Again Folks, the City of Riverside is actually polling the public to craft its propaganda campaign for the upcoming revenue measure, known as Measure C for this November 2021. This is how the City plays the game from there exclusive new best seller, “How to Fleece a Taxpayer” which coincides with their previous release, “If You Want It, Just Take It!” :
1) The City gets caught (last Fall) illegally taxing its ratepayers through what’s called the General Fund Transfer (11.5% of your electric utility bill is actually a tax you never approved in violation of Prop 26, 2010). See: Parada vs. City of Riverside.
3) The City then places a ballot measure for the November 2021 election using persuasive (violative of State election code) vs. factual information: “To maintain 911 response, fire, paramedic, police, street repairs, parks, senior, other general services, shall the City Charter be amended to continue collecting in electric rates and maintain the voter-approved fund transfer existing since 1968, limited to 11.5% of gross revenue, providing approximately $40,000,000 annually to City of Riverside’s General Fund that does not increase tax or utility rates, until ended by voters, requiring audits/ all funds benefiting Riverside residents, be adopted?” The general idea is to scare the public as to where the City might cut funding (i.e. the things the public cares the most about).
4) Then the Public Union money comes pouring in to send propaganda materials out the month before the election, USING THE PR AND POLLING DATA/INSIGHTS YOU PAID FOR, to tell you the world will end if you don’t vote for the Measure C, but not mentioning City employees will be the biggest beneficiaries of the ballot measure.
The same strategy was used successfully for Measure A (Water Fund Transfer), Measure Z (sales tax increase), and the latest utility rate hike (probably others I’m forgetting at the moment). For example Measure Z resulted in many City employees getting nearly a 25% raise over the course of two years…money you were told would go towards enhancing your quality of life. That raise also made our unfunded pension liabilities skyrocket…which then precipitated the City selling pension bonds last Summer…which guaranteed much of our public employee pensions (80-90% of highest salary for life with retirement in their 50s often, to which I ask, ‘Where’s the fairness towards the private sector asked to pay these packages?” The dishonesty of how our local government agencies continue to act should by this point make you understand that you should vote ‘no’ on all future “revenue measures,” also known as “hidden tax revenue schemes.”
A WORD FROM CITY OF RIVERSIDE GOVERNMENT WATCHDOG, JASON HUNTER: SORRY FOLKS THE SOUND IS BAD, INCREASE THE VOLUME.
SHOULD LIFE JACKETS BE MANDATORY? A QUESTION TO PONDER SINCE NOT HAVING THEM CAN CREATE A DANGER TO THOSE AROUND YOU, INCLUDING YOURSELF!
BOTTOM LINE GOVERNMENT SHOULD LIVE WITHIN THEIR MEANS, AFTER ALL, WE THE TAXPAYER MUST….
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST EVERYTHING, RACIST, A.K.A “THIRTY MILES OF CR-P,” RACIST, “LATINO WHITE SUPREMACIST SITE,” “SITE IS A JOKE,” “RACIST,” “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” DID WE MENTIONED WE HAVE BEEN LABELED RACIST?, “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORRIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE CANNOT TRUST THE ACLU THESE DAYS ANYWAY! RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
When looking at the City budget, one can see that the primary expense to the taxpayer is public worker salaries. Again, considering you have public unions deeply involved with the campaign process while negotiation their member’s contracts, who actually comes out to bat for us, the taxpayer? We all need to ask the question: have cities now become government entities that benefit their workers’ quality of life as opposed to the quality of life of their employers (the taxpayers/constituents)? Does government exist solely for the purpose of benefiting those directly and indirectly employed by it?
Commentor Karen Renfro made the following opinionated insight based upon on her analytical perspective of the relationship between the City of Riverside government and public employees on the Nextdoor website. Many in the community who are voiceless feel the same way, despite propaganda spewed by the City.
(click image to enlarge)
Back on February 22, 2018, the Budget Engagement Commission members were perplexed by the need for almost 50% of Measure-Z Sales Tax Money going to help a shortfall im pension obligations.
From Measure Z, $13 million was to be transferred to the General Fund: the Chief Financial Officer and City Manager are asking for $5 million of that $13 million to cover anticipated shortfalls due to unfunded unsustainable pension liabilities.
We also refer to an opinion piece in the Daily Bulletin by Sal Rodriquez. The following are excerpts, you can read the whole article by hitting this hyperlink. There is simply no question in my mind that local government has been hijacked and those responsible have created a financial abyss for the taxpayers. It’s a scheme that benefits no one but themselves and with the illusion that it directly benefits their members and taxpayers. Onward with Sal Rodriquez’s excerpts:
“Public employee unions exist to advocate for their members, often campaigning for policies at odds with the best interests of the general public. The so-called public safety unions are in a unique position. Representing some of the most esteemed and highest paid of government employees, they have lots of money to dole out and are more than comfortable exaggerating threats to public safety if it helps their cause.”
“Cases in point: ballot initiatives in Hemet, Riverside and San Bernardino tainted by undue influence from public safety unions.”
“In Riverside, the city, which last year was boasting about a $1 million surplus and felt so good it decided to give police officers a $4 million raise the city hadn’t actually budgeted for, has put on the November ballot a one-percent sales tax. Expected to raise about $50 million a year, Measure Z is touted as necessary for the future of Riverside.”
“With a name like “City of Riverside Public Safety and Vital City Services Measure,” it certainly sounds important. Of course, if passed Measure Z revenues can be spent however the council likes and there are no guarantees about how the money will be spent, with one notable exception. On Tuesday, the City Council approved a contract with the city’s police union which, among other things, will give police officers a bigger raise if voters approve a tax increase. It’s quite the incentive.”
“According to recent filings, the police union has already contributed $12,500 to the Measure Z campaign. Firefighters union president Tim Strack told The Press-Enterprise that he already had $100,000 in commitments for the campaign. Behind any talk of the need for more money for “public safety,” is really just a desire for bigger raises and budgets.”
Even, President Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) had something to say about the conflict of public worker unions and doing the work of the people in this in a letter:
“All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.”
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
What’s left for the Local Riverside Taxpayers after Measure Z is passed by heavily funded Unions! What is left when the Riverside Council voted for higher Utility Rates for a Utilities that the Riverside Public Residents actually own! RPU is Riverside Public Utilities! Why did they do it? They increased your Utility rates, to pay for their bad decisions and contracts with the Unions. What they did was to increase the General Fund Transfer from the Utility fund to pay unsustainable pensions. A sanitation worker in Los Angeles is retiring with $280K per year. Are public workers the Nouveau Riche? What gives? My pension is $980.00 a month with the Vons Corporation as a Managing Pharmacist, What gives?
With the economy strong, Measure Z continues to beat forecasts for revenue taken in by the City and currently approaches $53 million/year. So what ACTUALLY happened to the money? And here’s where the story takes a predictable turn.
At the same time Measure Z was being put on the ballot, now-infamous former City Manager John Russo crafted a deal with the local unions (and non-represented) employees, which was passed by our crooked City Council (with no veto from the Mayor), called the Partnership Compensation Model (PCM). The PCM was structured to grant salary raises of 9-12% ABOVE AND BEYOND NORMAL MERIT RAISES spread over 2 years for all public employees ONLY IF Measure Z should pass.
In return for this lucre, the unions had to promote the heck out of Measure Z (click on image to enlarge below).
Tim Strack, president of the Riverside City Firefighter in center, raises his fist as the first results of Measure A came in, at the Orangecrest Club in Riverside, at left, Tom Hunt of the school board and writing in the totals is Dave Austin, on Tuesday, June 4, 2013.
This is what taxpayers hate! These Assholes enumerating themselves, but not creating any savings or a value to benefit the taxpayers. The reality has set in, these dirt bags have only thought, thought on how to screw you, that is us, the taxpayer. Take a good look at these individuals..they are not your friends or your supporters, they are working to take your money, by any means possible. Which it terms they are Socialist, that is the reality…
Now here’s what should make you take your pitchforks and torches down to City Hall at the next Tuesday City Council Meeting: according to City Finance’s own numbers (presented March 13th, 2019 to the Finance Committee), in return for that $100,000, by the end Fiscal Year 2021, those very same employees will make off with over $21,000,000 annually ($16,000,000 from Measure Z itself and the remaining from your recently-raised utility bills) as a result of PCM (Partnership Compensation Model) – see and click on image below to enlarge.
