Posts Tagged ‘mayor ron loveridge’

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: REDISTRICTING: DIVYING UP THE PROFITS OF PROSPECTS…

Posted: August 16, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
3

Redistricting is the process of drawing new electoral district boundaries in order to equalize district populations, and that’s that.  It’s not about business preferences or to insure a candidates political election.  The overall purpose of redistricting is to review districts and where necessary redraw districts in order to address any changes in population concentration.  Anything other than this would be considered gerrymandering.  Gerrymandering, of course, would the act of that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating geographic boundaries to create partisan or incumbent-protected districts.  Gerrymandering may also be used to hinder a particular demographic, such as a political, racial, linguistic, religious, or class group.  A considerable amount to consider.Unfortunately, the grey lines of redistricting interpretation has escalated into a cornucopia of questionable delineations when it comes to the final district maps.  Some of the Principle Rules of Redistricting are as follows:

1. Compactness-districts shall be drawn to encourage geographical compactness such that nearby areas of population are not bypassed for more distant population.

2. Contiguity-The geographic integrity of any city, county, city and county, local neighborhood, or local community of interest shall be respected.

3. Community Interest-A community of interest is a contiguous population which shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation.

4. Protection of Incumbents and Achieving Political Goals- The place of residence of any incumbent or political candidate shall not be considered in the creation of a map. Districts shall not be drawn for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against an incumbent, political candidate, or political party.

One such incident of questionable activity came up when legislative aide to Ward 5 Councilman Chris Mac Arthur, Chuck Conder questioned the possible move of his residence from Ward 4, represented by Councilman Paul Davis.

Has Mr. Conder been on a mission canvassing neighborhoods, allegedly in what some are saying ‘gerrymandering mode’ in hopes to swing a district to their benefit in the next council election?  But Mr. Conder was the same person who allegedly was involved in an altercation at city hall, to take it a step further, has blatantly called City Council Public Speakers ‘idiots’, ‘ bitches’ and even taken photographs for record purposes.  I suppose for Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s reference file.  One would think that this would be enough for firing.  Nope, this is Riverside, we are old school, and some political families are deep rooted in more ways than one, a way that some say is responsible for how the City is currently runned.

But nothing surprises me these day when you view Moreno Valley School Board Member Mike Rios, (incidently who would want this person around or representing your children? But evidently they keep voting for him!).  This is one man who has been charged with attempted murder, pandering, rape and pimping of underage girls, a wife who has been deported for illegally being in the country and drug transporting.…a great resume and now running for City Council of Moreno Valley, which I just believe did not make the application deadline.  Should we call it sociopathic behavior?

What constitutes a resume for a position as City Council these day’s?  Would it be the same that constitutes a resume for City Council in the City of Riverside?  Could we say it would be much more than a ‘housekeeping’ background?   I would imagine one should at least be able to read the city’s financial books as a start.  But changing the page, how about those who have taken the oath of office to complete the office that they campaigned for, then inadvertently decide to change course to pursue another political office?  Councilman Andy Melendrez, William “Rusty” Bailey and Mike Gardner, decided to run for Mayor without completing their obligatory oath to represent the constituents that they asked to elect them.  Councilman Mike Gardner on record states at a City Council debate at Cal Baptist University in 2011,  that he has “no intention to run for Mayor”.  Soon as he wins the election for Ward 1 City Council, he decides to run.  The same with William “ Rusty” Bailey, who on the eve of his reelection wining decides he may also just run for mayor.  Is there something in Riverside water, besides hexavalent chromium that is causing these indecisive brain damaging responses from local leadership?

As you can see, Chuck Conder’s residence is in Ward 4, which is actually in the pink in color (according to the map)  because it reflects Councilman’s Paul Davis’s area, and is currently in the Canyon Crest neighborhood of which is in question.   The recommendation is that residential portion be shifted to Ward 2.  Conder said Thursday that he and a neighbor circulated a petition, which he created after hearing Ward 2 Councilman Andy Melendrez’s impassioned plea not to split the Eastside.  “When Andy talked about (how) contiguous neighborhoods should be respected and you ought to keep neighborhoods together and not split them, that’s what was going to happen to us,”  neigborhood Conder said.  Well it wasn’t really going to happen that way.  First, if you look at where Chuck resides, we just called it Chuckie Land for the point of argument.

Keep in mind Chuckie’s neighborhood lines (the broad red lines) are made up of Ward 4, Ward 3 and Ward 2 residences.  Even if one wanted to change Chuck’s residence to Ward 3, it would still remain within the boundaries of the neighborhood lines (large red lines), therefore not breaching the contiguous argument he attempted to make.  The ward boundary line is indicated by the dark blue line on the map.  Therefore the question of why the petition, as many are asking?  Not to make this more confusing, Chuck Conder currently resides in Councilman Paul Davis’s Ward 4.  The rumour is he wants to stay in Ward 4 so he can run against current Councilman Paul Davis in the 2013 election.  Chuckie currently stated on record he has no plans to run against current Councilman Paul Davis in the next election.  So why the effort?  Can we assume that their is some underlying agenda?  We’ve heard in the past the those in politics may somtimes portray a position of having no underlying meaning, but why do it?  Is their a concealed agenda for Adkison’s , Bailey’s , Melendrez and Gardner’s efforts to pursue the Mayor’s seat?  All have been Councilman, and all want to be Mayor…and the later three have discount their obligation to the constituents to fulfill their electoral term.

But is it also possible for those in City Council to negotiate amongst themselves pieces of their district within closed doors to insure their reelection?  Is it also possible for someone to canvass district neighborhoods for signatures in order to play musical chairs with district neighborhoods in order to allegedly benefit themselves and possibly a political agenda in the next council election?  Or a letter from the Greater Riverside Chamber President, Cindy Roth, to recommend the move of one area of Ward 2 to Ward 1?

I don’t know what really happened to decency in government, or if it ever existed, but what about our fourth branch of government?  I always thought the responsible party would be our local paper, the Press Enterprise, so why does this publication feel the need to confine opinion in the way that it does?  Opionion good or bad molds peoples opinions.  People should not have to be protected by opionion, people can certainly be the judge of that.  Relevant stories regarding the City don’t always seem to make to print.  Is it because, maybe they are so tied with the city that a true investigative story of relevance may never come to fruition.  Is it possible such non print occurrences may be due to accepting special electrical rates with the City?

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW PRESS ENTERPRISE CONTRACT WITH THE CITY.

Would this then obligate the PE to turn some stories down?  But in the politically correct world we live in, it must seemingly be acceptable.  There was a time when part of our checks and balances in government was the press.  The presss was considered the fourth part of government, notwithstanding the judicial, executive and legislative, something went a rye when one piece failed to step up to the plate of protecting the taxpaying people.

Let’s also remember the City of Riverside owns it’s Public Utilities, and electricity can be purchased from next to nothing, allowing the City to make astronomical profits.

-THE BAILEY LAPTOP CAPER-

As Joe Friday would say “Only the facts”.  The facts are, quite confusing… We have a teenager with an attitude, no back up (not muscle, but computer lingo for data protection),  a dog that is a barker not a biter (I’m a lover not a fighter scenario) but still allowed the intruder to breach the premises, home was not ransacked, there was the feeling of being violated (which I can understand), no crystal or china was taken (did anyone care about this when they were a teenager?), emotionally disturbing face book postings (I assume nothing was password protected).  A confrontation with the hacker online, and in this virtual world a chase ensued, eventually pressing him to leave this synthetic social playground.

JUST THE FACTS!

Neighbors saw the teen casing homes but did nothing, except for one individual who confronted him, and his response was, “I’m now going to lunch”.   But according to the PE, Chief Diaz is on it, couldn’t comment on it due the ongoing investigation.

I’M ON IT..

Months back, Diaz was praised on his work on the apprehension of the fifty cent bandit, as we have posted on TMC.  A perplexing set of circumstances,  eventually leading to questions such as why did this individual actually spent the time to go on to his facebook site to post embarrising comments which were by all standards “juvenile”, (which I would and could not expect anything less from a teen).  Did this teen know Councilman Bailey?  Could he have been a former or current student of his??

No password, that was easy…Facebook, who is this guy? Let’s have some fun..

Many questions abound in this perplexing enigma, but thank god for the chief to hopefully bust this caper wide open.  And it appears they did.  Again the story reported by the PE still appears missing pieces of puzzle to make this story whole.  The Press Enterprise states police was investigating an unrelated burgalary, when they happened to visit this teen’s home and spoke to the guardian.  Shortly after, the guardian and teen met with detectives and surrendered the property.  Now it appears to me that quite possible Bailey knew the teen, and/or the teen knew Bailey.  In the real world this doesn’t happen.  I’ve had property stolen as well as other residents in our neighborhood, and RPD response to the property stolen, is that it may never be retrieved or found.  Needless to say, the laptop and all the other stolen items were found, good for Bailey.  Other suggestions from emails to help Bailey,  were using and online back up system such as Carbonite,  to protect against stolen or lost lap top computers Lo Jack for Lap tops is recommended.  Once a computer is turned by a robbery suspect, the laptop can be located within hours.  Then simply a home alarm system.

This goes to reason, as police are not always at our disposal, as one wood street retired police officer had stated, RPD is not always responsive.  This was one resident who walks his dog, and was accosted by three individuals on Ramona.  Which he was able to hold back with the use of pepper spray.  Now he walks his dog armed.  He was asked, If residents should learn how to use arms for protection, his answer was yes.  As trying times continue people will become more desperate, and individuals will need to be able to protect their properties and most importantly their families.  Local gun classes and pepper spray classes can be found by calling any gun store.  Until then, we can only wait to hear a response from the Chief himself on this laptop caper, which it appears their was a break in the story.  A great surprise for residents who never receive this quick of a response from RPD.  Regardless, as many residents agree, quite a bit of hoop la of stories for a lap top by PE, where other stories of importance are only mired into the depths and darkness below the camouflage of political quicksand.

Well, the culprit was arrested in this lap top caper.  Officer Manning said police were investigating an unrelated burglary when they visited the teenager’s home (I would imagine inadvertainly) and spoke with his guardian. Shortly after that, the guardian and the juvenile, who is 17, “met with detectives and surrendered property taken in the burglary at Councilman Bailey’s house.  The juvenile admitted participation in the burglary,” Officer Manning said.  Police believe the teenager is involved with at least half a dozen other burglaries. Manning said they assume others are involved because of the types of items that were taken. Manning said the teen has no prior criminal record, but he declined to release any identifying details because of the suspect’s age.  Bailey could not immediately be reached for comment (Well alrighty now).  A neighbor told Bailey he had seen a male teenager peering into homes, apparently casing them, but it’s not yet known whether that was the same person police arrested.  Whatever the vague cirmcumstances, we are glad Bailey has retrieved his famed lap top.  We only hope that he would now fight so that this type of efficient police work can be attained by all citizens.  In the East Side, currently RPD is still seeking clues to the June 30th murder of Ashanti Hassan and the January 26th murder of Gregory Ball.

-UNION MAYHEM IN SAN BERNARDINO: NOW THE MAYOR’S FAULT?-

It’s hard not bring up the blame of government officials without bringing up the unions.  This is of course not a one sided issue.  Public/Government Officials and Unions who negotiated unsustainable pension plans as well as salaries.  Executive Government Officials who had City Council give their blessing for their high salaries and pension, beyond the standard of the private sector.  There are two aspects here to consider.

It appears the Mayor is already being shaked down in a intimidation tactic to vote a certain way.  This would not happen if people In the communities would educate themselves in city politics and attend city council meetings and voice their opinion, otherwise what you get is out side organizations which may not have the community’s best interest at heart, because what is at stake is their interest which may be union emphasized.  Government should be representative of the people, not those who’s interest lies within a particular group or organization of a few.  This in essence can only breach the health and safety of the community as a whole.  As a whole the community must pay for it in higher taxes.  And that is would substantiate a breach of public trust by those who took an oath to protect and represent their constituents, rather than their obligations to their contributors.   Well, this will continue to become and ongoing conundrum brought to the forefront of many municipalities.  More cities in the next few years will file for bankruptcy, Compton, CA may be next..with many more to follow.  Salaries and pensions that go beyond what is found by the standard of the private sector, cannot be legitimately justified. In the private sector salaries are based on the value or service produced, in public service, nothing is produced.  Salaries are simply justified based on taxpayer monies available in some sort of revenue stream that ends up becoming some sort of illusion of value.  Unsustainable pensions: many feel these union pension contracts were negotiated not in the best interest of the taxpayer.  Therefore a breach of trust and consequently should legally be deemed null and void.

-HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM IN RIVERSIDE, ARE WE THIRD UP ON THE LIST?-

Alark Hard Chrome was a chrome plating shop in the 1970’s located at 2777 Main Street.  Soil and groundwater at this sit were contaminated with chromium as a result of spills, discharges and drips of plating solutions on the premises.

This site was added to the EPA’s National Priorities List (NPL), commonly called the Superfund Site here in Riverside.  Even though there are many hot spots of contamination in and around Riverside, the EPA has set their sights on this one and continue to monitor levels of Chromium-6 also known as Hexavalent Chromium, a known carcinogen when found in drinking water.  Hexavalent Chromium was made famous in the Erin Brockovich movie of ground water contamination in Hinkely, CA.  All of the City of Riverside’s water come from ground water wells.  The Environmental Protection Agency will continue to monitor the Alark site, ground zero for the known dumping of this contaminate.  The EPA will continue to follow it’s path, or technically it’s plume, to known drinking wells.  The City of Riverside has said that our water is safe.

Our understanding of regulatory guidelines is that neither the State of Federal Government limit Hexavalent Chromium in water, but both regulate total chromium instead.  The Federal Government has a cap of 100 ug/L (100 parts per billion) for total chromium and the State of California limits total chromium in drinking water to 50 ug/L (50 part per billion).  In 2001, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) conducted ground water samplings.  In one well (MW-7), the ground water sample contained 17,300 ug/L (17,300 parts per billion) hexavalent chromium exceeding the States maximum acceptable level of 50 ug/L (50 parts per billion).  As we understand, there are new methods to detect specifically the carcinogenic Chromium-6 (Hexavalent Chromium) in ground water.

The question which has not been quite answered, is has the plume hit the drinking water aquafiers to the extent of concerned levels?  According to Riverside Public Utilites water quality report of 2011, hexavalent chromium ranged from 1.9 parts per billion to 2.7 parts per billion, all in acceptable levels for drinking water.  So how much Hexavalent Chromium is necessary for someone to come down with cancer?  At this time the answer is unknown.  The EWG (Environmental Working Group), initiated by Erin Brockovich, is now pushing to reduce California’s hexavalent chromium limit down to 0.06 parts per billion.  In this scenario, making a case of levels of hexavalent chromium contaminant in water in relation to cases of related cancer, won’t be necessary.  Therefore, if she is successful, Los Angeles, San Jose, Sacramento and Riverside would be targets of her litigation team.  If the State levels of hexavalent chromium were to drop to 0.06 part per billion, the City of Riverside would be third on the list on the top five chromium contaminated cities.

THE ALARK SITE (FIRST TWO PICS), AND ANOTHER AREA OF CONCERN, THE NEW FAIRLY NEW DEVELOPMENT CLOSE TO ALARK ON TWOGOOD LANE (THIRD PIC).

         

-COUNCIL INTERFERENCE ON THE PROMOTION PROCESS? 35-0..SGT. VALMONT GRAHAM CALLS FOUL!

On one hand, Riverside Chief of Police Sergio Diaz states that his promotion decisions are not guided by racial bias, and he wants to dispel the image that the city “is a soft touch” for disgruntled employees by litigating their suits.  Even though the Chief refrained directly about this case, he certainly appears to infer that those bringing up these issues of discrimination are disgruntled employees.  Sgt. Valmont Graham has served the citizens of the City of Riverside for an outstanding 25 years.  Allegedly, Sgt. Valmont Graham has been passed over 35 times during his employment with the City.  It would personally be an insult to refer an officer of the law, of this caliber,(of course I’m not talking about the illegal gun sale to the former City Manager Brad Hudson by the President of the RPD Union),  as a ‘disgruntled employee’.  So why the pattern of retaliation?  Now keep in mind that the Chief was hired by former City Manager Brad Hudson, who left town in whisk to take a lower paying job for the County of Sacramento when his discretionary spending came into question.  But it’s no secret, retaliation has costed the taxpayer a mint in legal fees, and further the settlement via a court judgement.  Sgt. Valmont Graham’s original complaint is as follows:

COMPLAINT OF 07-19-2011

TMC wrote a story, City of Riverside See’s Skin Color as Problematic?  The Press Enterprise story that Sgt. Valmont Graham was passed over for promotion because he was “black”.  A highly respected black judge, Jaqueline Jackson was assigned to hear this case, but was then asked by Richard D. Roth, contract attorney for the City of Riverside, to be removed.  As an attorney, how effective will he be in defense of the City, when more than likely he will settle this case out of court.  Roth is also running for California State Senate and is endorse by those in the City such as Mayor Ron Loveridge.  By the way Mr. Roth’s wife, Cindy Roth, is President of the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, also supported and financed to promote certain City events such as the “Festival of Lights”.

The question that seems to be returning to the forefront is, “are Council interfereing with the Police promotion process?”  Back in May 2011, Councilman Steve Adams, also a former police officer, was brought to the forefront with allegations that he interefered with the promotion process of police officers, specifically Lts. Darryl Hurt and Tim Bacon.  Even then, Adams emphatically denied any interference, though the taxpayer shelled out $550,000 to settle the case out of court.  Well, all I could say, if we shelled out that amount of green backs, the two officers must have had a good case.  It certainly appears to be a repeating pattern of this allegation of intereference with Adams, comes complete with a corresponding pattern of denial as well.  Was it a corruptible surprise that a ‘special panel’ found no ethics violations by Adams?  Even Retired Deputy Chief Pete Esquievel came to the rescue of Adams by telling the panel that he made it clear to the two officers that it was not a condition of the officers promotion. But approximately a year before, Esquievel came forward with a complaint against the police department in other matters as you will find in this tort claim.  This tort claim also followed Police Officer Neely Nakamura’s complaints against the Riverside Police Department in her tort claim.  The distrubing claim by Nakamura against the Riverside Police Department was that she was illegall held, seized and searched, kidnapped and held without reason, do in part to her alleged sexual relationship with Deputy Chief Pete Esquievel.

                                                                  

CLICK LINK TO VIEW ESQUIEVEL DOCUMENT             CLICK LINK TO VIEW NAKMURA DOCUMENT

In the case of Lt. Meredyth Meredith, the then Chief Russell Leach said he was preparing to promote her to captain.  Then Assistant City Manager Tom DeSantis called Leach to put a stop to this.  Leach found out later that Adams marched into a meeting with then City Manager Hudsion and DeSantis, and emphatically told them she should not be promoted.  Of course, you guessed it, that was denied by Adams again.  By the terms of the City Charter, members of the City Council are not supposed to be involved in the promotional process.  Therefore, a violation of the City Charter would tell us that this would be job for the District Attorney.  Well, we all know that will never be investigated, and if it is the complaint would be unfounded.

    

According to a deposition release by City Attorney Gregory Priamos of former Chief of Police Russell Leach, he states that complaints made by current Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey may have hindered Valmont Graham from being promoted.  In addition, we find it interesting that a deposition of an ongoing case is released by our City Attorney.  Was there some in fighting between Priamos and Bailey?  According to then Assistant Manager Tom DeSantis, Bailey was embarassed or sleighted by what Graham had said, and was furious to the point of expressing his anger to city management.  Did Bailey’s act hinder the well deserved promotion of this black officer?  Others mentioned that at the meeting Graham talked about police issues and answered questions from the audience.  One question was not a police related, but Graham felt it was more in line of a Council question.  He then handed the mike over to Bailey to answer.  Was Bailey taken off guard because of the question, maybe he could not answer?  In any case it appears he was embarrassed, then furious, not sure in what order.  Then the focus was on Sgt. Valmont Graham.  Was this simply a misunderstanding?  A misunderstanding which has cost a vast amount of taxpayer monies and resources?

If there was some words of advice, what would Sergeant Joe Friday say to Councilman Steve Adam’s?CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW CLIP

JUST FOR LAUGHS….

RIVERSIDE FORGOTTENRIVERSIDE PLAZA 1960’s, RIVERSIDE, CA

         

THE ALFRED M. LEWIS GROCERY STORE, RIVERSIDE, CA, SEPTEMBER 18, 1940, ON 10TH AND MAIN. (COURTESY OF THE UC RIVERSIDE, SPECIAL COLLECTIONS AND ARCHIVES).

CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, THE PRIAMOS TAPE, COMING SOON..

UPDATE: 0818/2012: CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIMOS BARS MISSION AMBULANCE LAWYER FROM LOBBYING CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO CHANGE THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S AMBULANCE POLICY.  THIS IS ONE CITY OFFICE THAT NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME..  WHAT?  DON’T TELL ME…AMR’S PETER HUBBARD AND GREGORY PRIMOS ARE ALLEGEDLY GOOD FRIENDS?  I WOULD NEVE HAVE SEEN THAT COMING..

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Voilà, Now a Marketable Item for the Political Marketplace…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL OBJECTION LETTER

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

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

WATER RESPONSES FROM CITY COUNCIL COMING SOON!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

     

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

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

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

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

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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: BARBER BLOG REBUTTLE: LETTER OF DETERMINATION BY DISTRICT ATTORNEY REGARDING ALLEGATIONS MADE BY MORENO, PITRUZZELLO AND FIGUEROA

Posted: June 1, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

April 23, 2012 I wrote this email letter to the DA’s office to Vicki Hightower, Chief Deputy District Attorney, Special Prosecution Section, addressing concerns and frustrations.

Four days later, this letter of determination along with an article by City Manager Scott Barber was posted on Scott Barber’s Blog Site.  This letter was sent to Mary Figueroa, as opposed to myself directly, and is dated March 29, 2012.

         

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT IN PDF FORMAT

SCOTT BARBER’S POSTING: IT APPEARS THAT THE FOLLOWING POSTING HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM BARBER’S BLOG SITE, BUT HERE IT IS IN IT’S ENTIRETY.

Letter of determination by the District Attorney regarding allegations made by Moreno, Pitruzzello and Figueroa

By sbarber | Published April 27, 2012

DA Letter

If you have been attending or watching recent City Council meetings, then you probably have heard statements from a group of citizens alleging a variety of inappropriate actions, such as favoritism towards a local developer, unauthorized spending by our former City Manager, loans from the sewer fund to the Redevelopment Agency (I blogged about this earlier today), and funds used to demolish property for the “Raincross” development. Yesterday, the City received a copy of the determination letter from the District Attorney’s Office, along with a list of the individuals who presented the information to the DA (see the title of this blog for that list), regarding these allegations. I am pleased to share the letter with you (click on the DA Letter link to read) and to let you know that the DA concluded that no criminal acts occurred as a result of the City’s actions.

SELF APPOINTED CITIZEN AUDITOR, VIVIAN MORENO RESPONDED AS FOLLOWS:

  1. Vivian Moreno

Posted April 27, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Are you for real? it’s on. Are you guys really serious that you put this in writing? This letter will be sent to the Attorney General and the State Controller and let’s see what they have to say. the city spinners are at it again and now they have the DA in their pocket. Wait till the feds see this. Scott, the city is in big enough trouble as it is and you are going to try and challenge us. Go for it!!! If you are really transparent, post this. You might actually get someone to read your blog, because we are going to post our response. This took the DA a year to respond? Get a grip.

__________________

One can see that if citizens have concerns locally with city officials in violation of the city charter, where do they take their concerns for investigation, if not District Attorney Paul Zellerbach’s office?  Any guesses?

This is the problem and the following scenario is reflective of this, as noted in Mary Shelton’s blog five before midnight, how do you investigate an official and have him sponsor a fundraiser at the same time?  This is why investigations of politicians conduct can’t be local.

Again, the determination of our concerns was assessed by a one time meeting and never followed through appropriately with a secondary or tertiary meeting.  Or in our estimation never investigated appropriately to the satisfaction of our community and individual concerns, of which was expected by this department.

First, Vicki Hightower, had our contact information on file, it’s quite paradoxical that she asked that the letter be forwarded, since there was no contact information. She does have our email, and further, the DA’s office has been quite adept at collecting and filing our articles regarding TMC postings.  We consider the DA’s office quite resourceful at attaining this information if necessary.  So, I’d like to address this question, the primary reason are group of concerned citizens contacted and met with District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, was the issue of Connie Leach, whereby  the contracts and issues of concern will come out shortly.  The items listed in the letter coincidently received by Mr. Barber, were discussed, but not the primary reason for contacting the DA.  By the way, I’d like to take this time to thank Mr. Barber for giving me top billing in his posting title.  You may observe, the issue of Connie Leach is not mentioned in this letter.  The meeting took place in confidence, and we were unaware of the possible collaborations between city officials and the district attorney’s office thereafter the breach. But questions arose regarding the associations between the DA, the City and The Grand Jury, not only when you view campaign support, but there close association within the working environment.  What’s quite interesting was the file of TMC articles the DA’s office had in their possession and their request to know who were the writers.  The cards appeared to change before our eyes.  Were we being the ones investigated?

Who would be the the enforcement agency regards to city charter violations , if not the DA’s office?  According to the letter, in many instances they are washing their hands of any responsibility.  It is our understanding and the accepted standard in other cities that the DA’s office is responsible for enforcing any violations of the City Charter etc.

Item #1: Loans from Sewer Funds used to fund Redevelopment Agency Projects:

Response by the DA’s office regarding sewer funds:

Riverside Municipal Code is as follows:

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL SEWER CODE CHAPTER 14.04 IN PDF FORMAT

Sewer Fund Loans; not sure why the DA’s office is playing symantics with us, but the ordinance is very clear, it states exactly what these funds should be used for.  It appears that the DA’s argument remains toward the premise that ‘nothing in the ordinance specifically prohibits the specified loans’.  Bingo, that is also correct, there argument is that ‘nothing specifically states you can’t’.  A DA diversion?  But again the ordinance is very clear on what the funds should be used for.  It states that such revenue (sewer) shall not be used for the acquisition or construction of new street sewers or lateral as distinquished from the main trunk, interceptor or outfall sewers.  So therefore, why would monies from the sewer fund be transferred from a local City fund to a State Agency (RDA) in what is know as an ‘inter-agency” loan.  When RDA is reflective of an agency of new construction, and the ordinance states this money cannot be used for new construction.  The DA’s office went on to say that if there was such a provision, it still would not be a crime for the District Attorney’s office to address, because it would be a violation of the City ordinance.  So who would be the appropriate source of contact for this concern?  We have been told it is the DA’s office.  We wouldn’t think for a moment that it could be the City.  Whereby the city would investigate themselves on this violations.  So the question remains..  Again, the DA’s office did not address the concern clearly, except to say that if there was not an ordinance saying you could not make a loan from the Sewer Fund., and of course this is also correct.  There is none.  But they didn’t consider the ordinance at its’ direct face value?  In doing so, do ordinances, provisions and laws truly mean anything at all?

A loan from the Sewer fund to RDA, would be consider an ‘inter-agency’ loan.  Even then would have to serve a sewer purpose.  Again the DA diverts attention from his office to allow the City Manager Scott Barber to state no criminal actions occurred within the auspices of the DA’s office.  Though, the DA states, if there was an ordinance, which there is, it would a ‘violation of the city ordinance’.  So who enforces violations of city ordinances?  Please Mr.DA, you know exactly what the intended meaning of this charter ordinance meant?

Item #2: City Manager Discretionary Spending

Response by the DA’s office regarding former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary spending.

Former City Manager Brad Hudson’s total discretionary spending as indicated below.

Brad Hudson’s discretionary spending.  City Manager Scott Barber addressed this issue in a posting.  I also responded.

Ability to  enter into contracts up to $50,000.00 is available to City Manager, not all department heads.  Contractual agreements up to $50,000.oo without council approval was entered in after the firing of former City Manager George Carvahlos.  Mr. Carvahlos was a true Riversidian and was against much of what the current council wanted.  Which included Ed Adkison, Frank Schiavone, Steve Adams and Mayor Ron Loveridge.  Hudson was brought in and the contractual agreement clause was raised from $25,000.00 to $50,000.00.  Fifty thousand is alot of money, and again their were no guidelines which encompassed the proper spending of that amount to prevent spending abuses.  One could spend $50,000.00 daily, or one could spend incremental amounts in what is known as bid splitting.  Again Mr. Zellerbach, we are talking about apples and oranges when comparing the City Manager’s discretionary spending for fiscal year 2009/2010 is $299,685.00 when compared with Parks and Recreation of $2,000,000.00.  Our public records for City Manager’s discretionary spending  for fiscal year 2009/ 2010 for contracts under $50,000.00 comes out to $29,554,005.19.  You also state that the 2009/2010 discretionary spending under $50,000.00 is $299,685.00.  You are off by $29,254,320.19… I don’t think you are seeing the complete spending picture, these are contracts under $50,000.00 approved under City Manager’s or Department Heads authority.  The City Manager is ultimately responsible for all spending even over the Department Heads authority.  Therefore, the amount in oversight by the City Manager is $29,254,320.19.

Item #3: Favoritism to Mark Rubin (developer)

Response by DA’s office regarding favoritism by the City of Riverside toward developer Mark Rubin.

Dennis Morgan (aka. Larry the Liquidator) of IPA, which is the contracted property management company for all the City of Riverside’s properties.  Why does he also manage properties of Developer Mark Rubin, to what was mentioned at a land use committee meeting of in the neighborhood of 15,000 sq. ft.  Mark Rubin is a property developer for the city, one of the properties is the vacant and unfinished Raincross Promenade project.”  They even exchanged accolades at a Land Use Committee meeting in which they acknowledge themselves as “compadres”, in my estimation, as a figure of speech in regards to their close ties.  We have several witnessed who will attest that this occurred at a land use committee meeting.  But I guess it is not pertinent enough for the DA to address this issue on a constructive basis that would allow pertinent information to evolve..

The last statement Barber makes, “the DA concluded that no criminal acts occurred as a result of the City’s actions”.  According to the DA’s office in reference to property transfers they do address the fact that the City of Riverside did violate the law, and this concern should be forwarded to the State Attorney General. What is important to notice is that there is no criminal action to warrant action by his office.  That does not mean a serious criminal violation hasn’t occurred, it only means that the DA’s office is not the appropriate entity to handle it.  For example, the City of Riverside has created a resolution which does not allow Marijuana dispensaries within the City, even though at the State level it is legal, at the Federal level it is illegal.  The city can now stop the dispensary and cite them for violations, but they cannot take their property.  The Feds can.  Therefore a different office of government and must be called by the city to do just that.  This would be the Department of Justice.  The taking of property is known as ‘asset forfeiture.’

Again the DA states if this allegation occurred in (b) it would be a violation of RDA guidelines, not the DA’s responsibility.  If it isn’t there responsibility, isn’t it there responsibility to direct us to the appropriate office that could address our concerns?

Favoritism by the City toward Mark Rubin cannot be documented, that is true.  I agree with the DA’s office, this would be a hard nut to crack without solid evidence, such as bribery. But is it plausible to connect favoritism to the definition of nepotism?  Nepotism occurs in the city, but never addressed.  We have an instance such former councilman and mayoral candidate Ed Adkison at the Friday Morning Club Janet Goeskie Senior Center on February 23, 2012 stating that the City’s relationship with Connie Leach was ‘nepotism’.  Adkison was on the council during the Connie Leach allegations.  We also had councilman Steve Adams brother reviewing red light camera tickets.

Do you think if a Councilman received a ticket violation would they fulfill their obligation to pay it?  Or would it be surprisingly cleared from the system?  According to the DA, favoritism in their office must indicate documented bribery, otherwise it is out of the DA’s scope of practice. No documentation indicates bribery between the City of Riverside and developer Mark Rubin.

Item #4: Raincross property:

Response by the DA’s office regarding the demolition of the Swiss Inn, a Raincross property.

In the DA’s response, it shows the address to be 3120 Main Street, whereby it should read 3210 Main Street.  Our records show that the developer Mark Rubin owned the property when the City paid Dakeno demolition for the work on Mark Rubin’s property.   City acquired the property initially, transferred back to Mark Rubin, then flipped it back to the city.  The city did pay for demolition by Dakeno on the Swiss Inn property owned by developer Mark Rubin.  The City of Riverside paid for demolition according to the document which stated payment from the discretionary fund account on 03/06/2007, and Mark Rubin, developer, was still in posession of the property until 05/22/2008 when it was transferred to RDA.  According to the title company, the owner, Enrique Martinez transferred title on 11/09/2006

    

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DAKENO DEMOLITION DOCUMENT IN PDF FORMAT

The following document shows that payment of $44,770.00 as indicated in the notation in the above document from former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary fund.

CLICK IMAGE TO SEE FULL DOCUMENT

The above document is on page 231 of former City Manager Brad Hudson’s discretionary sprending account for the amount $44,770.00 indicated in the above notion referring to Fund 476 University Corridor/ Sycamore Canyon Capital Project paid to Dakeno Demolition.

Click this link to view 2005-06, 2006-07, and 2007-08 City Manager Brad Hudson Discretionary Fund

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

06/01/2005: BRAD HUDSON ENTERS INTO CITY MANAGER POSTION

06/07/2005: RDA MEMORANDUM COMMENCE NEGOTIATION W/ RAINCROSS PARTNERS 136 LP & RIVER REGIONAL

08/00/2005: CITY HOME PARTNERS AGREEMENT HAS PURCH/SELL AGREEMENT WITH MARQUEZ $1.67 MIL

-the Swiss Inn, house 42 Developmentally Disabled and 10 Live In Employees

-this purchase activates affordable housing redevelopment clause

-City Home Partners is connected to Raincross Partners 136 LP

-Raincross Partners is connected to Mark Rubin

-River Regional is connected to Mark Rubin

-An upset Marquez believes RDA is purchasing his property, and finds out later the Developer is purchasing it.

-Actual sale doesn’t record until 11/09/2006 with Mark Rubin’s name all over it.

09/13/2005: DDA RIVER REGIONAL PROPERTIES LLC- mentions affordable housing

09/19/2006: Redevelopment memorandum-item #11, Resolution of necessity to acquire 1st to 3rd   properties-approved by city council, no resolution document exists, therefore no land acquisition should have taken place or developer (Rubin) was required to put into escrow monies to acquire property, pay for demolition, clearance, and relocation fees.  5.4 million dollar sewer transfer took place to pay for relocation, clearance, and demolition fees, deposited into escrow fund.  5.4 million sewer inter-fund transfer occurs according to council report but the sewer fund is not the loan of record, the worker’s comp and the electric fund are the receivable loan until August, 09 Money is not moved from the sewer-fund until August of 2009.  Money is posted to sewer fund June 30, 2009.  Why would an employee fraudulently back-date the postings of the sewer fund?

10/04/2005: DDA RAINCROSS PARTNERS 136 LP (CHUCK,RUBIN) -included affordable housing comprehensive plan

08/06/2006: CITY SURVEYS SWISS INN PROPERTY FOR PURCHASE

08/17/2006: GRANT DEED SIGNED FROM ENRIQUE MARQUEZ TO REGIONAL PROPERTIES INC. (MARK RUBIN)

09/06/2006: MARK RUBIN-REGIONAL PROPERTIES INC. TAKE OVER ESCROW

09/19/2006: RAINCROSS PARTNERS 136 LP TERMINATES THE ENTIRE DDA WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING

09/19/2006: DDA AMENDMENT FOR RIVER REGIONAL FOR 256 UNITS.  IN A CITY EMAIL MARK RUBIN TAKES OVER ESCROW.  HE WILL CLOSE THE ESCROW AND FLIP PARCELS  TO THE AGENCY.

11/07/2006: CITY EMAIL STATES MARK RUBIN IS OKAY WITH HOLDING ON TO THE SWISS INN FOR NOW

11/09/2006: GRANT DEED RECORDED FROM ENRIQUE MARQUEZ TO REGIONAL PROPERTIES INC. (MARK RUBIN)

02/08/2007: PERMIT ISSUED: CITY DEMOS MARK RUBIN’S PROPERTY SWISS INN,   $44,700.00  as stated on permit.

03/06/2007: CITY OF RIVERSIDE PAY’S DAKENO DEMOLITION $44,700.00 VIA FUND 476 UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR/ SYCAMORE CANYON CAPITAL PROJECT.

07/16/2008: GRANT DEED TRANSFER/SELLS  (FLIPS IT) FROM REGIONAL PROPERTIES INC. (MARK RUBIN) TO RDA.

03/08/2011 – GRANT DEED TRANSFER FROM RDA (BRAD HUDSON) TO CITY OF RIVERSIDE

                                             

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE DOCUMENT        CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE

Item #5: Transfer of Redevelopment Agency (RDA) real property to the City.

Response by the DA’s office regarding the issue of illegally transferring Redevelopment properties back to the City.

OK Scott, did we miss the part of the transfer of 149 properties from the Redevelopment Agency back to the City before the June deadline?  We brought this to City Council a year ago, and was discounted.  Even you City Attorney must have missed this one, or even your $400 per hour Best, Best & Krieger outside legal help missed this one.  This was a violation by the city that the DA addressed, but was not addressed or mentioned on your blog appropriately in detail by you.  Knowingly that a violation had occurred, is it not in the DA’s position to forward this to be investigated by the State Attorney General?