Simplified:
1) Your Mayor and Council (with an assist from former City Manager John Russo) made a deal with the devil unions to trade an annual annuity of over $20 million of your money in return for $100,000. The Net Present Value of that annuity over the next 20 years (the sunset on Measure Z)? NEARLY $300 MILLION.
2) Every one of your elected officials at the time (including Ward One Council member Mike Gardner) contributed monetarily to the “Yes on Z” campaign, as did City “leaders,” non-profit associations like the Riverside Chamber of Commerce and the Raincross Group did as well.
3) The 2021 Fiscal Year budget forecast shows a $15 million deficit, which means SERVICE CUTS are on the way just 5 years after the passage of Measure Z. You think we’ve got a homeless/pothole/you-name-it problem now? Give it a year! They’ll be sleeping in your front lawn and RPD will not be able do anything about it, as this occurrence recently in our cherished Wood Streets.
4) The numbers in Simplified #1 above do not reflect how the PCM will make our unfunded pension liability explode, as pensions are calculated off an employee’s highest salary. I’ll take a swag and guess that number will eventually be in the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS too.
5) The City runs for the benefit of the electeds, a few special interests, and the employees, with just enough thrown back at the general public to provide the illusion that all’s well and things are getting done. Behinds the scenes we have $2 billion in debt, a $535 million unfunded pension liability, and budget deficits as far as the eye can see (at the City alone, not counting the County, the School Districts, etc.).
6) Eventually, all the Measure Z money will go to employees as Simplified #4 kicks in. You have been screwed royally by those sworn to serve and protect you. The City’s proposed solutions to the problems they’ve created seem to center around selling your assets, cutting your services, and taking more money from you…the road San Bernadino took over 10 years ago. Sooooo, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? I will offer my suggestions at a later date. The below was a debate on the subject of Measure Z hosted by Ralph Torres of Hey Riverside. Councilman Paul Davis and Community Tax Activist Jason Hunter were on the hot seat! He gave a warning to the taxpayer residents as follows: And don’t say some of us didn’t warn y’all at the time (at 10 minute mark in particular):
Please, please share with your neighbors. It’s time folks woke up. There’s still time to mitigate this impending disaster.
I get a bit peeved, as you should, at the entitlement I see amongst the public sector workers who think there’s any equity between work in the public and private sector by allowing public sector folks to retire at (in some cases) 90% of their highest one-year career salary in their early 50s, especially with the amount of pension spiking that still goes on. That’s not a comfortable retirement: that’s a scam on the private sector taxpayers, many of whom at looking at $35K/year in Social Security at age 70.
According to the PE, 53,000 former public employees in California were pulling down 6-figures a year in 2016, many of whom NEVER PUT A PENNY OF THEIR OWN MONEY towards their retirements. If this was seen in the Private Sector this would lead to Bankruptcy. And no, I don’t feel sorry for one second about demanding that those pensions be modified (particularly the higher end ones), especially since reform of the problem has been postponed by our public employees continually buying our elections (like Measure Z) and politicians. The general public is the boss under our Constitution, so if enough of us say “no more,” guess what? That’s it … regardless of past promises, just like in the private sector. Google, “United Airlines bankruptcy,” for reference. And the whole argument that everyone who bitches is just jealous they can’t get a job in the public sector is preposterous on its face (the private sector pays for all ALL general fund employee compensation via taxes) and shows how little people know about how our economic system of capitalism works (while not perfect, I challenge someone to show me a better model that’s actually been implemented in a country this size).
Bottom line, the City of Riverside should consider Bankruptcy as an option, and then renegotiate those Union contracts or give the Unions an ultimatum, decrease salaries and increase the pension obligation or contribution to the fund. The City of Riverside should only negotiate contracts with Unions that we actually can afford. The Private Sector does it all the time, they would otherwise see bankruptcy!
The above was a news story that was published on Youtube in 2013 by Fox Business, it talks about the unsustainable pension cost crisis that California is being confronted with. When they looked further they found public city workers were retiring with high yearly fat payouts. They had a sanitation worker in Los Angeles retiring with $280K per year, a librarian in San Diego retiring with $234K per year, a retired life guard in New Port Beach retiring with $180K in pension and health care benefits per year and 94 public government workers in the Bankrupt City of Stockton, CA receive over a $100K plus per year in pensions. Why am I peeved? I receive a pension of $980 per month in my pension as a pharmacist. I worked with the private sector as a pharmacy manager with the Vons Corporation. My background, I have a Doctorate in Clinical Pharmacy from the University of California. What I’m telling you, and should be obvious, is their are elements within City Governments that do not care, and do not look upon the interest of their taxpaying constituents.
This reminds me of Riverside Public Utilities dispatcher Donald Dahle who received $257,719 in overtime in 2016, boosting his total earnings to $373,235! A dispatcher folks! According to Internal Audit Manager for the City of Riverside Cheryl Johannes stated, “In other words, they found no fraud, … Where (Public Utilities staff) were lacking was internal review. They had policies, but if people don’t follow policies, this is what happens.” Duh, are we talking about City of Riverside Employee who was in charge or who had supervisory role was derelict in their duties or who was clearly incompetent? This being said cost the taxpayers a heap of money!
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
ACCORDING TO THE ALAMEDA MAGAZINE, THE PHOTO WAS COURTESY OF JOHN RUSSO (Wow, thanks John!)
TMC Figured Russo out way before the City of Riverside did. We had the all laid out for the City of Riverside, but they relied on their staff. Thanks John for your Riverside legacy, Partnership Compensation Model, Measure Z, 50 year loan lease, Contracts without a Resolution.
Alameda City Manager John Russo, a former Oakland city councilman and city attorney, is headed to Riverside.
Outgoing Alameda City Manager John Russo likes to use sports metaphors. So, when news broke in February that Russo, along with his oversize personality, was leaving the Island for a new opportunity and greater compensation in Riverside, the response from city officials was akin to what small-market baseball teams admit when they land a high-priced slugger in the last year of his rookie contract. “Frankly, we were lucky to have him,” Councilmember Jim Oddie said in the days after the announcement.
Following stints in Oakland, first as a council member and then as city attorney, Russo’s thoughtful wit and razor-like barbs made his hiring as city manager in 2011 as curious as a big fish swimming in a small pond.
By most accounts, Russo’s four years in Alameda were a success. In an understated, yet frank interview, Russo said his greatest accomplishment is not moving along development at Alameda Point, but repositioning the city and public employee unions away from constant back-biting to an atmosphere of shared values and greater economic certainty. There were rumors that Russo’s departure was exacerbated by the surprise results of the fall election, but Russo said the rumors are untrue and that he merely landed an opportunity to fast-track existing plans for moving himself and his family to Southern California. “To the surprise of many,” he said, “I’m not an important person. I am just city manager of a small California city, and later I’ll be a city manager of a bigger city in California.”
However, under Russo’s stewardship, decades of uncertainty over the direction of development at the former Alameda Naval Air Station was resolved following an agreement with the U.S. Navy for the city to limit housing at Alameda Point in exchange for reconveying the land at no cost to Alameda taxpayers. But, Russo said credit does not lie with his actions. “I don’t think I have a legacy,” he said, noting his viewpoint is deeply rooted in his Southern Italian ancestry. “I have a fairly fatalistic view of the world,” he added. “I know no one ever believes this applies to me, but I think I have a fairly modest view of what my role is. This community was ready to make progress at Alameda Point.”
The infrastructure of support preceded him, he said, when the community rallied around an ultimately unsuccessful pitch to lure a new campus for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to Alameda Point. “I didn’t make that happen. That feeling of ‘at long last, we need to do something about the base’ is what drove the process. The public itself was exhausted by plan after plan. Once you get that mandate from the people and the council, it makes it easier to get something done.”
Yet, negotiating the no-cost reconveyance is one of his proudest moments, Russo said, but even then, he believes luck was involved. The Navy’s previous $108.5 million asking price was never going to pencil out for the city, Russo said. Instead, he urged the Navy to erase the uncertainty of the last decade and return to the original offer of a no-cost transfer of the property. “I just wanted to start a dialogue by getting that number down, but they surprised me by saying yes,” Russo said. “With economic development, sometimes you have to throw the line in the water dozens of times to get a bite. We got a bite on the first throw. That was just luck.”
Next, Russo needed to dissuade some councilmembers from being starstruck by large-scale development at Alameda Point, which incidentally, provided an easy stab at legacy-building to a more balanced piecemeal approach. “The city kept swinging for the fences and trying to hit a grand slam by seeking a single entity to develop the entire point all at once,” Russo said. “What I told them is we need a rally of singles, and I will submit that we scored, and we will continue to score.”
Although he said more needs to be done to put Alameda on solid financial footing, Russo said a thawing of animosity between City Hall and public employee groups over salaries and benefits will greatly aid the city over the next decade. City employees now contribute a higher percentage of their salary to pensions and split the additional costs of medical benefits, Russo said. But they also enjoy pay raises when the city’s revenues increase. (Partnership Compensation Plan, whereby salary increases are tied to City revenue, did it in Alameda, he did it in Riverside. Was Measure-Z just another Employee Profit Sharing Scheme?)
“What we’ve done here is created a true partnership for good times and bad times,” he said. “That’s a very foundational change in the relationship that had sort of veered from ‘Let’s do whatever labor wants,’ to ‘Let’s go to war with the people who work for us.’”
On the horizon for Alameda, Russo said, is increasingly higher premiums from the state’s largest pension group, the California Public Employee Retirement System, or CalPERS, and greater demand in coming years for post-employee benefits, both of which he said the city is ready to confront. “Alameda has made tremendous strides that will be very important in the coming five to 10 years in dealing with the two big challenges the city faces,” he said. “We’re on a path culturally to being able to have those discussions about those bigger issues in a way that is very businesslike and partnership-based rather than a bunch of symbols and blame and nonsense.”
Despite the accomplishment, Alameda’s fiscally conservative residents, including many who favor pension reform, rarely view Russo as a crusader for their cause. Russo said he relied on the professional opinions of the city treasurer and auditor and “not those taking positions that are founded in emotion or ideology,” he said. “I don’t use Tea Party-type people as my litmus test of my success, not nationally, and not locally. When I was in Oakland, I used to say, ‘I’m sick and tired of people who are sick and tired.’ That path leads nowhere.” (Russo was not a crusader for the taxpayers of Riverside, remember Russo is part of the Blue Blood Liberal Elite… I’m exceptional due to my background, all others are an impediment. Case in point whereby public comment is seen by Russo as a formality, not part of the Democratic process of community involvement..)
Some of these same people were often outraged by Russo’s in-your-face style during public meetings over the years. “I make no apologies,” Russo said. Instead, he was defending his employees from unfair attacks from the public and, in some occasions, members of the City Council. “When you stand publicly and accuse good, professional people on my staff of being either stupid, lazy, or corrupt, I think you should expect an answer. If you want to play above the rim, then expect to be rejected from time to time.” (More revealing examples of the dark mind set of Russo. Did he simply display the classic case of a sociopath?).
Regrets? Russo has had a few. “I’m wrong all the time,” he said. “I just try to be right consistently more often than I’m wrong.” Specifically, Russo said he overreached on Measure C, the 2012 sales tax increase to fund a disparate wish list of city projects. “I just kind of threw it all in together, saying if you’re going to go to the public to ask for money, it should be a meaningful set of projects,” Russo said. Furthermore, elected officials sought additional projects as a strategy for cobbling together the needed two-thirds majority for passage. A more single-minded approach may have been more successful, he said. “I regret that my judgment there wasn’t as good as it should have been. Then again, maybe it isn’t a regret, because the public just didn’t want it.”
Contrary to popular opinion, the reason for his leaving Alameda has nothing to do with Mayor Trish Herrera Spencer’s slow-growth stance for Alameda. Instead, he said, they quickly forged a good working relationship and keep in daily contact. “This is not about whether Trish and I get along. We get along fine. It’s a very friendly relationship. We don’t agree on everything, but it’s not my job to agree. My job is to implement the council’s direction.”
However, he acknowledged conflict exists among the new city council. “There are clearly issues between the mayor and other council members, and there’s dissension there. That’s politics, and it’s not for staff to talk about. They have to work that out amongst themselves whether I’m here or not,” he said. “But that’s not why I’m leaving.”
Before accepting the job of Alameda city manager, Russo and the-Mayor Marie Gilmore had a “personal pledge,” he said, that if he took the job, he would agree to stay for the duration of her tenure. “When she left office, that pledge was gone,” Russo said, and the opportunity in Riverside arose around the same time. Russo and his family already had plans to eventually move to Southern California upon the end of his time in Alameda, he said. “It just moved forward what the family’s plan was by a couple of years.”
Russo’s bump in pay starting in May as Riverside’s new city manager will definitely help the college fund of his twins who will both be attending college starting in the fall, he said. His $296,000 annual salary in Riverside, compared with his $215,000 base salary in Alameda, is basically the difference between taking out a loan for their education and paying for it himself, he said. “I paid my way through college, and I didn’t pay off my school loans until age 43,” said Russo. “And I’ll be damned if I’m going to be paying loans until I’m 80.”
(Before Russo was fired he cashed out over $100K of taxpayer monies. The traveling snake oil salesman caught the attention of our City, and the taxpayers caught the bite of higher taxes while he skipped town to greener pastures. But still, the issue of both Russo and Guess’s contract have not been resolved. Both current contracts violate City Charter as to not having a resolution passed by Council. If Andy doesn’t put forward an investigation maybe District Attorney Mike Hestrin’s office will.)
JOHN RUSSO STATES HE LEFT JOB AT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, I GUESS HE CONVENIENTLY FORGOT HE WAS FIRED…
BLOCK BY BLOCK: RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITY INCREASES: TAXPAYER ADVOCATE JASON HUNTER INTERVIEWED: On a side note, the City of Riverside has made it clear to community groups and local radio stations, they will not participate it Hunter is part of the debate. In fact TMC has been told, Councilman Jim Perry, former City Manager John Russo and former RPU General Manager Girish Balanchandran apparently stated they will not to appear even if they were the only participant.
FROM THE DESK OF COMMUNITY TAXPAYER ADVOCATE JASON HUNTER: Poll given on Next Door neighborhood web site: Do you think Riverside Public Utilities staff should get automatic raises if our rates are hiked (without a vote of the public I might add)? Accordingly in this poll, the Residents of the City of Riverside do not want their representatives to pass this. If they do, it will be political suicide. People in Ward 1 keep on wondering why the so called advocate neighborhood group, NOWS (Neighbors of the Wood Streets) continues to be an ineffective voice within the community.
Jason Hunter wrote this to the entire City Council and Mayor, as he believed the unethical/illegal behavior in this City needs to end, and the ratepayers/owners need to be aware of this conflict-of-interest… apparently the whole scenario seems like a lot of racketeering to me quite frankly. Also, did you know 18% of the proposed rate hike is just plain ole’ new taxes? Please write your Councilmember or show up next Tuesday at 7pm at City Hall to voice your opinion on a measure that is actually greater dollar-wise than Measure Z (2016 $50+ million sales tax). Remember the Riverside City Council will decide Tuesday, May 22, whether to start charging residents more for water and electricity. Get your asses out to City Council on this date!
Ward 7 – Steve Adams 951-826-5991 (office), or 951-826-5024, email: sadams@riversideca.gov
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
Riverside Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey speaks during his State of the City Address, on Thursday, Jan 25, 2018, wearing his ever-present rose-colored glasses.
JANUARY 2018: AN “ECONOMICALLY STRONG REGION”? WHAT IS PERCEPTION AND WHAT IS REALITY WHEN IT COMES TO LIVABILITY WITHIN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, AND WHAT NARRATIVE IS CREATED FOR GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS? WAS IT DONE BY DESIGN AND CONTRIVED IN THIS YEARS STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS?