                                                 

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW PROPERTY TRANSFERS       CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW 2ND VERSION OF PROPERTY TRANSFERS

Regarding Connie Leach, former Chief of Police Russell Leach’s wife.  TMC will post our concerns and allegations that the DA’s office and the Riverside Grand Jury to our knowledge, considered baseless, or without merit.  But questions still remain regarding the use of Police Asset Forfeiture funds in payment to Connie Leach, while her husband Police Chief Russell Leach was in charge.  Our position will posted.

What we find is that the DA’s office is not the appropriate office to address our concerns and allegations.  Though, when asked who would handle violations of charter at the City level, we were directed to the DA’s office.  But all local entities were exhausted, we went to the appropriate entities at the State and Federal levels.  Yes this is all true, Scott is right, no criminal actions at the DA level, and I’m sure no criminal actions at the City level, because as you would also find, that the City Attorney, Gregory Priamos would call this baseless.  Some may say that this is a system created by a few, to work for a few.  But I believe there continues to be something wrong with this picture. Something that reflects a triage of influence by these entities. Creating a difficult arena for local residents to address their concern without some sort of retribution, slanderously or financially, or what some in the city say, ‘client control’ tactics.  And that is my opinion. It may be right, it may be wrong but we will continue to investigate and learn the language of municipal politics..  Final word, we do appreciate City Manager Scott Barbers dialogue.

But we have to remember the DA’s office never addressed the issue of federal cold plates, illegal gun sales, illegal badges, fillegal law enforcement/emergency lights, fraudulently and illegally applying for concealed weapons permit with a false address, overlooking DUI’s and ticket fixing.  If this was anyone other than those in the office, such as the common citizen, we’d be in jail, and people have one to jail.   Of course, these violations would not be handled by the DA’s office, which is actually true…but again …who would?  And if they were responsible for oversight of these violations, would they actually mitigate them?  And would they contact or forward these issues to the proper legal authority?

Is there a triangle of influence connecting the City, DA and Grand Jury?  Is there a quadrangle of influence connecting the City, DA, Grand Jury and Judges?  Is there actually a pentagonal angle of influence which would involve the State?   Pentagonal in the sense that what do citizens do when they have utilized all resources without any reasonable response?  We have addressed this pressing issue in a TMC article.  These would include the City Attorney’s Office, the District Attorney’s Office, the Grand Jury, the Superior Court Judges, and now possibly the State?  Are only hope is those offices outside the State.  Such as the IRS, Security and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice, the FBI etc.

What do you do as a concerned citizen when the majority of the City Council is tied in with the Distric Attorney Paul Zellerbach?

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO VIEW THE PIC.

Some public servants have said to bring such issues to the forefront is to ‘political’.  Even if the issues are right, they will not act on it, therefore leaving a conclusion that is vague and clandestine.  Therefore giving reason that the public is not important.  It then appears that one completely discounts the oath that was taken to serve, and placing their own interest as primary, superseding the public interest.  This is what most people in the community feel and are angry about.  Further, voters don’t vote because they feel it does’nt really matter..and in many ways they are right.  But they need to get involve at a different level.  I do feel at some levels that this letter was ‘orchestrated’ and ‘designed’ in many way by one or more political elements within city to divert and mitigate the actual concerns of the public as simply having no merit.  Further, to strategically label us as uninformed individuals.  This would only safeguard their political compulsory obligations to maintain their positions, supporting constituents and of course the ‘status quo atmosphere of illusionary stability’.  Another aspect to remember is that the DA’s office did not take upon themselves to even investigate our allegations.  They made their opinion simply on our one time meeting and the information we submitted that needed further investigation by his office, which was not done.  A step further, their opinion may have allegedly been made after contact with the city, further breaching our confidence as concerned citizens.  Many of these issues, according to District Attorney Paul Zellerbach’s Office, simply must be forwarded to the State Attorney’s Office, of course, we assume, the appropriate office to deal with these issues. City violations of the City Charter, as we understand, are to be directed toward the DA’s office.  But what we are told by the DA, “was it illegal or just bad business”?  Our we to accept as concerned citizens that bad business is an acceptable premise for city business?  City business that doesn’t have a public or constituent benefit?  When does bad business cross the line?  When does it cross the line into the gray line of illegal?  Our these departments of oversight really there to be good fiscal stewards of the people in which they took an oath to protect and serve?  If you view the premise of this blog article, this is more of a hit piece against Vivian Moreno, Dvonne Pritruzzello and Mary Figueroa by DA Paul Zellerbach and Riverside City Manager Scott Barber to discredit their concerns or mitigate their allegations? Can we call it collusion?  Regardless, what can I say, ‘This is Riverside’.

Again, our concerns were originally with Connie Leach, and TMC will be posting our findings in “Hush Money II” that were suddenly rejected by the Riverside Grand Jury, without fully investigating each respondent and fully evaluating the documents submitted and requested from the City of Riverside.  The Grand Jury had requested asset forefeiture records from the City of Riverside and failed to continue their interview process in order to fully complete their investigation.  Instead, decided to relieve themselves of their duty to act on citizens concerns by acting not to act.  Was the result allegedly orchestrated or meticulously created by design in order to mitigate any unintended repercussions?

Considering the DA’s TMC article file (kinda reminds me of Hoovers FBI files), considering the questions that were asked, in turn, were we actually the ones being interviewed?  Was this a last ditch effort in their process to protect the family?  Were we actually dancing around the issues?…  and a final question, what is your connection with local Attorney Virginia Blumenthal ingrained on your ribbon above the tutu?  and how many are truly ingrained within the family called ‘Riverside’?

PERDITION

UPDATE: 06/16/2012: Pravda Press Enterprise continues it’s art of molding popular public opinion?  Does our Chief Sergio Diaz have a starring role?  PE leading the way to absolutely no comments?

WHAT’S WRONG PE? CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA & ILLEGALS STEALING AMERICAN JOBS? WHY YOU SENSORING ALL THE COMMENTS THAT ARE TRUE. WE ARE IN AMERICA ( OR I THOUGHT ) WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH SO LET OUR OPINIONS BE KNOWN!!   – obama hater, commenter on the Press Enterprise possibly prior to being censored..

Once again, PE proves only certain opinions are acceptable here.  Good job, airjackie and kensew, you have achieved media sactioned thinking.  – censordefier, Commenter on the Press Enterprise

or

are commenters actually the ones censoring?

The problem with this comment section is there is no moderator. If a reader doesn’t like your comment, they report it as abuse and it’s collapsed. It’s supposed to be reviewed by a moderator but the PE has gutted it’s staff to generate profits so your comment will never be read and reinstated. In this case, it’s the illegal alien supporters collapsing the comments they oppose. Notice it’s only people who oppose the president’s stupid move that have been collapsed and the pro stupid move remain. Test it yourself. Report one of them and they’re comment will disappear as well. Terrible setup here.  – crymeariver, commenter on the PE

Other commenters make a case in point that comments with the highest approval ratings are being deleted or removed, especially when the comments don’t violate their guidelines..

UPDATE: 06/16/2012: REDLIGHT CAMERAS IN THE NEWS AGAIN:  Press Enterprise Alicia Robinson new posting on her blog regarding the issue of redlight cameras.

TMC had our own comments regarding redlight cameras as revenue enhancers over safety issues.  While Councilman Paul Davis voted against the renewal contract back in 2011, Councilman Andy Melendrez voted for it, Councilwoman Nany Hart voted for it, Chris MacArthur voted for it, Councilman Steve Adams must have voted for it to keep his keep his redlight camera reviewer brother Ron Adams working, Mayoral Candidate/ current Councilman  William “Rusty” Bailey and Independent Voice for Riverside voted for it, even “I have no such plans to run for mayor”, of course, mayoral candidate and current Councilman Mike Gardner voted for it.  And voted for it as a safety issue, as opposed to a revenue enhancer, and discounting studies countering the psuedo statistics they were provided.

But to now lose $1,154,000.00 in anticipated revenue projections according to City Manager Scott Barbers proposed budget?  The question remained that it was a bad deal last year when the proposal to renew the contract went in front of Council.  Councilman Paul Davis saw through it and didn’t vote for it, the rest did, and now how will they vote this time?  Vote for renewal, is a vote to continue hard earned taxpayer money down the toilet.

UPDATE: 06/18/2012: CITY OF RIVERSIDE TO REMOVE RED LIGHT CAMERAS!  COST CONSIDERED A FACTOR IN THE DECISION FOR THEIR REMOVAL.. 

UPDATE: 06/17/2012: ARE REDLIGHT CAMERA COMPANIES, SUCH AS AMERICAN TRAFFIC SYSTEMS BANKROLLING COUNTERSUITS AGAINST VOTER BACKED INITIATIVES TO REMOVE REDLIGHT CAMERAS?  Recently a story was leased in the Press Enterprise regarding the City of Murrieta and a voter backed initiative to remove redlight cameras.  Former council candidate and former chairman of Murrieta’s Public Safety and Traffic Commission Steve Flynn, in conjunction with the law firm Bell, McAndrews & Hiltachk counter sued.  Steve Flynn skewed the issues when interviewed by KFI’s John and Ken Show.  Listen to this interview in it’s entirely by clicking this link.  At the end of the interview on this show,  John Kobylt stated toward Steve Flynn, “You have zero credibility”!  Questions arose on who is bankrolling these counter suits against citizen voter initiatives.  Mr. Flynn didn’t know who was financially backing the Murrieta suit, although his name is on it.  But appears that in other states that these counter suits are occurring, the redlight camera companies as American Traffic Systems are bankrolling them.

Steve Flynn

When Ken Champou asked Flynn asked, “Why can’t people vote to get rid of them”?  Flynn responded referring to the people, “they were misinformed”.

UPDATE: 06/17/2012: SACRAMENTO BEE: EDITORIAL: TIME FOR CALIFORNIA TO PUT AN END TO ‘DOUBLE DIPPING’?  Case in hand, editorial mentions former Riverside City Manager and current Sacramento County Executive Officer Brad Hudson.  Currently, it appears that ‘double dipping’ is a public sector phenomenon, whereby some government workers can retire as early as age 50, receive a CalPERS pension check and get another government job.  You better believe this would never occur in the private sector, because you are dealing with company money, and it is watched carefully.  In the public sector where taxpayer money funds salaries and pensions, it may appear to some government representatives guarding the till as ‘funny money’.

          

According to the editorial this type of activity show a failure, a failure to recruit and groom entry level and midlevel people to replace aging baby boomers.  Currently, if a retiree recieves a pension and a government salary, it appears that retiree no longer contributes to the pension system, therefore placing a strain on an already strained public pension system.   But if one transfers from a different local which has their own pension program, to new local with their own, this scenerio wouldn’t apply.  So it ask the question, “Should California do what New York does”?  Retired government workers under 65 who return to public employment cannot receive pension payments if eartnings reach beyond $30,000.00.  Questions arose when current Riverside Police Chief Sergio Diaz retired from the Los Angeles Police Department, as Deputy Chief at 55 years of age in March 31, 2010, to begin his new job of Riverside Police Chief July 1, 2010.  Diaz was hired by former City Manager Brad Hudson, and in unison with former Assistant City Manager Tom Desantis.

UPDATE: 06/18/2012: YELLOW BRICK ROAD TO EMERALD CITY?

 

I told you a thousand times, Chief Diaz say’s you need a permit for the costumes or the next time you’ll be arrested…

The City of Riverside has been labeled the ‘All American City’ in 1998, and christened the first ‘Emerald City’ in 2009, all we need now is the ‘Yellow Brick Road’?  The City of Redland’s has it’s ‘Orange Blossom Trail’ ( which in my opinion should have fittingly been in Riverside), the City of Indianapolis has it’s ‘Cultural Trail’, so why not?  Let’s build a yellow brick road.

                       

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL PROPOSAL

Passed on last week’s consent calendar is the creation of the signature ‘Yellow Brick Trail’, linking UC Riverside to ‘Emerald City’, of course, to our wonderfully blighted Downtown Riverside.

 UPDATE:06/18/2012: THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR EMILIO RAMIEREZ HAS MUCH TO SAY ON THE REDEVELOPMENT BUG-A-BOO…

According to the Press Enterprise the biggest concerns are the loans the city made to the redevelopment agency.  Ramirez said they were legal when they were done, which was long before the 2011 bill that ended redevelopment existed.  State officials have cited the law’s section that says loans between the city and redevelopment agency are not “enforceable obligations.”  In other words, ‘not legal’..  Ramirez goes on to say that at the June 16 meeting what started out as $158 million in questionable Enforeable Obligations by the State, that $60 million of that was unknowingly added as a ‘book keeping line item’.  This $60 million with 2 other similar items which add up to what he is calling ‘ the $80 million mistake’, which the State says are not payable.  This would appear to mean that the taxpayer is responsible for this $80 million???  and the ‘Ramirez Spin’ continues, if it shouldn’t have been there to begin with, it was never there?