Well when you utilize UCR your going to get what you pay for, favorable numbers. We saw this with RPU’s attempt to fudge numbers and use comparisons such as private and public, which is like comparing apples and oranges. But if you have those rose-colored glasses, what a rosy picture it will show.
Hmmm…but wasn’t this the same UCR that compared apples and oranges in order to ratepayers to pay more for utilities? Evidently so.
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
Here’s the lowdown: RPU commissioned at a cost of $72,000 of ratepayer dough a research team at UCR, to determine the financial and social impact of RPU on the Riverside community. It’s a little-known-fact that UCR procures its electricity and water at special lower rates from RPU than what the rest of us suckers, the community pays, leading some to wonder if tit-for-tat was in play. Shockingly (sic), the crack team at UCR determined that RPU was the greatest thing since adding that third taco to the combination plate. How uncanny that this report was timed to come out right before RPU was to call for a rate increase! Remarkable was a hand-written comment from General RPU Manager Girish Balachandran (a.k.a. Drunk Daddy) made while reviewing a draft of this UCR report. The note was in reference to numbers the UCR team gave comparing RPU with another utility company known as SoCal Edison. We will get to that Drunk Daddy chicken scratch in a moment.
But there were a lot of other things of concern that should have been mentioned that were not so rosy for the resident taxpayer and utility ratepayers, such as:
In general, complaints concerning difficulty with planning permits, code enforcement, lack of law enforcement response, increase crime, increase homeless in the neighborhood, increase property taxes, increase utility rates, increasing unfunded pension liabilities, increase sale taxes, increase taxes and regulations…. all continue on deaf ears by representatives.
Higher electric and water utilities passed and we own the public owns the utilities! Go figure… all we can tell you is that individuals who seek justice for taxpayer concerns have tied the City’s exuberance in court.
Less Law Enforcement Protection, police won’t even respond to resident calls anymore, even with higher taxes! What are they telling us, come to Riverside BYOG (Bring Your Own Gun)? Beatings and shooting in downtown. We had a drug transaction incident three houses from us on Friday March 30, 2018; RPD wasn’t even interested.
UPDATE: PROSTITUTION RING IN ACTION: 1:26 A.M.: 3564 BANDINI AVENUE: GIRL PICK UP: WHITE FORD TRUCK: ARMED WOOD STREETS RESIDENTS ON IT..RPD NOT.. SORRY MIKE, HOPE WE DIDN’T DISTURBED YOUR RIVERSIDE SUPERVISOR CAMPAIGN.
Fire, won’t get involved with creating fire lines and cleaning up City lots, but will definitely cite you for what they consider ‘fire hazards’ unannounced in your place of business or home. The city has unfortunately pitted the taxpayers against those who apparently protect us, our law enforcement and fire.
Code Enforcement…A.K.A. The Other Police Force….Well, this is without saying, if you don’t pay the piper, you will be harassed till kingdom come.
Increased crime and homelessness in our communities, that is without saying. Our mail is being stolen, drug houses, prostitution rings. Not in the so called bad parts of town, in the ‘Wood Streets’! The City has simply indulged in programs that are simply inviting homeless to come to Riverside. Taxpayers are now seeing tent city’s around town and now have to get use to finding more human feces in retail public places.
What about public employee pensions? Measure A and Measure Z won’t generate enough money to maintain those employee pensions, therefore, will we eventually have to sell our Public Utilities in order to satisfy the unfunded unsustainable pension debt?
So should the City continue to financially support educational and statistical entities for services that may be biased? What is the purpose of that? To support a perception of things, whereby in essence the reality is much different? Is it to say, “All is well!” while the Titanic is apparently sinking? Discernibly addressing true problems with true resolutions would surely be the key.
If you want the truth hidden and a prettier city, get your own pair of rose colored glasses, on Amazon $39.27 and free shipping! They’ll just make your walk in the City of Riverside that much rosier. The people of Riverside certainly hope that after taking a stand on the City Manager’s new contract by vetoing it, Mayor Bailey will continue to abide by the issues and concerns of the taxpaying residents and put a stop to the above nonsense. You made a stand Mayor, you have our attention, and the now the whole City is Watching…
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
Love my enemies, bless those who curse me, pray for their salvation. – Book of Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey, circa at exactly February 12, 2018, 8:27am
THE RUSTY FILES: [queue eerie music] We present a few of the personal notes reflecting on a cornucopia of thoughts the Mayor wrote to himself for future reference as he brooded over the Russo/Geuss/Soubirous/Melendrez/MacArthur-led coup just days before. In others words, “Did anyone get the license plate of that truck?”
CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE JUST A SMIDGEN OF THE RUSTY FILES
A VIEW INTO THE ALTERNATE UNIVERSE IF MEASURE A, THE RIVERSIDE CITY PROSECUTOR MEASURES WOULD’VE PASSED
Well according to the Rusty Files, Russo manipulated Geuss to test the waters against D.A. Mike Hestrin and whatever other power structures there were in Riverside County at the time, including seventy-billion-time re-elected former D.A. Grover Trask. He is a troublemaker.
Moreover, the Rusty Files reveal Russo loves to create controversy, then come in and save the day. And he loves to get credit for easy wins…such as Measure-Z, the Library, Museum and the Budget. Rusty asks the question, “Is there a pattern here?” He is a front-runner.
He refers to other city’s where Russo was in the middle of conflict, then left when the going got tough. He goes on to say that John loves to fight, argue and purposely create opposition just for the sport of toying with them. He is a manipulator.
Does Russo do what he says he will do? It appears according to the Mayor, that Russo cannot be counted on. He says one thing, and does another. He cannot be trusted.
Then our sweet, beloved, squeaky clean homegrown Mayor drops the bombshell, “How many wives?” Is it a metaphor for how Russo treats the cities and the public who have paid for his ever-expanding waistline, or should we take this at its literal meaning and infer more? Does City Manager John Russo have commitment problems? He is disloyal.
What else lurks in the depths of the Rusty Files? As a teaser for future TMC posts we’ll leave this at the door: it turns out Cindy Roth, the Chamber Queen and long-time ally of Mayor Rusty Bailey is not a bit amused by being cut from the General Fund gravy train by City Manager John Russo. Her husband, Senator Roth, who profited as well from the legal gravy train provided by our fair city for many a year, is rumored to have helped the Mayor with his veto defense arguments. A real State Senator vs. a wannabe State Assemblyman: it’s on like Donkey Kong!
CLICK ABOVE TO ENLARGE PIC
MIKE FINE’S MESSAGE:
Rusty refers to Mike Fine’s message, and to print it out so that the Council will read it. Mike Fine, former deputy superintendent for RUSD and member of the Riverside Budget Engagement Commission (quickly becoming our favorite citizen-led commission of all-time), apparently had a bit to say about Measure Z monies being spent to fill the pockets of Mr. Russo. And we have those Facebook messages for your viewing pleasure, including a little tiff with Councilman Andy Melendrez, where Fine takes the Ward 2 Councilman to school. Some excerpts:
I volunteered to sit on the city’s budget commission as a way to give back to my hometown. I recently spent eight hours over two nights listening to the departments express their plans and needs. There was no mention of a hefty raise and home loan for the city manager. It wasn’t listed as a need. How do I do the job the city has asked me to do as a volunteer who has expertise in governmental budgeting when not all the information was shared? While I can still make a recommendation to the council regarding budget matters, what’s the point when the council acts recklessly in the midst of the budget process?
My point is simple. The city has many needs -many more than resources will cover. At a time when you will have to consider cuts in services and programs you sent the wrong message to the residents, employees and partners of the city. City vendors are being asked to reduce their prices by 10% at the same time the council is awarding senior management raises and an unwarranted home loan.
You will recall that the city sold voters on a sales tax increase to support police and fire. But now, under the city manager’s direction, they are proposing cuts – to budgets, not taxes!
This is an issue of leadership – more precisely, a lack of leadership.
According to Fine the City is full of contradictions and flouts the perception of transparency but in reality has none. Sounds to us like Mr. Fine has been listening to longtime city critic advocate Jason Hunter, who coincidentally tells us something B-I-G is coming (we can’t wait).
We believe there has been malfeasance playing out within the confines of City Hall by the fact that current contracts for both Geuss and Russo accompanied no such ‘resolution.’ For years dear readers, every new contract that included new & improved terms for fatcat bureaucrats included a resolution which authorized the spending on behalf of the City; then all of a sudden, poof, it disappeared.
Why? Well, our lying eyes have seen the in-fighting that has recently taken place between the Mayor’s Office and the City Manager’s Office, with Council taking sides, and believe this to be the cause. We therefore presuppose that this omittance was done to strategically counter Bailey’s impeding veto. See folks, according to City Charter, Rusty can legally veto a ‘resolution.’ Without the ‘resolution’ in the contract, technically, Rusty’s veto might not be valid. This was orchestrated by design. But it appears our Mayor is not in the mood to take any prisoners this time.
The Ides of February 2018 came and went. The day of the veto, Rusty Bailey probably felt a bit like Caesar did when his Council Buddies were waiting for him at the Council Forum on that cold Tuesday afternoon…
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTY’S MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “POLITICALLY INCORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
The pension problem in the City of Riverside was brought to the attention of the City Council and the Executive Management as early as 2014 by the very active public and TMC. We want to make this very clear to our readers: all the political rhetoric that is currently being spun is bullshit. Assistant City Manager Marianna Marysheva tries to spin the fact that her brilliant team has just discovered our current dire pension problem. No Marianna, we found it, years before your arrival on the scene from Oakland Maywood Lynwood Mammoth Lakes…wherever (damn girl, you’ve been around!). If you are claiming you just found it, we are going to claim you are a waste of money.
Not only did we find and report the break down in this system, we were ignored. Now, no one will be held accountable for their lack of professionalism and enormous cost to the taxpayer. So what do these ever-increasing pensions costs mean to the public? You will no longer get your trees trimmed, potholes filled, parks maintained. So, what does this mean to City Hall? You will have your $200,000 salary for the rest of your life! Make no mistake about it, we are going to get nothing, and they – the public employees – are going take everything. These brilliant professional minds at City Hall are going to ask for more money, and you the stupid taxpayer are going to continue to pay it. At least that’s the plan…
The pension problem was created in the 1990’s by Governor Davis when he increased the formula for payouts for State employees based upon his thoughts that the tech bubble would never pop. Every municipal agency soon followed. Because our government is stacked with pro-labor sycophant’s who apparently don’t care about the future nor understand math, instead of adjusting these formulas back downwards, it became clear post-housing bubble we couldn’t afford them. Hence, CalPERS began forcing larger and larger contributions from both municipalities and employees, while not addressing some of the outrageous pension-spiking abuses in a timely fashion. And while the issue is now finally getting the attention it deserved 10 years ago, we at TMC believe the problems are now so large they are virtually unsolvable absent drastic measures or miracles, as baby boomers are retiring in droves.
Riverside CFO Adam Raymond at the last Budget Engagement Commission meeting on Thursday February 22, 2018 stated that shortfalls in the General Fund are simply due to CalPER’s increases in contributions. City records indicate that forecasted City revenues will be inadequate to cover these expenses for the next decade! As operational costs increase in the next five years in fact City reserves will disintegrate, if of course, we don’t do anything. And what does that mean? Will they come back to the taxpayers again, and again for their shortfalls? But this hasn’t been a secret: unsustainable pension costs have been a popular topic for several years now. But you know what is a secret until now? Riverside has no plan to deal with the impending crunch…unless you count sticking it to the constituents as a plan.
As a consequence to escalating pension obligations, our reserves will continue to decrease, and therefore Mr. Raymond suggests to the commission the possibility of investing with slightly higher risk as a possibility (of course with an unpredictable economy, this investment platform may not be the most desirable option). Measure Z revenues will not be enough. Mr. Raymond suggests more cuts, after the City had promised that the passing of Measure Z would take care of everything. Just like the water transfer tax, the hotel tax, etc., etc., before it…wash, rinse, repeat.
Later Assistant City Manager Marianna Marysheva attempts to mitigate the perplexing faces of the Commission about the use of Measure Z monies for pension obligations, by using her well-known by now, “Ice Queen Spin,” which includes a variation of monotone nothing-speak, impossible-to-understand powerpoint slides, along with empty promises. She tried to show the commission that the shortfall was revealed only after review of the numbers by her crack team, and ‘we are on it’, and ‘that is why we do these five year plans’. But perception is reality, and the Commission knows it and the Council knows it: the budget crunches will continue ad infinitum due to increasing unsustainable pension obligations. And we for two wouldn’t be surprises if the City, with the financial help of the unions (our heroes, right?), rams through another tax measure.
Advice for Ms. Marysheva: stop the drama – we know it’s an act, and a bad one at that. Your boss John Russo is the ‘ultimate drama queen,’ and don’t even try to take that away from him. There is only one diva allowed at a time.
The Ice Queen brings up her meeting with a bond rating agency. So why is this important? On one hand she says in three years we are going to have challenging financial problems, while on the other hand she is setting us up for borrowing more money. You see folks its never enough. She also mentions that the bond rating agency is impressed with the TEAM…. So who’s the TEAM? The Mayor, City Council, executive staff, and Budget Engagement Commission. You mean batting leadoff and on deck are the two principal players in getting us in this fiscal hellhole? We have to laugh that, little does the bond rating agency know, the MAYOR is no longer part of the TEAM!
Public employee unions exist to advocate for their members, often campaigning for policies at odds with the best interests of the general public.
The so-called public safety unions are in a unique position. Representing some of the most esteemed and highest paid of government employees, they have lots of money to dole out and are more than comfortable exaggerating threats to public safety if it helps their cause.
Cases in point: ballot initiatives in Hemet, Riverside and San Bernardino tainted by undue influence from public safety unions.
Hemet has been plagued by polarizing debates over public safety and taxes for the past several years. In 2014, soon before the November elections, the City Council voted to contract for fire services, deeming it the best available option.
This prompted a flood of money from firefighters unions across Riverside County to help elect candidates favorable to the city’s firefighters union, which opposed contracting.
It worked, and the newly elected council quickly reversed the decision to contract, and has focused on tax hikes ever since.
In June, voters rejected the union-backed Measure E sales tax increase. Rather than reconsider the decision to capitulate to union demands, the council instead decided to put another tax on the November ballot.
In Riverside, the city, which last year was boasting about a $1 million surplus and felt so good it decided to give police officers a $4 million raise the city hadn’t actually budgeted for, has put on the November ballot a one-percent sales tax.
Expected to raise about $50 million a year, Measure Z is touted as necessary for the future of Riverside.
With a name like “City of Riverside Public Safety and Vital City Services Measure,” it certainly sounds important. Of course, if passed Measure Z revenues can be spent however the council likes and there are no guarantees about how the money will be spent, with one notable exception.
On Tuesday, the City Council approved a contract with the city’s police union which, among other things, will give police officers a bigger raise if voters approve a tax increase. It’s quite the incentive.
According to recent filings, the police union has already contributed $12,500 to the Measure Z campaign. Firefighters union president Tim Strack told The Press-Enterprise that he already had $100,000 in commitments for the campaign.
Behind any talk of the need for more money for “public safety,” is really just a desire for bigger raises and budgets.
Note the blatant conflict of interest by our public safety unions. They give big money to support a sales tax like Measure Z and they give big money to the campaigns of the individual Council members. These Council members, hence, are responsible for ratifying their contracts. Shouldn’t this be considered criminal behavior? They pay to play, and they see us as nothing but feeble-minded simpletons, who will vote based on ’emotion rather than logic.’ They will mobilize and encourage their union members to vote for an initiative because it is good for them financially, even if the action is unsustainable and destabilizing socially in the long term. They will then cry foul when we as a City cannot deliver.
Make no bones about it, if the public doesn’t take the business of the people seriously, neither will those who represent you. We think the City should be run as a efficiently as a business, while understanding it is not trying to maximize profits at our expense, and we public salaries should be tied to the outcome of organic tax revenues, not new revenue schemes. And what will they do next? Sell our Public Utilities? But what do we know, as Councilman Soubirous says, we’re just a bunch of hillbillies. Well that’s what he says people in Los Angeles think of us anyway.