UPDATE: 06/19/2012: NOW IF ANYONE WHO LIVES IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE KNOWS, IF THEY WERE TO TURN PLANS OR ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE THEIR WOODSTREET HOME, OR JUST DO IT ANYWAY,  WOULDN’T WE HAVE THE WRATH OF CODE ENFORCEMENT ON THE RESIDENT?  THEN HAVING TO RATIONALIZE WITH COMMADANT PRIAMOS OR EXPERIENCE SEVERE FINES?  SO HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN AT ALL?  OH, THESE ARE THE NEW RENDERINGS SUBMITTED FOR THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY, AMONG OTHERS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.  NOT SURE AT THIS TIME, WHAT ARCHITECT SUBMITTED THEM OR HOW MUCH TAXPAYER MONEY WAS PAID, BUT CERTAINLY FLOWS WITH THE EARLY CALIFORNIA REVIVAL? AROUND DOWNTOWN? OR DOES IT?  BUT CLICK THIS LINK TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUND OF THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY.

Press Enterprise Dan Berstein has their take on this Architectural (or animal ?) rendering, and Alicia Robinson talks about the new library design, please don’t throw stones..

 JUST FOR LAUGH’S

Will the remnants of the mayor continue to pull the strings?

Ugggh…Call Public Works and tell them we will need another change order!

Now, for an update of how commenters feel about the current immigration issue in the Press Enterprise…….well okay, how bout page 5? 6? 7? hmmm….well we’ll have to just check back later. 

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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THE DEATH OF REDEVELOPMENT : THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATE IN THE BLOODY AFTERMATH..

Posted: April 24, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1

While the City scrambles, TMC’s truth squad, oops, that’s the City’s tag line, has been blogging, reporting and speaking at Council Meetings as to why the Council should not have passed certain loans.  In addition, how passing these loans will come back to hurt the tax paying constituents.   The states silver bullet of termination appeared to be the only answer.  Now 10% of those Enforceable Obligations submitted to the State Finance Department were rejected for not following state guidelines.  Enforceable Obligations are legal contracts which declare that one person or agency owes another.  The question being asked is were these filing discrepancies inadvertainly overlooked by our protector of citizens, City Attorney Gregory Priamos?  And even their hired hand, Best, Best & Krieger?  Could these discrepancies possibly be considered faulty legal advice?  The City of Riverside shot back at the State Finance Department with the following letter.  According to the latest Press Enterprise the City Manager Scott Barber is defending some of the debt.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT

In the response letter sent back to the State Finance Department by City Manager Scott Barber, he then agreed with the State on the following two items which could not be considered Enforceable Obligations.  But shouldn’t the City’s legal council, Riverside City Attorney Gregory Priamos, have been able to clear this question of what is enforceable and what is not?

Page 1, Line Item 38: Grant agreement between City and Housing Authority  $60,000,000.00                                     Page 2, Line Item 13: LM LS Targets of Opportunity-La Sierra/ Arlanza            $1,085,749.17

A total of $61,085,749.17 which is due to hit our General Fund.

What is really disturbing in the letter is that Mr. Barber states there are three items of concern that can give way to a rate payer lawsuit.  This in response if the State is unable to accept the debt, it will go to Riverside residents in the form of higher utility rates.  But in doing so, these would in essence be a violation of proposition 218.  These are Page 1, Line Item 29 ($4,329,897.60), Page 1, Line Item 30 ($328,039.22) and Page1, Line Item 32 ($4,793,600.00).   Which amounts to $9,451,536.85.

Self Appointed Citizen Auditor, Vivian Moreno, emailed the following letter to Vicki Hightower of the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office indicating our frustration with the use of local resources.  The letter was also read to the Council and Mayor at the April 25, 2012 public comment section in council chambers.

CLICK LINK TO VIEW DOCUMENT

The rejections came from California State Department of Finance to the tune of nearly $159 million in projects and debts from Riverside’s former redevelopment agency, potentially leaving the city’s general fund responsible for the amount lost.  Did City management commit fraud when submitting inaccurate information to the State of California for responsibility of payment?  What role if any did the law firm Best, Best and Krieger have in this?  Or is the responsible party ultimately the decision makers, the deciders, the Council and the Mayor?

         

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE COMPLETE DOCUMENT.

Above is the letter sent to Vanessa Kirks, Fiscal Manager for the City of Riverside dated April 13, 2012 from Mark Hill, Program Budget Manager for the California State Finance Department detailing the states rejections.  What was also found, was that the California Department of Finance sent 55 cities this letter out of over 400 cities with one or more items rejected.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE CORRESPONDING DRAFT ROPS SUBMITTED TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.  POINTS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW ARE THE REJECTIONS DETAILED BY THE STATES LETTER.

What people need to know about the relationship between the Redevelopment Agency and the City of Riverside, is that Redevelopment Agency is a state agency.  The agency board is made up of your own city council, mayor and employees of the city’s development department. The City and Redevelopment are one in the same, they just change hats.  Ultimately, they are responsible for all actions and decisions.

The state then mandated that local oversight boards or succesor agencies be created to organize and dissolve the assets, debts and other obligations of the former Redevelopment Agency.  Loveridge stated, “The irony of this is that the state set up these local oversight boards but (the Department of Finance) is setting the rules of the game”.  True mayor, but did some of your oversight board actually know some of these loans were wrong? While others may have not?  Or were you steered inaccurate legal advice?  Also Mayor, when you met with the initial oversight board didn’t you set some rules of the game?  It appears that Mayor Ron Loveridge and County Supervisor John Tavaglione appointed each other for Chair and Vice Chair of the Board.  Conflict of interest?  Or just two peas in the pod?  Not to mention, it appears that John Tavaglione is covering all bets by endorsing three mayoral candidates, which are running against each other.  Former Councilman Ed Adkison, Councilman Mike Gardner and Councilman William “Rusty” Bailey.  But would these endorsements have have anything to do with John Tavaglione running for Congress?  Or further, even Richard Roth, Esq., oops General Richard Roth, Esq.,  who does quite a bit of legal work for the city, such as the current Sgt. Valmont Graham case regarding racial discrimmination issues and a proposed settlement offer in todays city council agenda.  Even though they are both endorsed by Mayor Ron Loveridge, is this a conflict of interest?  Or just bad, bad business?  Even Nick Tavaglione endorses General Richard Roth.  Possibly some relation to John Tavaglione?   “Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive”  This is pretty bad legal situation for our city and someone needs to be disbarred, but the city which continues to exist in a clouded stupor and may not have the gumption to know the difference.  For example, there are City loans made to the redevelopment agency, if not repaid, could be a future hit to the $214 million general fund. The problem is our general fund will not be able to sustain the additional debt load, we our are currently in a deficit as it is.  Will this mean layoffs? Program cuts? Department cuts etc. etc.?  More utility hikes?

If you were to read the California Department of Finance Question & Answer, which appears our city management did not, it states what is acceptable and what is not.  The state even has Question & Answer on Enforceable Obligatons as follows:

CLICK THIS LINK TO VEW FULL VERSION.

The Oversight Board or Succesor Agency, with John Tavaglione and Mayor Ron Loveridge on the sidelines appeared to approve all the obligations for the former RDA and thought they could pull the rug over on the State Finance Department.  The City and the Oversight Board sent the state a list of obligations they said were allowed and should be paid under the 2011 law that dissolved redevelopment agencies.  The Oversight Board in itself was filled with conflicts of interest, and they obviously acted accordingly and expectably.  The state then enforced its own pre-released guidelines, and rejected particular line items accordingly.  State officials disagreed with a number of items on the list, including construction contracts for the new downtown fire station, Municipal Auditorium and Doty-Trust Park, as well as a disputed amount of loans from the city to the redevelopment agency and nearly $18 million from bonds issued in 2007 that the state says should not be spent.  The City of Riverside took offense, and threatened litigation, well Gregory did, possibly by default.

In response to the State Finance Department rejection letter, City Manager Scott Barber will now send the state a response letter early this week, while Mayor Ron Loveridge will follow up with a trip in person to Sacramento.  This will turn into a grand event by having his lobbying group, the League of Cities, behind him?

City Attorney Gregory Priamos stated, “We’re confident that by continuing to engage in a serious dialogue with the Department of Finance that we’re going to solve these issues without the need for litigation.”

But to even think that the city attorney would threaten the state with costly taxpayer litigation without considering the guidelines the state implemented,  would be considered political suicide.  Especially in a time when the city has less of a revenue stream, but not the city attorney’s office it seems.  But of course, this is an office which operates without transperancy and without the duty to divulge expenses to the public, of which the public are entitled to.  Many constituents in the City of Riverside are telling TMC that they are questioning Greg Priamos’s abilities and practices, which do not appear to be truly protective of our local constituents interest.

According to the letter sent to the City of Riverside by the State of California Finance Department the state says no to approximately 10% of the submissions, while the City of Riverside of course, as we are now aware, threatens litigation.  What the State is saying is that Enforceable Obligations (EO),  of which the State cites HSC section 34171 (d) , declares in part that Enforceable Obligations do not include any 1. Agreements, 2. Contracts or 3. Arrangements with City (that created the Redevelopment Agency), and especially the Redevelopment Agency itself.  So it appears that the City and the Redevelopment Agency entered into multiple loan agreements.  The law appears to be very clear, I’m not sure what part Gregory, our City Attorney and Best, Best & Krieger didn’t quite get?  I know that they are both sharp cookies and it would appear to me that they wouldn’t allow the city to submit erroneous paperwork purposely.  But what do I know, I’m only a common citizen..

But let’s go a little further down.  The State considers the following not EO’s.  You cannot make inter agency loans and that’s what the TMC truth team has been trying to tell the Mayor and the City Council.  Did the city’s lobbying group The League of California Cities say this was legal.? Did the Greater Riverside Chamber say it was legal?  Did our City Attorney Gregory Priamos say it was legal.  Did Best Best & Krieger, the City’s hired law firm, say it was legal?

There were loans between RDA and the City totaling $41.3 million.  There was a cooperative and an agreement between RDA and the City totaling $61.2 million.  There was a loan between RDA and the City Housing Authority totaling $1 million.  So far $103.4 million total

Then there was an unused revolving line of credit for $19.9 million.  Again it remained unused, but the City still tried to push this through for payment regardless.  The State said no, it’s not EO’s. New total is $123.3 million.

There are contracts with the city with other entities, not RDA, that the City tried to pass to the state as a Redevelopment issue for $19.9 million.  It said no, these are not EO’s. New total, $143.2 million.

There was various expenditures with no expenditure contracts, similar to how the City handles business with BB&K, with no contracts.  The state said no, this amounted to $15.4 million. New total, $158.6 million.

So for now, the City of Riverside claims victim status, blaming the state for themselves over extending the city’s finances.  We all know that the City is in denial, they will never admit fault, and will not take a bit of responsibility for their past voting record as they should.  Continuing to blame the State Finance Department for themselves incurring our $2 billion in Redevelopment debt, and of course, the constituents of this city will ultimately be responsible for the debt.  We must also not forget those who were in charge at the time of these occurrences, such as Former Chief Financial Officer/ Assistant City Manager/ Treasurer Paul Sundeen.

The truth of the matter is that the city can only ‘cry wolf’ a limited amount of times, before the residents of this community realize what they have done.  But in all fareness we must allow the city’s newly formed “truth squad” to respond to this conundrum, and we will wait to hear from them.

Interum Public Works Director, Tom Boyd is now named Public Works Director.

It is now time time to ask the Public Works Director the question the constituents have been waiting to ask, with regards to bids, contracts, change orders and accountability of which he has taken part of .

UPDATE: 06/01/2012: STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT SEND LETTER OF APPROVAL TO CITY OF RIVERSIDE ALLOWING COVERAGE OF $26 MILLION OF THE ORIGINAL $156 MILLION ORIGINALLY REJECTED.  CURRENTLY, APPROXIMATELY $133 MILLION IS UNACCEPTABLE TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND REMAINS A DEBT OF THE CITY.

WHAT WOULD JOE ISUZU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT ALL THIS?