Above you’ll find a list of City of Riverside accomplishments that was recently presented to the Budget Engagement Commission. In the Finance section of the citywide highlights it states, “For the 14th straight year, the City’s annual budget received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers’s Association.” How inane, and insane, given how existing City management threw old city management under the bus just 2 years ago for cooking the books. And it highlights how stupid all these trophies the City seems to lust for continually really are in reality.
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “SCANDALOUS,” “NEGATIVE,” “WARPED,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “INDECENT,” “REPUGNANT,””IMMORAL,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US:
John Russo, Zorro, champion of the underdog and defender of the common man; or low-down outlaw and notorious gang leader?
As we at TMC wax nostalgic over the passing of the largest tax increase in the history of the City of Riverside just over a year ago, we pass along these gems, proving once again: the more things change, the more they stay the same in the ole’ River City…
Exhibit A, Councilman Mike Soubirous, 11/30/2017, a year after the passage of Measure Z:
As a 2013 candidate for Council I was against the GFT (Measure A). Mostly out of principle because I thought that the City should not have to rely upon the GFT to make ends meet. At the time, being an outsider (not on the Council) not knowing our City’s true financial status, I believed that if we needed that transfer that much we must be in bad shape financially. After the former City management team left and newly hired City Manager John Russo and his staff came on board, it was discovered that the City was about $11.5 million in the hole (or $11-1/2 million less than what Council had been told we had). In order to balance the budget Council immediately implemented 4% across-the-board cuts to all departments/services (June, 2016). We also discovered additional bond debt that was kept somewhat quiet. We were headed down the path toward bankruptcy had we not taken the immediate budget cutting action!
The residents/voters saw the Council initiated reforms and pledges to pay down debts, raise our dwindling reserves (from 15% to 20% – actually at the time down to 13%) while balancing key infrastructure and public safety needs. So the residents voted to approve Measure Z. Since May, 2015,the City Council and Executive Management team has promoted an openness, transparency track and have been improving the City’s economic development/building & safety/planning business model (more business friendly) customer service oriented position. Things are headed in the right direction! Problem is, the economy is not growing very fast (tax revenue) and is staying somewhat flat. Flat is better than trending down, but means we will probably have to impose ANOTHER 4% across-the-board cuts this June (2018) to again balance the budget. This is good for taxpayers as our City is becoming financially leaner and leaner. Doing more with way less. But not so good for those who want City services right now or five minutes ago. So by cutting back on the GFT at this point would mean imposing more than the upcoming anticipated 4% across-the-board cuts to all departments and services. Most who voted for the Measure Z (1 cent per dollar sales tax) did so to keep or advance City owned tree trimming, road paving, hiring of more police and some infrastructure projects in place or actually (finally) catching-up.
Exhibit B, City Manager John Russo and sidekick Natasha Fatale Marianna Marysheva, 4/23/16, seven months or so before the vote on Measure Z:
The city’s new administration has spent several months working to institute the kind of fiscal discipline required to generate healthy and sustainable budgets well into the future. This process has been difficult at times for everyone involved. A $1 million surplus projected for fiscal year 2015-16 – built on the type of budgeting we should no longer allow – has morphed into a shortfall of about $8 million. This shortfall, if not corrected with sustainable ongoing measures, will result in a $10-12 million budget hole in fiscal year 2016-17.
Unfortunately, some perennial critics of the city have confused the cure (early diagnosis of future budget challenges) with the disease (a negative imbalance between ongoing expenses and ongoing revenue). These folks have been frightening some Riversiders by proclaiming loudly that the city faces imminent bankruptcy.
As Riverside moves through weeks of introducing, refining and, ultimately, approving a budget for fiscal years 2016-17 and 2017-18, there will be some bumps in the road. Residents and business owners may hear things that make them uncomfortable, and perhaps even a bit nervous about Riverside’s financial health. But as we work through this difficult process, please keep in mind that Riverside is in good financial condition overall, and that this process is only going to make that even stronger.
So who are we to believe regarding the financial condition of the City of Riverside in 2016? Staff prior to the passage of the Measure Z ballot measure, a $50+ million new annual sales tax; or an elected official afterwards? Well neither, of course! Butttttttttt, neither were technically (fingers crossed) lying either…the key word being “imminent” when it came to the timing of bankruptcy.
Staff and the Council knew back in early 2016 (and looooong before that for some of them) that the City had been hiding its true liabilities off-balance-sheet for years. Trouble was, the cows were soon to be returning to the barn, where they was no hay. We’ll even give you TMC’s version of proof of this knowledge: former Finance Director Brent Mason was scapegoated fired within months of Assistant City Manager Marysheva arrived on the scene. Given the tremendous leeway the City has traditionally afforded other overpaid, hack executive employees caught with their pants down hands in the cookie jar, so they could either “retire” or “seek better opportunities,” while staying on the City payroll for much greater time periods, we must conclude Mr. Mason did something fairly egregious to merit his ignoble departure. Marysheva described it at the time as, “The city has a history of unbalanced budgets, but those imbalances have been disguised,” while ex-City Councilman Paul Davis described it more in layman terms: “cooking the books”.
But the real truth would have to wait until 2017 because Harold HillJohn Russo had a tremendous idea at the time and just the right strategy to pull it off. And that hustle plan was theWells Fargo Wagon Measure Z good folks. And along the way he would seduce one spinster librarian loner Councilman and perhaps fool the whole town into believing his shipoopi. But that fine story is for another day…but with a twist we’ll bet you didn’t see coming! Then you may have been caught with your pants down in River City.
Long-time readers will remember how we and our band of, “perennial critics,” trudged over to council chambers week after week after week to warn of impending financial collapse, and our dear “leaders” (gulp) only response was to call us crazy or deranged. As the old adage goes: if you can’t attack the message, attack the messenger. And so who’s crazy now? With gargantuan unpaid pension liabilities, fully-leveraged assets with bonds that need to be paid, and skyrocketing taxes, fees and rates … yep, there’s still going to be plenty of trouble; right here in the ole’ River City. More to come.
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
Two weeks ago, we released our story of the Drug Dealers Next Door: Part I. The following is the second part of Author David Silva’s response to the City of Riverside, approximately one year later, which was posted in the Inland Empire Weekly on September 24, 2008. Nothing had been done by the City of Riverside to resolve the drug issue in his neighborhood, which leaves us pondering the question, “Did they really want to?” or “Did they really care?”
In this second Silva article, the author displayed his continued frustration with local law enforcement and local elected representatives. Like the case of David Silva, no one within the City has contacted or given us any direction as to what to do about our problem neighbors. At least you can rely on something in life – government inaction!
On September 19, 2017, Wood Streets resident and former Mayoral Candidate Vivian Moreno went to the City Council meeting to bring the lingering and current neighborhood issue of the Drug Dealer Next Door…with an added twist, prostitution! Yep, the other night the Wood Street residents had the pleasure of hearing the annoyance of the Wood Streets King Pimp not being paid correctly by one of his employed working girls. Yep, right in the front yard without any fear of anyone knowing what they were talking about.
Keep in mind this issue had been brewing in our neighborhood for approximately 5 years and gets worse by the day, so I guess it was the natural progression we should’ve expected…and accepted?
Moreno came to Council to declare that she is required to have business license in order to do business in the City of Riverside, but a drug dealer or prostitution ring does not. So why should she? If the City allows an illegal business to operate, why should she continue to comply legally with a City that cannot protect legal businesses from the illegal ones? She tore up her business license in front of them. Much like Silva, it was an attempt to call attention to an unresolved issue by petitioning her government.
However, we conclude David Silva must be right: if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. Besides having unsafe neighborhoods for our children, our seniors, our taxpayers, we still cannot get our trees appropriately cut, our pot holes filled. It has been clearly evident for many years now that the City of Riverside cannot provide even the most basic services to our community, who are now paying through the roof (Utility Users Tax, General Fund Transfer, Measure Z, etc., etc.), and for what? Certainly not safety. Our neighborhoods continue to be put at risk by the inertness of our law enforcement and leadership. It happened ten years ago; and it’s happening now with no remedy in sight. The same fools sit on the dais within the Art Pick Chambers; and Chief Sergio Diaz’s highly-paid, crack narcotic squad has done what? [crickets]
THE DRUG DEALERS NEXT DOOR: PART II: BY AUTHOR DAVID SILVA:
INLAND EMPIRE WEEKLY SEPTEMBER 24, 2008
It’s been nearly a year since I wrote about the drug dealers operating next door to my house [vol. 2, issue 25 cover], and if you’re wondering how the guys are doing, let me assure you they’re doing just fine.
Franco (not his real name, but drug dealing is illegal, you know) recently installed a carport awning to protect his trade in bad weather. Brother Mario (another pseudonym) is on what appears to be his fourth new car since Christmas. Say what you want about these guys (and lord knows I’ve said a lot—to the Riverside police chief, the mayor, the city’s crack narcotics unit and the Weekly’s readers), they’re single-handedly keeping the local auto industry afloat.
Yes, these boys have struck gold, and the rest of us are green with envy. While no less than seven “for sale” signs can be seen on front lawns up and down the block, the dealers next door are in home-improvement mode. While the rest of us sleep in shifts in case some addled tweaker tries sneaking through the bathroom window, the dealers sleep the untroubled sleep of the dead, their persons and their stashes safe behind wrought-iron doors and the sign on the front that reads (I kid you not) “Do not ring after 10PM.”
Of course, there’s always the remote possibility that the dealers really should be more worried that, at any minute, Riverside’s crack narcotics unit will come crashing through those reinforced doors. But who are we kidding? If the police were going to put a stop to all that illicit activity next door, they would have done so by now.
As I wrote back in October, my non-dealing neighbors and I tried repeatedly to draw the city’s attention to the situation next door, going so far as to arrange a neighborhood meeting with one of Mayor Ron Loveridge’s deputies. The deputy listened wide-eyed to our story and jotted down notes into a little black notepad, which he then tossed into a briefcase where, I imagine, it remains gathering dust to this very day. Nothing was done.
By the time my column appeared, I had called the Riverside PD three separate times to complain about the dealing next door (not counting follow-up calls to check on the status of the complaints). Since October, I’ve called the police and City Hall three more times, each time being told that the department had no record of any previous complaints, and each time being assured that the department was now right on it. One of those calls resulted in a callback from Riverside Councilman Frank Schiavone, with Police Chief Russ Leach sitting by his side. Both Schiavone and Leach assured me that the city took such complaints seriously, and that they were right on it.
Nothing happened.
This has been going on for three years now, during which I often wondered why the Riverside PD would put up with an open-air drug bazaar operating in a residential neighborhood just three blocks from three public schools. Drug busts are great PR for the police, and right here was a major bust just begging for the cops to walk up and slap the cuffs on it. So why didn’t they?
Early last month, I finally learned the answer to this nagging question: It wasn’t that the police didn’t want to bust up the drug house next door. They just couldn’t find it.
“According to my computer,” said the officer who took my sixth (and, I swear to God, last) complaint, “the street address you gave me doesn’t exist in Riverside.”
“Well, that’s odd,” I said. “I’m looking right out my front window and there it is.”
“Are you sure?”
“Oh yeah, it’s right there. Maybe you should check again.”
He did, and again declared the address didn’t exist. Back and forth we went, with me insisting the street address of the drug house next door to me existed, and the officer insisting that it didn’t. Finally:
“Found it!” he said, sounding well pleased. “OK, we’re on it. The Police Department takes these calls very seriously.”
After three years, six complaints, a meeting with the mayor’s aide and a conference call with a councilman and the city’s top cop, the Riverside Police Department’s crack narcotics unit finally located my neighbor’s house on a map.
More than a month later, the dealing next door has continued unabated, and if there are any cops snooping around, they’re wearing invisibility cloaks. The only thing that’s changed around here is my attitude toward the neighbors.
“How’s it going, Franco?” I shout when I go out for the mail. “Yo Mario! Nice new Prius, buddy!”
If this is how the city of Riverside wants to wage its war on drugs, I might as well be on friendly terms with the winning side.
–David Silva, Author
FROM THE DESK OF LOCAL RIVERSIDE RESIDENT, ACTIVIST & COUNCIL CANDIDATE, KEVIN DAWSON, REGARDING NEW LIBRARY DESIGN:
“UGLY” THE COMMON TERM TO DESCRIBE THE MONSTROSITY TO BE KNOWN AS THE NEW RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY.
The $10 million over run is to elevate the building so people from the Fox will hopefully walk under it to get to the Culinary Institute. That’s $10 million for a walk way! Why don’t we just use $1 million to buy coupons to the Culinary, that we could hand out as incentives to Fox patrons to walk around a less exspensive library building on the ground? Of course I’m just joking. This is a ugly, over priced building, loaded with gimmicks that will become dated looking like the horse collar grill on a Ford Edsel. Unlike a car, we won’t be able to trade this lemon in a couple years after we realize we made a mistake. Also, the city has been cutting the library budget for years. They’ve let go all the professional staff that had library of science degrees and cut way back on programming. The current main library is denuded of books. The city is not going to restore funding with this new building. This project is based on lies and manipulations. The head librarian gave as reasons for needing a new building, that the current building was too big and that the pillars ruined the sight lines. They said it would cost almost as much to remodel the current building as building a new one, so why not build a new one. But then when they proposed the Discovery Cube would go in the old building, the remodel cost dropped to $10 million. When the Discovery Cube dropped out and the Cheech Art museum was proposed, they now say it will only cost $5 million to remodel the building. I say we should remodel the current building for the $5 million, and keep it as our main library, saving us $35 million! Measure Z was sold to the public as being needed for “needs” like public safety, and not wants like a new library. I want to support the library but not like this. If they have an idea for a great, inspiring new building, put it before the voters, and ask us to support the project based on its merits. Ask us to prove our support by our willingness to pay for it through a special acessment tax. That way, a crappy design will die the death it deserves, but an inspiring design will prevail and be supported by a proven majority. The people in San Francisco were so inspired by the Palace of Fine Arts, which had been built to only last a couple of years for the 1915 Panama exposition, that they voted to tear it down and rebuild it as a permanent structure. The Palace of Fine Arts is great example of inspirational artitecture and something that would compliment the mix of classic historic structures we have downtown, but an example of how to be bold, without being offensive to the surrounding neighborhoods. Our city is on the road to making a mistake but it’s not too late to change directions. We should not move forward with this design because people are tired, and just want to “get it done”. We should not move forward, just because we’ve already spent money on this design. Ugly needs to be called out for what it is, and this is an ugly building.
Let me also comment on councilman Gardner’s motion to approve, where he said he was making the motion to approve because he thought “the people of Riverside were ready, evidenced by the number of speakers who came to speak.” Really? The room was almost empty and hardly anyone was there to speak, unlike the night the council voted to move the library, and the room was packed. That night there were 80 speakers and a petition signed by almost 800 people saying don’t move the library. That meeting went until 1AM, but in the end, the council ignored the public, and approved an expensive project, without ANY discussion of how to pay for it. It was only later, they presented Measure Z. And while Measure Z was generously passed by voters, our city is still not out of financial danger. I believe our financial problems are what is driving the proposed utility rate increases. Our city has a electric and water fund transfer of 11.5%, that gets transferred straight into the city general fund, where it can be spent on anything. So, if the City Manager says the rate increase is not about more money for the General Fund, ask him if he would agree to not take a transfer from the rate increases, and see what he says. – Kevin Dawson
NEW RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY (CLICK TO ENLARGE)
With $60 million in unfunded future pension liabilities, Council, with the help of City Manager John Russo, overrode the community dissent that night, over-allocating funds for a new library. Proving the establishment elite have an agenda, and your dissent for the project in public comment was only a legal formality they had to bear before moving on to a pre-determined decision.