UPDATE:04/23/2012: CITY HALL SCUFFLE? Info has been brought to TMC that Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s aid Chuck Condor was allegedly involved in a scuffle with another individual at City Hall.  Condor has been called on the carpet of City Hall for making derogatory remarks such as calling woman commenters “bitches” and “idiots.”  This was done in plain sight of others at city meetings.  Is Condor out of control?  Or is this an accepted part of City Hall culture?  TMC has been told Chuck Condor is now on administrative leave, ‘paid leave’?  That we do not know.  Is Chuck Condor going to lawyer up?

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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: A CITY IN A WORLD OF PAIN! CONSTITUENTS BITE THE BULLET WHILE CITY LEADERS STAY MEDICATED…

Posted: April 21, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

What the Press Enterprise has not reported, is that these rate hikes were brought to the attention of the City Council and the Mayor many many times over by Self Proclaimed City Auditor Vivian Moreno.  With denials and dismissive responses from Councilmembers such as Mike Gardner and Andy Melendrez, both incidently candidates for mayor.  We are not critics as the PE would like to state, but responsible and educated citizens reading the city’s own public records, and asking the questions which the constituents really want to know.   Many times the answers are dismissive and contradictory to the public records at hand.  How should we as citizens respond if not to continue to ask the questions, until they can finally admit the truth.  If public records state their will be an increase from 2012 to 2013 their will be an increase, if not, correct the records.  But now, it appears that the city has been compelled to admit the truth.  We warned of the purple pipe reclamation program, with an increase of $2.00.  A program that does not benefit the citizens in Riverside, especially when the City of Riverside is one of the few cities which owns their own water rights.  We are only at forty percent capacity the rest we sell to other municipalities at a profit.  If the water table was to exceed the fifty foot mark from the surface, this would endager building and infrastructure foundations.  Therefore the water table must be monitored closely and harvested accordingly.  Accordingly, sewer rates from July 1, 2009 to July 1, 2013 for a Basic Multi-Family Dwelling have increase from $14.94 to $25.77, this is an increase of 42%.  Currently $21.26 as of  July 1, 2011 to $23.97 July 1, 2012, and increase of 13%.  Sewer rates going up, $2.00 in July 2012, up to $3.00 in 2013. 

The tiered water and electrical rate hikes, by manipulation of the number scales.  A new charge for mosquito abatement for some household at $8.00 per household.  I just found out that back alley I must clear of weeds every summer is the city’s property.  In addition this is under duress of a $1,000 fine for not clearing the city’s property.  Mad yet?  In addition,  no one resident receives credit for cost and time of cleaning the city’s property.  Even the fire department is beginning to charge fees for services.  You would think that our tax money would suffice.  But it appears that these may have been implemented to sustain the unsustainable, especially the pensions.  These were labor negotiations by city leadership that were not in the best interest of the citizens.  Storm drain maintenance hikes from $2.83 to $5.82, to sustain storm drain maintenance, street sweeping and of course which leads to a reason to cite constituents with parking tickets to sustain new parking projects etc.  Trash rates will go up $0.46 per month beginning in July 2012.  All constituents were denied a real say in the matter or were misinformed.  We can say ‘fiduciary negligence.’  But it won’t stop there, there are the bonds which are coming due as a result of the Renaissance debacle.  The city will be blaming Governor Brown and the state for banning redevelopment, for the money they say will sustain the payment on those bonds.  But that’s not how it works.  The State of California stopped Redevelopment because of the abuse.  They will blame the state, while the city will not take responsibility, because that will mean they are now apt at making good decisions.  But what you find that does not change in the long run.  Because in the long run it is you who will have to pay for it in increase property taxes.

“When I see a spade I call it a spade…”   – Oscar Wilde

It is no wonder that city residents feel they are habitually terrorized by the city and code enforcement agents who slowly drive by residents home to see what kind of violations they can find. Yes many have quietly said it could be Cuba or even the Third Reich, but I have to continue to remind them we live in a city called Riverside, also know as “The All American City”.

Is Redevelopment really over?  The State of California says it is, but will municipalities create something different?  Originally, Redevelopment was created to combat blight.  Areas of cities that didn’t contribute to the overall tax structure.  As Redevelopmentevolved it tended to benefit friends and others close to the Mayor, City Council and Management, rather than the overall community.  Established businesses which were contributing to the economy were then hit with another tool, ‘eminent domain.’  But the irony is, that the visionaries of government who saw an illusionary and unattainable conception created in essence blight.   Currently what we have downtown that is blighted and created by the Renaissance program under the supervision of the Mayor and City Council at a cost of close to 2 billion dollars to the taxpayer.  In addition, does not make a penny for the community as it was intended. They can blame it on the loss of redevelopment, but it couldn’t logically work with it.  Another improvisational plan appears to be in the works.  Infrastructure Finance Districts, originally created and intended to work one way, just as redevelopment, will they be strategically morphed again as redevelopment was, to the benefit of a few?  While on one hand, the taxpayer are just feeling protected by the end of redevelopment, others are recreating an alternative gravy train.  Let’s make no bones about it, Pavlovian would be jealous of how much salivation exudes in the mouths of politicians on this thought. Yes you may say it is a dogs world, but here’s how infrastructure finance districts work: a group of property owners (or residents if there are more than a dozen) in the specified area vote to allow a portion of property taxes that would ordinarily go to the general fund to be diverted to pay for construction and improvements to public property — things like libraries, parks and recreational facilities.  But ordinarily, property owners such as resident are not likely to go to the city and ask for them to place it on a ballot initiative.  So what may happen, would be the city goes to the people with a ballot initiative that the city would benefit the property owners.  This is quite slick… this is what would happen, financially speaking, property taxes would not go up, but the general fund doesn’t get as much money. The City would go along with the decreased amount in the general fund because, in theory, these public enhancements cause nearby property values to rise, ultimately putting more property taxes into the general fund in the future. But currently the City’s has been spending more than they are taking in.  So again, will this new concept debacle cause additional increases in property taxes at some point?  Probably so.. therefore people need to think before they vote, those who don’t vote, need to vote.  If you don’t vote, you are allowing your representatives to be truly unattended.  It is your duty to be part of the checks and balance system which protects our community.  Without it, we will continue to be afraid of government, whereby government should be afraid of the people.  We therefore hae to ask ourselves, does government fear us?  Or do we fear the government?  Thomas Jefferson said it best, “When governments fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny”.   Government is our servant, not our master!”  When the people fear the government, as with code enforcement abuse, tax abuse, service fees abuse, hidden tax abuse, a tiered utility rate abuse and the feeling that nothing can be done…you have allowed government to have victory.

More to come, new article in the Press Enterprise, again posted for a short amount of time then buried but worth reading, because it is what citizens as us, who the city has called ‘misinformed’, ‘idiots’ or if a woman, ‘bitches’, the allegations of falsification of records.  If it at all matters, Interum Public Works Director, Tom Boyd is now named Public Works Director.

It is now time time to ask the Public Works Director the question the constituents have been waiting to ask, with regards to bids, contracts, change orders and accountability of which he has taken part of .

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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: WHAT COLOR IS OUR MONEY? WHITE, BROWN, YELLOW, RED OR BLACK? COMMENTER SAYS ROTH LAUGHS AT THE EASE OF COLLECTING A BIG PAYCHECK FOR DOING NOTHING..

Posted: April 12, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
2

UPDATE: 04/20/2012: City Council has allocated time on Tuesday 04/20/2012  for President/CEO Cindy Roth to present and discuss Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce and its relationship to the City of Riverside.  Questions have been raised of City’s role in funding via taxpayer allocations of certain projects etc. with the Chamber.  The Greater Riverside Chamber is a non-profit, and questions have also been raised regards to conflict of interest as some have contracts with the city and its influence on particular projects which should only be a function between the council, mayor and the Riverside constituents.

UPDATE:04/19/2012: According to Former City Councilman and Mayoral Candidate Ed Adkison, City Manager Scott Barber divulged to him that the City of Riverside will have a $10 million dollar deficit.  Salvador Santana, of The Truth Publication, stated that the budget was balanced, this info he received in a recent 3:00 am meeting at the home of Finance Director Bret Mason.  Councilman Mike Gardner states we may have to use some of our reserves, but we have a balanced budget (I didn’t know the city had reserves, no one is yet able to pin point it).   According to the public records request act, TMC still sticks to premise that the City has more like a $90 million deficit.

UPDATE: 04/13/2012: BLOCKED WEBSITES HIGHLIGHTS TENSIONS BETWEEN COUNCIL, CRITICS.  Article in PE regarding the blocking of the Thirty Miles of Corruption on public city sites.  ACLU notified according to the Five Before Midnight blog, and has placed the City of Riverside on watch.

Most of the money to the chamber was donated between the years of 2005-2007 when Brad Hudson was city manager.  Cindy Roth CEO/ President of the Greater Riverside Chamber, a non-profit organization, was vehement against the city having a Citizen’s Auditing Committee.

CINDY ROTH, PRESIDENT/CEO OF THE GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE

As for the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, it does nothing but collect paychecks. The office could be used for rental for income to the city. Cindy Roth laughs at how easy it is to hold a title and collect a big check and do nothing for it.  But that seems to be common with friends of friends. Several citizens looked to the Chamber for help and Cindy Roth never got back to them and really doesn’t cared as the fact no one will say anything to her.  — Airjackie, Commenter on the Press Enterprise 5:38 PM on 04/22/2012

Why would a non-profit care about local citizens participating in an oversite of the communities coffers?  Why would such an entity have presidence over the will of the people?  Further, Ms. Roth states that the City’s Finance Committee would suffice.  This has been a committee that has had an inconsistent track record of meeting, there have been times whereby it met twice a year..but since 2010 we see an up swing in Finance Committee Meeting, which is a good sign for the community.

FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETINGS 1999-2010 (CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW)

What would be so wrong for true dedicated oversite committee of local citizens for the community’s coffers?  What is Ms. Roth afraid of ? Is the Greater Riverside Chamber really a lobbying group?  Why would it matter to a non-profit organization such as the Chamber?  Well this struck us as odd, so we did a little investigation and found the following.

What many have also brought to our attention are the board members.  Many who receive contracts with the city, such as BB&K attorney Howard Golds and also Richard Roth, Attorney and husband for Cindy Roth, who is also running for Congress under General Richard Roth and endorsed by Mayor Ron Loveridge.

Also there was a great disparity which was evident between chambers, but is it legal to donate tax payer money to non-profits?  Click on the link under the image to view the full document.

           

GREATER RIVERSIDE CHAMBER      HISPANIC CHAMBER          ASIAN INDIAN CHAMBER        AFRICAN AM. CHAMBER

CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY AGENDA ITEMS APRIL 10, 2012:

ITEM #14  They simply want to raise your water rates from $2.83 to $5.82, they wanted actually to raise it to $10.00  Evidently Public Works is unable to work within their budget?

             

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE DOCUMENT

On the above Public Works document, on page four, it mentions that the Greater Riverside Chamber voted to increase our rate from $2.83 to $5.82.  This sends a message to the community residents that there is an underlying connnection with this particular non-profit and the city.  Could we consider that there may be a conflict of interest with some of the board members?

So if we don’t pass this we will have to take it from the general fund.. According to Barber, the loss of Redevelopment has a direct impact on the General Fund to the extent of $6 million.  Therefore an already strapped General Fund will have to make up the slack of programs dependent on it.  He said it is a tax increase, but that was put in place before proposition 218, and therefore it is not subject to a vote.  This is a tax increase, City Manager Scott Barber said, and that is partly why I believe the Greater Riverside Chamber supported it.   Not because they receive financial support from the city,  most of the support that the Chamber receives from the City goes to pay Festival of Lights and Keeping Riverside Clean and Beautiful,  and thats what financially goes to support the chamber and that’s what needed to be said.  Well this needs to be said, I would imagine that the Greater Riverside Chamber is under city contract for services related with the Festival of Lights and Keeping Riverside Clean and Beautiful.

Since the Storm Drain issue is about keeping curbs clean of debris.  Chris Mac Arthur made mention to the problem of street sweeping both sides of the street on the same day.  We can’t have friends or family over…  of course we know we will be ticketed. you cant have any activity on those days.

Councilman Steve Adams is confused about the time line regarding the Federal Mandate of the Storm Drain issue, it was actually put in place in 1948, not 10 or 20 years ago.  These are mandates by the Federal Government that are unfunded.

Vivian Moreno Councilman Mike Gardner had suggested that we increase the rate from $2.83 to $5.82  Have you asked the citizens of Riverisde to sweep their curb, like you you make us clean the alley ways, which is actually your alley way.  The Greater Riverside Chamber will approve anything that has any increases, because they need their ‘financial fix’.

Dvonne Pitruzzello, Lower the rates and let us spend our money here in Riverside.  Your sucking the residents dry, it may go along with the mayors plan to remove the low to moderate out and middle to upper income residents in, in order to pay these taxes, but in terms of economics, this does not work.  Stop bleeding the citizens, especially for the elderly, this is there food money.

In reference to this isssue, Councilman Paul Davis vehemently stated, “I may stand alone, but I will not do this tax”!    Passes 6-1… and yes,  even our “independent voice for Riverside”  William “Rusty” Bailey voted for it.  TMC thanks Councilman Paul Davis for being an independent voice for Riverside, standing for people not politics, demanding fiscal responsibility and challenging the status quo to improve our quality of life.  Wow, that just sounded vaguely familiar..

So has Mr. Barber ever thought of cut backs?  Why again hit and terrorize the residents with more increases.  Residents have to financially cut back, why can’t the city?  Residents are made to live within their means, why not the city?  What would the city do, if they didn’t have the power to tax and implement such fees etc.?  They would have to be like us, forced to live within their means.

ITEM # 25  We have a resignation in the Human Resource Department of Tyrell H. Lawyer, Commission on Disabilities, a year before the contract ends, March 1, 2013.  Does anybody want to hear Tyrell’s story?  I sure do..

ITEM # 28  Continue an agreement with the Goeske Center to pay their electrical bill and and their landscaping bill.  The cost to the tax payer $403,590.00 from the General Fund.  The Janet Goeske Center is a non-profit organization, and questions have been raised if this monies our considered a gift of public funds.

PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE APRIL 6, 2012 PURPLE PIPE PROGRAM:

On April 6, 2012 at the Board of Public Utilities Meeting to allow public comment on the issue of the purple pipe.  The purple pipe program is a new water reclamation program the city would like to implement, with of course, you paying the bill.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE DOCUMENT

Not only was this meeting for the leyving of new fees for the purple pipe program, but for other issues.  One issue that we noticed, was Item #14 on the Public Utilities Board Meeting on their consent calender which was to approve a purchase order for the purchase and installation of office furniture for 3750 University Avenue.  Which was BB&K’s office space, whereby the City of Riverside assumed their lease, costing taxpayers $175,234.00 per month.  Well the furniture cost indicated in this item is for $280,691.84, but it doesn’t stop there.  They snuck in a change order, just in case they needed even more furniture, for $200,000.00  Usually change orders are brought back to council to be approved due to an unforeseen action which escalates the cost.  Therefore a justification needs to be brought to the attention of the council or board.  So the total cost for new furniture for their new place is $480,691.84, where does the old furniture go?  To that great office in the sky, I guess?  So, if they were to use their old furniture, and I’m sure it is not that old, we would have Tom Boyd’s needed $345,310.00 to pay for his storm drain, with something left over for a rainy day.  But of course, they may just use it for lunch.

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE DOCUMENT

But let’s take it a step further, the adopt a tree program, which is Item #13 the Tree Power Program.  It allows Public Works to pay out a maximum to each vendor or $150,000.00, but the total program is capped at $500,000.00

Questions are being asked on the purple pipe tax.  Some are questioning the extra expense Public Utilities recommends for more furniture.  Out with the old, in with the new style?  at taxpayer expense? ..during a down economy?  Is the purple pipe program being push to help pay the rent for BB&K’s old lease, but now the City’s new lease (or should I say we the taxpayer’s new lease)?  When we swap out, or take over BB&K’s lease, it will cost the taxpayer $175,234.00 per month.  Excessive?  According to market statistics we will be paying $1.00/ sq. ft. over current market trends.

Mary Sheldon, Five Before Midnight Blog,  blasted Councilman Steve Adams last weeks response of discrimination being funny..  Discrimination isn’t funny when at a recent settlement cost the taxpayers $1.6 million.

Dvonne Pitruzzello, 2012 Mayoral Candidate, said that we need the same type of reporting for the city attorney, that we have for the city manager discretionary spending.  Also stated regarding discrimination law suits, that we can lose federal and state funding if a city has to many discrimination law suits, and that’s not funny!   Further, she wanted to find out when developer Mark Rubin’s property was transferred, because I see Councilman Mike Gardner’s mayoral signs there, and I thought the city owned those properties.

Self Proclaimed Citizen Auditor Vivian Moreno, said if we cleaned our own street and paid for our own trees, we would have enough money left over that we wouldn’t have to pay for the purple pipe.  To add to this comment, citizens are not recognized or thanked for the expense of cleaning back alleys, which is actually the city’s back alley.  But they do this under the duress of expensive code enforcement fines.  Citizens forced to clean city property under the threat of being fined…now that doesn’t sound like freedom, but it does sound like an oxymoron.

Former Assistant Deputy Attorney Raychele Sterling spoke of contract bids and prevailing wage increases, since interum public works director tom Boyd didn’t know this basic bit of info.  April 3, 2012 at City Council Ms. Sterling spoke about the public works performance evaluation form which had not been reviewed by the City Attorney’s office, and considered “a lottery ticket” for employment lawyers.  Without further adieu here is the infamous ‘Tom Boyd Special.’

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW

UPDATE: 04.12.2012: IN THE NEWS, COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS AGAIN ATTEMPTS TO IMPOSE CONTAINER FEES ON PASSING TRAINS.  TMC ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE SOMETIME BACK WITH THE ARTICLE BELOW,  WHEREBY A JUDGE WOULD NOT ALLOW THIS ATTEMPTED FEE.  THERE WAS EXTRODINARY LEGAL COST TO THE TAXPAYER IN LEGAL FEES AND AGAIN COUNCILMAN ADAMS ATTEMPTS TO PROPOSE TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE THAT THE TAXPAYER PAY AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT IN DALLAS, TEXAS $160.000.00 TO PERSUADE OFFICIALS AT VARIOUS PORTS THAT THESE FEES ARE NECESSSARY FOR PROJECTS SUCH AS RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATIONS..  IS THIS DALLAS BASED CONSULTANT REALLY A LOBBYIST?

CITY OF RIVERSIDE VS. PORT OF LONG BEACH: COURT STATES THE ORANGE BLOSSOM SPECIAL CAN PASS WITHOUT GREASING EMERALD CITY!

ALSO IN THE NEWS IS THE MAYORAL CANDIDATE RACE, WITH A NEW PRESS ENTERPRISE ARTICLE ON THE VIEWS OF THE MAYORAL CANDIDATES.

FAIRMONT PARK HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT BULLDOZED WITH POLICE ESCORT ACCORDING TO PRESS ENTERPRISE.

WASTE CONTINUES, TMC ENDORSES MAYORAL CANDIDATE DVONNE PITRUZZELLO

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

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: JOIN US IN OCCUPYING CITY HALL TUESDAY MARCH 6, 2012!

Posted: March 3, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,
1

THIRTY MILES OF CORRUPTION AND CONCERNED CITIZENS WILL OCCUPY CITY HALL IN SUPPORT OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER’S AUDIT OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S MISUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS.  EXERCISING THEIR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH DURING PUBLIC COMMENT.

TUESDAY, MARCH 6TH, 2012

8:00 AM – 3:00 PM: GENERAL ASSEMBLY

3:00 PM- COUNCIL CHAMBER

6:30 PM- COUNCIL CHAMBER

IT TAKES A WHOLE COMMUNITY TO CLEANSE CORRUPTION… TAKE BACK RIVERSIDE!

TMC NEWS FLASH: CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER JOHN CHIANG SENDS AUDITING TEAM TO OCCUPY CITY HALL!….LEGALLY!!

Posted: February 28, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,
11

LATE NIGHTS (8:30pm, 2/29/2012) FOR CITY STAFF AT CITY HALL, WITH LIGHTS A BLAZING ON EVERY FLOOR..

WHILE THE CITY SCRAMBLES FOR DAMAGE CONTROL, THE CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER, JOHN CHIANG, WILL BE SENDING THEIR AUDITING TEAM TO THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE TO INVESTIGATE CITY FINANCES.  THEY WILL BE ARRIVING MONDAY MARCH 5, 2012 AND STAY TILL MARCH 16, 2012 AND BE WORKING ON THE FOURTH FLOOR CITY HALL, PUBLIC WORKS, INTERUM DIRECTOR TOM BOYD’S DEPARTMENT.  PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SIOBHAN FOSTER ABRUPTLY LEFT HER DEPARTMENT JUST MONTHS AGO FOR A POSITION WITH THE CITY OF PASADENA, UNDER PASADENA CITY MANAGER MICHAEL BECK (FORMER ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE).

FRIDAY 2ND, IN WHAT IS AN UNUSUAL MOVE, THE WHOLE FINANCE COMMITTEE WAS PULLED FROM THEIR OFFICES TO ATTEND A CONFERENCE.  A POSSIBLE BRIEFING ON HOW TO RESPOND TO AUDITOR QUESTIONS?

ALSO, FRIDAY, A CITY EMPLOYEE RECEIVED A FAVORABLE RULING ON AN EMPLOYEMENT RELATED CASE.  THE JUDGE HAD DETERMINED THAT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE HAD FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS.

AS SELF APPOINTED AUDITOR VIVIAN MORENO ANNOUNCED THE COMING OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER, COUNCIL MEMBER STEVE ADAMS AND THE MAYOR SURROUNDED CITY MANAGER SCOTT BARBER AND CITY ATTORNEY GREG PRIAMOS AT THE END OF THE COUNCIL MEETING.  THEY APPREARED TO BE PERPLEXED.  DID THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF FAIL TO INFORM THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL??  OR WERE THEY SURPRISED THAT TMC KNEW BEFORE THEY DID?  TMC HAS BEEN REQUESTING THE COUNCIL AND MAYOR TO BRING IN THE STATE CONTROLLER TO AUDIT THE BOOKS, WE EVEN ASKED MIKE GARDNER AND RUSTY BAILEY WHEN THEY WERE RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL.  NOW BOTH ARE CURRENTLY RUNNING FOR MAYOR, HOW WILL THIS EFFECT THEIR CAMPAIGN?  WILL THEY ALL BE HIDING BEHIND THE COMPUTER WHEN THE CONTROLLER COMES ASKING QUESTIONS?  NOW WHAT?  SOMETIMES CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY IS JUST TO MUCH FUN!

IN GOD WE TRUST, ALL OTHERS WE AUDIT..

STAY TUNED, MORE ON THE SPECIFICS TO COME…

THE EXAMINER’S, BILL SHEER’S LATEST ARTICLE DESCRIBES RIVERSIDE’S WOMAN ACTIVIST, SOMETIMES CALLED KOOKS OR CRAZY, BUT STAND FOR THE BASIC RIGHTS OF THE COMMUNITY, AND DEMAND ANSWERS FROM THE REPRESENTATIVES WHEN NECESSARY..

UPDATE:02/28/2012: WELL HALLELUJAH!  THE STATE CONTROLLER IS FINALLY COMMING TO OCCUPY CITY HALL MARCH 5TH.   SELF APPOINTED AUDITOR VIVIAN MORENO MADE THE ANNOUNCEMENT AT TUESDAY’S CITY COUNCIL DURING PUBLIC SPEEKING.  SHE ALSO ASKED THE QUESTION IF FORMER CITY MANAGER TOM DESANTIS WAS LET GO BY THE CITY BECAUSE OF SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN A CITY PARKING LOT?  ALSO MADE KNOWN, WAS DESANTIS’S EXORBITANT EXPENSES MADE TOWARD THE TAX PAYER TO THE EXTENT OF A MILLION DOLLARS OVER SEVERAL YEARS..  AND REGARDING FORMER BRAD HUDSON, ” IT TOOK SACRAMENTO APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS TO FIGURE HE WAS A LITTLE OVER THE TOP, AND TODAY YOU THINK HE DIDN’T OVER SPENT ANYTHING”.    IN THE FIVE YEARS THAT HUDSON WAS CITY MANAGER, WE SPENT ALMOST A MILLION DOLLARS, A MILLION DOLLARS REGARDING COUNCIL AND STAFF LUNCH EXPENSE ACCOUNTS.  SHE WENT ON TO SAY, “IF WE NEED THE MONEY FOR THE LIBRARY, STOP GOING OUT TO LUNCH”… 

THERE WAS MUCH PRESS REGARDING FORMER CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON LEAVING THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.   MAYORAL CANDIDATE WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY, CURRENT COUNCILMAN, MADE THE STATEMENT BEFORE HE LEFT RIVERSIDE, THAT HE, HUDSON, WAS A “MORAL COMPASS”.

THEN COUNCILWOMAN NANCY HART BLURTED OUT A POSSIBLE BOND MEASURE FOR THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY.  CONSIDERING THE REDEVELOPMENT DEBACLE THAT THE LIBRARY WAS UNDER FOR RENOVATION.. 

SHE WAS QUICKLY SQUASHED BY MAYOR LOVERIDGE AS IF THIS WAS AN ISSUE NOT TO BE PUBLICLY EXPOSED…THE MAYOR QUITELY STATED, “THAT’S LATER IN THE YEAR”.   COUNCILWOMAN HART ALSO MENTION THAT SHE KNOWS PEOPLE ARE FLEEING FROM CALIFORNIA, BUT DOESN’T THINK THAT THERE ARE AS MANY PEOPLE LEAVING CALIFORNIA DUE TO THE ECONOMY AS WE THINK..  BUT SHE FEELS THAT IT NECESSARY TO REACH OUT AND TOUCH SOMEONE TO COME TO RIVERSIDE.. AND THAT WE HAVE A GREAT SURPLUS IN REGARDS TO CITY MONIES..  AND ONWARD TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT..

COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS STATES THAT THEIR ARE A FEW THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF REGARDING THE RENAISSANCE. 

FIRST, JUST A BRIEF LITTLE HISTORY LESSON, THE RENAISSANCE WAS TO TAKE THIS CITY THAT WAS NOT DESIREABLE, TO MAKE IT THE MOST THE DESIRABLE CITY IN CALIFORNIA..NOT ONLY HAVE WE’VE DONE THAT, BUT WE HAVE MADE IT THE CITY THAT IS MOST CAPABLE TO BRING JOBS AND RETAIL TO THIS CITY…   “OK, WHERE IS IT”?  THIS IS WHAT MANY IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE ARE SECRETLY ASKING.. “WHERE IS IT”?  AND WHY SHOULD RESIDENTS BE AFRAID OF ASKING THESE QUESTIONS?  IS THE TRUE REALITY OF CITY COUNCIL, THE REALITY OF AN ILLUSIONARY AND DETACHED PREMISE?

 UPDATE: 03/01/2012: CITY OF STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA ON THE BRINK OF BANKRUPTCY, COULD BE LARGEST CITY TO FILE.  ACCORDING TO BLOOMBERG THE CITY CAN’T EVEN PAY THEIR BONDS.   STOCKTON’S COUNCIL WILL BE ASKED TO REDUCE THE CURRENT BUDGET BY $15 MILLION BECAUSE OF NEWLY UNCOVERED ACCOUNTING ERRORS AND MISMANAGEMENT THAT HAVE LEFT THE CITY ALMOST BROKE, ACCORDING TO CITY MANAGER BOB DEIS.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST…  AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: CITY COUNCIL OVERSIGHT OF DISCRETIONARY SPENDING….A PATTERN OF FIDUCIARY NEGLIGENCE?

Posted: February 14, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
2

UPDATE: 03/01/2012:  THE SACRAMENTO BEE REPORTS SACRAMENTO COUNTY EXECUTIVE BRAD HUDSON RILES UP LABOR UNIONS.

UPDATE:02/19/2012: SACRAMENTO BEE REPORTS:  BRAD HUDSON NEEDS A LESSON IN REALITY!  IT APPEARS THAT UNDER BRAD HUDSON’S WATCH THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO SPENT $15,000.00 ON A MACHINE TO CURB WHITE NOISE.  NOPE, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE, BUT FOR A LOGISON SOUND MASKING SYSTEM… IN ORDER TO PREVENT EASEDROPPERS FROM HEARING CONFIDENTIAL MEETINGS!  TMC WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THE ‘CONE OF SILENCE’ TO DETER THOSE PESKY EASEDROPPERS.

 COULDN’T HANDLE THE HEAT IN RIVERSIDE, CAN’T HANDLE THE NOISE IN SACRAMENTO?  ..AND HE ALSO MADE THE NEWS ON CBS!

 

CLICK THIS LINK TO WATCH THE NEWS REPORT

CBS ALSO MENTIONED BRAD HUDSON HAS YET TO RETURN THEIR PHONE CALL REGARDING THIS ISSUE, REGARDLESS, CBS REPORTER MENTIONED THEY WILL BRING HIM BACK IN THE NEWS IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS WHEN HE RELEASES HIS BUDGET ALLOCATIONS.

UPDATE:02/16/2012: SACRAMENTO BEE REPORTS:

 “I chewed him out about it,” Yee said. “I said they were unacceptable with the money he makes. … He went overboard. We all gave Brad a mouthful so I don’t think this will be happening again.”   – Sacramento County Supervisor Jimmy Yee

Sacramento County Supervisor Phil Serna said he asked Hudson to consider reimbursing the county for those costs – which seemed reasonable, given that Hudson makes close to $500,000 a year in county salary and retirement benefits from his last job.  Hudson declined to do so, Serna said. 

 

HUDSON’S PAST DISCRETIONARY SPENDING IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE

2005-2006:  $39,296,019.06

2006-2007:  $45,091,052.92

2007-2008:  $37,691,038.33

2008-2009:  $26,918,067.27

2009-2010:  $29,554,005.19

TOTAL       $178,550,182.77

2010-2011   $830,762.24

       

The total discretionary spending under Former City Manager Brad Hudson was $178,550,182.77.  Under Hudson, he could spend up to the maximum of $50,000.00 without City Council approval.  Prior to Hudson’s hire, in 2004, the maximum amount that could be spent without council approval was $25,000.00.  In June 2010, Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello asked the question regarding an accounting of the city manager’s discretionary spending.  This is what we found.  What it was spent on is all together another story, but it also appeared that that the discretionary fund had not been reviewed by city council.  But coincidently since Pitruzzelo’s June 2011 request the amount spent from discretionary spending decreased dramatically.  Since June 2010 Hudson’s approved contract spending under $50,000.00 now went down to $830,762.24  Brad Hudson began looking for another position in February 2011, and left August 2011 to his new position in Sacramento leaving questions regarding his spending and why he left.  The records attained were the result of a public records act request.

UNLIKE RIVERSIDE, IT DIDN’T TAKE LONG FOR SACRAMENTO TO FIGURE BRAD OUT… THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN PLACED IN POSITIONS OF POWER, FOR THEY DO NOT BENEFIT THE PUBLIC AT LARGE WITH REGARDS TO THEIR ACTIONS AND DECISIONS..

UNKNOWINGLY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST…  AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM 

THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC…

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: HUDSON DOUBLE DIPS IN A DOUBLE DIP RECE$$ION?

Posted: January 11, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,
2

 

CLICK THE PIC TO WATCH BRAD HIDE..

Currently Former City Manager Brad Hudson collects a $200,000 annual retirement benefit from the city of Riverside, along with his new Sacramento County CEO salary of $258,000 plus benefits.  According to the Sacramento Bee he could earn a second pension when he leaves Sacramento County. His contract calls for Sacramento County to match up to $9,000 of his annual contributions to the county’s retirement plan.  During his employment with the City of Riverside, it has been found that he as spent over $200,000,000.00 in his discretionary slush fund without city council approval.  Hudson was allowed to spend up to $50,000.00 a pop.  New Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzello exposed his massive spending.  And of course Hudson had a shoe polisher here as well.  Quite possibly the City of Riverside owned Fox Theatre can have a musical about this.  The Fox, which runs on a deficit by the way, you guessed it, at tax payer expense.

BRAD HUDSON’S FIVE YEAR CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

BRAD HUDSON’S FORMER CITY OF RIVERSIDE CONTRACT

$197,000.00 CalPERS

$258,000.00 Salary as Sacramento County Chief Executive

$455,000.00 Total Yearly Compensation excluding benefits

Hudson retired at 53, to take on his new postion in Sacramento.  Excessive?  How much more will government do to terrorize the taxpayer?  Questions still remain if Hudson was given the choice to leave by resigning, therefore allowing him to receive his CalPERS pension, as opposed to being fired.  This has been an acceptable practice in the upper eschalons of government.  Another double dipping example is our new Chief of Police Sergio Diaz, retired from LAPD to take on the new position in Riverside.  Our forefather of this great country warned of this abuse, and as the peoples government it is not only our responsilbility, but our duty to oversee the activities of government.  We should never be asleep at the wheel, because if we do, the resultant government will be a reflection of our failure to intervene..

Read more here:

Public Eye: Sacramento County CEO’s refurnishing includes shoe polisher

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/06/4166679/public-eye-sacramento-county-ceos.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

I have taken some time to research Hudson’s misdeeds over the course of his undistinguished career.  He apparently left the City of Riverside flat broke and saddled with an unambitious successor who can’t seem to “ferret out” (those were the man’s words in the local paper) what is going on around him. I’m also sorry to report having learned that the Riverside police turned a blind eye to misconduct by their bosses’ minor son.  That is most disturbing. We really got a bum deal when this bum caught his own high speed rail out of southern California and wound up in our area. Our pain is Riverside’s gain.    – commenter from the uncensored sacramento bee, hudsonfan

This guy is trying to reinvent himself after being run out as Manager of the City of Riverside.  I urge everyone to just look up all the dirty laundry he left there, there are several news articles by The Press Enterprise-( pe.com) as a former employee of Sacramento County ( I retired last year) I know for a fact that the “open door policy” sounds good on paper, but it is a joke, all the departments are so understaffed and overworked that no one has the time to just visit with the boss?  What ever happned to working your way up the ladder?  I’m sure there a few county employees that are qualified and would perfect for this job.  The B.O.S. are hopefully going to wash their hands on this selection without eating crow, but I hope the public fills the seats for the next meeting and lets them have it.  – commenter from the uncensored sacramento bee, formercountyemp

From the “Old dog, old tricks” file: He’s been CEO for just four months and the troubled “company” he inherited has seen four years of budget cuts, not to mention layoffs, program cuts, and employee contract concessions.Brad Hudson, Riverside’s ex-city manager and now top exec of Sacto County, must feel their pain. Poor guy ate a $36K pay cut to $258K. But like Scarlett O’Hara, he’s clawing his way back! The Sacto Bee reports that hard-times Hudson has run up a $21K county tab on new office furniture. There’s a $7,300 “Lexington” desk, a round table, end table, coffee table and credenza. “I wanted something that was appropriate for the work that we do,” he told the Bee. “It’s not extravagant. I just want people to feel like they can come in.” And sit right down in his “Diva Series” conference chairs. Just don’t plant your posterior on papa bear’s new “Tuxedo Executive” chair or he’ll toss you out on your cummerbund. The only creature comfort critic the Bee scrounged up was an ex-union boss, suggesting the Sacto supes knew what they were getting. Hudson could just be warming up. During his six-year watch, Riverside City Hall completed a decade-long $20 million remodel, including glass-walled offices for electeds and a corner lair for the city manager. Don’t forget, Hudson is at heart a hard-charging developer. His currency just happens to be taxpayers’ dollars and fancy-pants lingo. Viva la Renaissance Chez Tuxedo Junction!     – Uncensored Dan Berstein, Riverside Press Enterprise

“That’s because he is collecting a $200,000 annual retirement benefit from the city of Riverside, along with his new Sacramento County CEO salary of $258,000 plus benefits.” This is not an uncommon practice and happens more than people realize.  I believe Ann Madden Rice of UC Davis Med Center, who’s salary is almost $1M as the CEO, is another who is able to “double dip”, along with several others executives working in the UC system.  However you don’t see a bunch of slam pieces on UC Davis executives as they are quite chummy with Cheryl Dell, sacbee President, and it’s staff.  It all comes down to blantant greed and the obvious exploitation of state/county/city loopholes which enables this to happen.  I could really care less about the $78 polisher.  I care more about the state, county, and city officials being able to retire and collect full benefits/pensions on the tax payers dollar and then them being able to take another posistion (carefully picked as to not violate the terms of their pension) and collecting another salary.  I think once they retire, they should have to stay retired…irregardless of their former public position.  They want to keep working, then they can go into the private industry.  Possibly creating some jobs and revenue for the state as opposed to continuing to suck off the proverbial breast of the state.  It’s highway robbery and it’s a big reason as to why the state is in financial ruin.     – commenter on the uncenored sacramento bee, Ms.Nesbit

$200k pension and a quarter million dollar salary?  He’s the problem – the government has become the biggest 1%.  They didn’t need a shoe polisher, they need a rope and a strong tree to hang him from.  THIEF!!!     – commenter on the uncensored sacramento bee, brettsacto

UNKNOWINGLY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!   TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST…  AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!  COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT!  TMC WISHES ALL, EVEN CITY HALL, A MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR!  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM  BY THE WAY, COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED!

Older Entries
Newer Entries