REMEMBERING TOM PETTY: “DOG ON THE RUN”: 1977:
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
DON’T GET HOSED AND TASED BY THOSE BEHIND THE TAX…VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z
Let’s all remember that the City is out of money, or they want us to believe they are out of money, right! Well here we go again, the City of Riverside sent out this mailer to all of its residents, which would be well over 100,000 households. How much do you think you the taxpayer paid for this? I’m sure most of us just threw it in the trash. If the City can afford to send each household this information, then you would think that the City is doing okay. We saw this exact same thing with Measure-A pamphlets back in 2013, the City uses taxpayer monies to send these “informational pamphlets,” but in essence, are psychologically designed for a vote in their favor. Don’t be fooled, as you were last time, these informational pamphlet were structured, written and fashioned to have you vote Yes on Measure-Z.
Why are we receiving this informational pamphlet? THE CITY NEEDS TO ASK US FOR MORE MONEY BECAUSE THEY SCREWED UP!
Unbeknownst to the taxpayer is the claim that if you Vote No on Measure-Z, you will lose important City services. Let me make this perfectly clear, we lost City services a long time ago, and we will NEVER get them back. The City chose to invest and squander our money on such things as “Government Entertainment,” as in the Fox Theater, instead of taking care of basic services for its citizens.
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
This “informational pamphlet” strategically shows a playground full of kids (because its all about the kids, isn’t it?), along with Public Works Employees, a Police Officer and a Fire Fighter. The title is “Measure-Z, What’s It’s All About.” Again, the City is going to tell the taxpayer how to vote, as they did with the water measure in 2013 known as Measure-A. When you foolishly passed this measure in 2013, you voted to tax yourself 11.5%! What the City promised us then never materialized, and what they promise us now will never happen. What is really egregious, is that the City and their cohorts really do believe you will fall for this and vote YES on Measure-Z. They are going to trick the unsuspecting taxpayer into showering them with billions of dollars.
Instead of holding staff and leadership accountable, our Council decided to concoct a “Spending Pledge” a few weeks ago. REALLY? How stupid and foolish this makes the Council looks. So rather then taking responsibility and accountability they’ve resorted to “pinky promises” in order to sway public opinion. Five of the eight electeds’ on the Council Chamber have held there positions for 7 years or longer. They own this fiscal mess. Measure-Z (Sales Tax Increase) is their attempt to remove accountability for running this ship aground….sort of a “You can trust us this time, we even placed our names on it!” These men are spending addicts. So what do they really need this money for? More Government Entertainment, Pensions and Raises.
You have to be a fool to give spending addicts more money! Vote “No on Measure-Z!”
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
The above pamphlet tells you, the taxpayer, why the City needs the additional money. For years the City leadership Has been boasting about our City being financially sound, you can all remember them saying “We have 40 million in reserves” they are now telling us that the City never fully recovered from the economic recession that started in 2008. Even Police Chief Sergio came out in the Summer of 2015 to tell City Council the Police Budget was sound. The City is lying. The City will never recover because they have misspent, over spent, passed special interest projects and new employee contracts without any funding sources. They were irresponsible with taxpayer monies and NOW THEY WANT MORE!
This November 2016, you will also be voting on another tax, Measure-O (Riverside Unified School Bond). If it passes, this will increase your property taxes $100.00 per every $100,000.00 your house is worth. So if you have a $400,000.00 home, your new additional property tax will be $400.00, and then add your new sales tax (Measure Z), which can be an additional $100.00 or more per year. You now have a total approximation of $500.00 per year additional tax. Then I’m sure all of you do remember there will be a sewer increase this year, and don’t forget Public Utilities will also have their hand out soon. You will also need to look at the State and the Federal Government, they may need more money as well.
How much more can you afford ? And who will be most impacted by this? The Most obvious is the poor, disabled, seniors and the retiree. TMC predicts this will also have a HUGE impact on Churches, a 10% tithe at the very minimum will be difficult if we have an additional 5 to 10% tax each year. Taking $40 to $400.00 out of your packer each month for additional taxes will be devastating for many.
CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE
This pamphlet was done by design to touch emotional center, voting with your heart, as opposed to voting with your head. Did the City purposely use two black police officer to show how diverse they are? With a small child to show they are connected to the community? This informational Pamphlet is simply just a bunch of BS and about the financial mess the city is in. They will not cut anything they will make the taxpayer go without the basics. Some say this is all about the increases to Police and Fire and Some state that Police and Fire make less than Teachers, I personally find that an insult to Teachers, but Transparent California tells a different picture on Fire and Police. It seems that they are making more than Corporate Execs and Doctors! The Riverside Police Department have incredible amounts of OT (Remember that’s how they pad their pensions), Other Pay and Benefits before finally tallying up the final total. If you come from the Corporate Private Sector as I do, OT as this is never seen. Overtime as this would lead a corporation to Bankruptcy, and that may be where the City is going.
Back in 2013, the City sent out at taxpayers expense, and informational flyer, known as the Water Measure, or Measure-A. In this taxpayer paid pamphlet, the City of Riverside threatened the taxpayer, that if this Measure-A didn’t pass the following would occur: the City would be forced to cut $6.7 million in local services, there may actually as residents faced with more gangs, graffiti and rundown streets. They actually stated that 79 City positions would be eliminated which included Police Officers, Firefighters, School Crossing Guards (we know what happened there), youth recreation programs (we know what happened there), senior services (they actually threatened the Goeske Center Seniors they needed to vote for this or we won’t fund you).
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
In the above 2013 Measure-A informational pamphlet, the first page also shows children, police officers with a child and public work employees. Quite the same formula as the current. In 2013 Mayor Rusty Bailey lied about Measure A, he has lied again today about Measure-Z. What else has Bailey Lied about? TMC HAS THE STORY! COMING SOON..
CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
CONTRIBUTIONS SUPPORTING YES ON MEASURE-Z HAVE BEEN POURING IN, you may ask “Who are they?” All the elitist bastards that will benefit handsomely, one in particular, Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey. But also the usual suspects such as the so called Non-Profits and Unions.
Bottom line folks, the City of Riverside never had a revenue problem, they have a spending problem, and spent they did. As with the Renaissance Project, with then City Manager Brad Hudson, who spent, over spent and misspent your monies like a drunken sailor. TMC wrote about this in detail. Most importantly we told council about that as well, and we predicted the City would be out of money and in trouble in 2015. WE WERE RIGHT. Now current leadership City Manager John Russo continues to lie and spin the truth on how all this happened. He now wants to continue the reckless spending practices. They just can’t help themselves.
Councilman Paul Davis, Andy Melendrez, Rusty Bailey, Mike Gardner and Chris McArthur were the responsible parties for getting us in this mess, This is how it works: Police and Fire Unions work to benefit themselves by laundering member dues, paid for by taxpayers, to return in campaign funds for the benefit and control of elected official. You may ask why Tim Strack, from the Fire Union, is giving over a $100,000.00 to the Yes on Measure-Z campaign. Why? Because its all about money and their own personal gain, its never been about you and the basic services of the city. Public Safety has found a way to hose and tase the taxpayer into submission, and this is wrong! Ultimately, sounds like strong arm tactics, when referencing the importance of their jobs to the community. This is a no, no, and could also be inferred as ‘coercion.’ But when you have no leadership to effectively protect the taxpayer, you have nothing.
REMEMBER FOLKS DON’T BELIEVE FOR A MINUTE THAT THESE PARASITES ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE TAXPAYER! THE MONIES ALLOCATED TO PASS MEASURE-Z ARE HUGE! THESE PEOPLE ARE IN IT FOR PERSONAL GAIN, OUR LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY SPECIAL INTEREST. VOTE NO ON MEASURE Z
REMEMBER MY FELLOW TAXPAYERS DON’T GET HOSED!
VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z
THIS TAX ONLY SERVES, AND CONTINUES TO SERVE THE PUBLIC SERVANT ELITES AND ESTABLISHMENT ELITES OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE.
DONATE: Come On Folks, Help and Support No On Measure-Z by donating to the following links:
BOB BUSTER, TREASURER, 7401 DUFFERIN AVENUE, RIVERSIDE, CA, 92504, 951-780-4749
TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com
“UGLY” THE COMMON TERM TO DESCRIBE THE MONSTROSITY TO BE KNOWN AS THE NEW RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY.
jehunter51
TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption 