Posts Tagged ‘riverside grand jury’

GJ072015    GJ072015two    GJ072015three     GJ072015four copy

CLICK TO ENLARGE TO VIEW JULY 2, 2015 GRAND JURY FINDINGS AGAINST COUNTY COUNSEL GREGORY PRIAMOS.

2014 2015 Grand Jury Report Riverside County Board of Supervisors Transparency Grand Jury Interference (CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW PDF VERSION)

untitled

COUNTY COUNSEL CONSIGLIERE GREGORY PRIAMOS

According to the latest report released by the Grand Jury on July 2, 2015, they believe they were retaliated against by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, when on April 8, 2014, the 2013-2014 Riverside County Grand Jury made public a report entitled, “Political Reform and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors”. This report focused on the use of Community Improvement Designation (CID) Funds and was critical of the way some of the funds were utilized.

Fifty-eight days later, they state, a new County of Riverside County Counsel with a “controversial reputation, a known history of Grand Jury interference, and over the objections of many concerned citizens, was unanimously appointed by the Board of Supervisors.”  According to the Grand Jury the following report is what started it all … or, in other words, HOW DARE THEY QUESTION OUR USE OF PUBLIC MONEY TO BOLSTER OUR CAMPAIGNS!?

gjreportcampaignreform

2013 2014 Grand Jury Report – Political Reform and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors (24 pages) CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW FULL REPORT

Three main points were made in this newest release by the Riverside County Grand Jury with reference to County Counsel Gregory Priamos.

The first focused on the bid process.  An anonymous Supervisor’s Chief of Staff, during testimony, was asked how extensive the geographic area was when the ‘Supes recruited for the position of County Counsel.  His reply?  “Three blocks.”  Although not required, the Board of Supervisors chose not to use competitive procedures, and instead handed a $250,000/year position with lavish benefits over to a buddy of theirs.  Was this was not Supervisor Marion Ashley’s Chief of Staff, Jaime Hurtado, whom we hear is being groomed to take over Ashley’s position?

Second, the Grand Jury had issues with Priamos’ “interference,” in their investigation.  Priamos in an email, asked that all County Departments and Special Districts contact his office (specifically, Anita Willis and Jeb Brown – his main squeeze at the City of Riverside) immediately if contacted by the Grand Jury.  The Grand Jury wants transparency and the truth when they interview people.  The Grand Jury believes this message was sent to control County employees out of fear of retaliation should they not be able to speak privately with them.  Nothing new to us hear at Thirty Miles: just Gregory attempting to have control of the message as he did in the City of Riverside.

Third, Priamos’s contract with the County should immediately be “nullified!”  This means that the Grand Jury feels that the County Board of Supervisors did not execute best practices for the hiring of a qualified (cough, cough…ethical) County Counsel.  Therefore, the Grand Jury is requesting the Board of Supervisors to conduct an actual, advertised recruitment for the position of County Counsel so that the best candidate can be appointed as County Counsel to serve the people of the Inland Empire.  Opps..sorry Greg!  That means somebody who is “not you.”

Since in his letter to county employee, Priamos references the County Executive Officer, Jay Orr, as his co-conspirator, perhaps the Grand Jury ought to investigate that angle as well, and whether Orr needs to be replaced…

Orr2013

County of Riverside, Executive Fool Officer, Jay Orr

County Sups, Just a Chain of Fools?

RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES SAYS, “WE ARE IN THIS TOGETHER…”

puletter

What is not covered in the above memo is that if the State of California was really serious about the drought, they would place on moratorium on new development … of course that’s about as likely as the Gov Moonbeam’s bullet train coming in under budget.

So many issues with the current policies, we hardly know where to begin.  While some are tearing out their front yards, if you have a pool, that’s exempt!  What if you have a share of the Gage Canal water, which many homeowners do? …exempt!

Untitled-1   intro-4-lg

In the City of Riverside, Brown is not only Sexy, it’s beautiful!  Our front lawns may be brown but are back yard pools are bright blue full of water!  Why is that folks?  It could be that the City of Riverside has a Contractual Obligation to Riverside Property Owners to Provide Water!  The City of Riverside has Pre-1914 Water Rights to Ground Water from the Bunker Hill Basin.  Which means that we are not in control of the California State Water Resources Control Board, Why? Because we have our own Board, Why? Because we as a City own Our Water Rights!  The Leadership of the City of Riverside misguided you, the taxpayer, to believe otherwise.  Causing by their incompetence, that they, the Council, would like you to pay more to cover their illegitimate transgressions.  Not to mention the illegitimate transgressions of your Pretty Boy Mayor, William Rusty Bailey.  Vote No on Measure-Z 2016!  Again those you have placed in leadership positions have deceived you!  You will be paying more for the Heroes you thought were Heroes..Fire and Police.  They are not are Heroes when it comes to scamming the taxpayer for perceived increases in pension and salary increases.

swimmingpoolnotatthistime

click this image to enlarge (click this link to go to the city source)

Riverside is unique in that we own our water.  Twenty percent is sold to outside locals.  So why are we conserving, while the city is mandated by law to harvest “x’ amount of water from the Bunker Hill Basin or lose those rights!  New City Attorney Gary Geuss file a lawsuit on behalf of the public asking the State to reverse their requirements since we own our own water.  What he forgot to tell the State is that the City has a “contractual” association with the homeowners that requires them to provide water.  What this means is that it trumps the State Water Drought Declaration.  More on this to come.  What’s more egregious is that the city of Riverside is asking their residents to be “snitches” on their neighbors concerning the new restriction, which will of course cause further undo tension and discourse in the community…for absolutely no good reason.

BREAKING STORIES FROM THE PRESS ENTERPRISE REFERENCING RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES.

JULY 04, 2015: CITY FIELDS QUESTION ON UTILITY RESERVES  The question arises from community activists, based upon and city of Riverside public utility documents, whether its ratepayers, that’s you and me for the uninitiated, have over-charged for services over the past decade.  The reserves have grown beyond what City official policies state, thereby violating those rules.  The the city was caught with their pants down, so they’re crafting language for new policy, and spinning the criticism.  We ask why is RPU General Manager, Girish Balanchandran, rewriting policy, if it wasn’t followed to begin with?  Seems to us like a waste of time if the City’s just going to do whatever the heck it wants anyway.

There is no question in our minds that the new policy will be written specifically to bring into conformance the existing policy violations, so that no one ever has to take any accountability….same ‘ole, same ‘ole.  The right thing to do would be to return the excess funds back to the ratepayers.  But that will be a challenge: your public utilities (“We Own It!”) currently does not work in your best interests.  What the City has done to the ratepayers over the years is just plain wrong.

JULY 02, 2015: RIVERSIDE: RESIDENTS WANT TO AX UTILITY TAX  A common theme: residents are fed up with all the taxation.  TMC is asking for your support to be part of a Ratepayer Advocacy Group that would serve as a watchdog on utility practices, and hopefully prevent some of the abuses we’ve suffered under the Loveridge/Hudson/Priamos (and their cronies) years.  The Board of Public Utilities does not advocate for the taxpayer, but for the city.

Finance Director Brent Mason stated that the utility user tax brings in $30 million a year to the general fund to pay for police, fire, parks and other services …. we thought that was what the General Fund Transfer was for!?  Seems to us like double taxation.

More Information on the Utility User Tax (click this link).

The utility users tax is not a sales tax (the State administers those); it’s an excise tax. Riverside residents pay the City for the “luxury” of gas, water, electric, and phone service. I don’t know about you, but those don’t seem like luxuries to me. They should all be repealed. The City needs to stop abusing its residents through excessive taxation in the form of fees like the Utility Users Tax and General Fund Transfer at its public (aka, monopoly) utility or risk losing them both…and maybe even its entire utility…in the process. My belief is that the City is breaking the social compact to provide these services at “cost plus” and will pay a steep price if it doesn’t come to the table soon with those that want reform at RPU. Just my two cents. – Jason Hunter, commentor to the Press Enterprise

THANK YOU CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND SUPPORTERS OF TMC FOR REACHING 200,000 HITS!  

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “DISGUSTING,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “ABOMINABLE,” “APPALLING,” “DETESTABLE,” “SLEAZY,” “SLANDEROUS,” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  YES WE ARE ALL OF THIS, WE ADMIT IT, SO PLEASE…DO NOT READ IF OFFENDED!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”.  WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT… AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

firstpage

GRAND JURY COMPLAINT AGAINST RPU (CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW DOCUMENT)

Audited financial statements for fiscal year 2014 indicate Riverside Public Utility’s (RPU) water reserves balance at $86,181,000.00, far exceeding the maximum of 100% of annual operating revenues set forth in RPU’s June 26, 2001, Fiscal Policy.  Statements for fiscal year 2014 also indicate an electric reserves balance of $210,929,000.00, again far exceeding the targeted reserve level set forth in the August 26, 2003, City Council Memorandum.

The issue of excess reserves has been raised by multiple members of the public at both Public Utility Board and City Council meetings during public comment since the Fall of 2014.  Neither the Board of Public Utilities nor the City Council have taken action to comply with the City’s reserve policies.  The existence of excess reserves indicate that the City, through its Public Utilities Department, has substantially overcharged its ratepayers for both water and electric services in violation of Propositions 218 and 26.

The Grand Jury is being asked to investigate alleged violations within the reserve policies and instruct the City of Riverside to issue refund checks to all rate payers, for excess utility reserves.

What residents must remember is that RPU, the Board of Public Utilities, and the City Council do not serve the bests interests of the ratepayers, but that of the City of Riverside.  The inherent conflict in the current situation demands the creation of an Office of Ratepayer Advocacy.  Further, RPU’s own reserve policy states these monies are to be used for contingencies, not planned infrastructure.

At the last Council meeting, the City attempted to utilize a slight of hand maneuver for over-collected reserves by stating that they will use reserves for $50 million in necessary infrastructure until a bond can be issue at a later date.  The fine print is that they have the option never to issue that bond.  We believe this was done to purposely decrease the amount of reserves,  therefore leaving less monies available for reimbursements and lower rates.

frontpg

05-19-2015 REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION (CLICK TO VIEW FULL DOCUMENT)

As a result of the information disseminated to residents on the reserves, the City’s spokesperson, Phil Pitchford, issued the following City press release in order to attempt to mitigate damage.

pressreleas

2015- CITY OF RIVERSIDE PROPAGANDA ON PUBLIC UTILITIES RESERVES (CLICK TO VIEW)

In an act of desperation, it appears that the City of Riverside was allowed to set up an account on a neighborhood website in order to disseminate their propaganda piece.  Is Big Brother present?  We had been led to believe the Nextdoor.com site was only for residents, not a marketing site.  Is the City borrowing from the NSA (National Security Agency) and utilizing this neighborhood site as a monitoring vehicle to gather information on individuals?

PHIL

CLICK TO ENLARGE

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

 complaintone

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE FULL BAR COMPLAINT AGAINST GREGORY PRIAMO BY VIVIAN MORENO

letterone

COMPLAINT RECEIPT FROM STATE BAR

According to Riverside County’s Grand Jury, Riverside County’s Counsel, Gregory Priamos’, Office has been accused of interfering and hindering with it’s investigation of the County of Riverside’s  IT department.  Of course, that’s nothing new here.  We in the City of Riverside have been dealing with Priamos’ clown tactics for years.  Hopefully, this signals the end of his run of the clown corruption, and this Bozo will finally be placed in clown jail where he belongs.  It’s time he paid for the malfeasance that’s been done.  The liar has cost the taxpayers millions in shabby legal advice.

This wasn’t Priamos first rodeo with the Grand Jury.  In July 2013, the Grand Jury found that the City of Riverside, Office of the City Attorney, which Priamos ran at the time, did not recognize the responsibilities of the Grand Jury and did not honor the secrecy of the Grand Jury.

gjpriamos
So we recently uncovered a story which similarly appears to have been the same actions Priamos is accused of.
62e98a804787780b700f6a7067003f25
Whereby a Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane was accused of a Grand Jury Leak. It appears that this AG purposely leaked this secret grand jury information to strike back at her critics, then lying about it under oath, in a case that could spell the downfall of the state’s highest-ranking female politician.  Sounds as “Classic Priamos.”  But I guess this is Riverside, and there are two sets of rules, and those who support him, being the County Supervisors and it even appears the State Bar of California, can attempt to mitigate the circumstances.  Well the taxpayers certainly know better.

Let’s of course not forget that Bozo was hiring outside legal help without contracts nor authority, to the tune of $16 million during the last 5 years he was the City Attorney.  In face, the City Attorney’s Office at Riverside was never looked at by internal audit his entire tenure as chief: what will the taxpayers find during the recently-ordered audit by the Governmental Affairs Committee?  Stay tuned.

clownpriamos

BOZO’S BIG TOP

In a classic Priamos comeback, according to the Press Enterprise, upon becoming aware of the Grand Jury’s dissatisfaction with his interference in their investigation, he offered to train the next grand jury on his office’s role…even we had to laugh at that one.  What he wants is “client control”, so he can massage the message, and redirect the Grand Jury to a favorable outcome, by the reeducation process.  The “Priamos Reeducation Process: A Study in Passive-Aggressive, Paranoid-Delusional, Obsessive Compulsive Assclownery”  Those in the loop know the scam.

The other item of contention is when his office decided to sue the registrar of voters with reference to placing the marijuana measure for the June 2015 ballot.  This could not be taken any other way, but to be a clear cut attempt to interfere with democratic process.  Further, this classic Priamos attempt was found unconstitutional according to State of California Law.  To be fair, Federal Law still classifies marijuana as a Class I drug, thus is classified as a substance which has no accepted medical use, thus illegal.  The point in this process, is that Priamos should have known the difference, but still attempted to waste millions of taxpayer monies challenging State Law, which found his argument unconstitutional.

There is also the issue of whereby his office was responsible for taking many properties from income strapped seniors and residents through the code enforcement process.  He was so proud of this, that he even had pictures of the homes taken within his office area.

CLOWNS TO THE LEFT OF ME, JOKERS TO THE RIGHT OF ME..JUST MORE OF THE SAME…

Related TMC stories on former City Attorney Gregory Priamos:(CLICK ON LINKS)

MAY 21, 2012: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY: ‘WE DON’T NEED NO STINK’N CONTRACTS!’

AUGUST 29, 2012: CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE: IS THIS INSURANCE FRAUD? IS THIS PENSION SPIKING?

JULY 8, 2013: CITY OF RIVERSIDE: D.A. FILES NO CHARGES DAY AFTER APRIL FOOLS ON WRIGHT! WILL CHARGES BE FILED ON PEPPER ON CLAPPING?

THE BOOK THAT’S ON THE NUMBER ONE SPOT IN RIVERSIDE: DELVE MORE INTO THE UNDERWORLD CULTURE OF THE PRIAMOS FAMILY…

The “Shyster’s Daughter,” written by Paula Priamos, cousin of our County Counsel Gregory Priamos, which takes an intricate view of the family environment in which she grew up in, is on TMC’s must-read list.

Does Greg Priamos have a family history of unscrupulous legal work?  Paula Priamos’ book gives insight to the family dysfunctionality and immoral legal dealings.  When contacted by Dvonne Pitruzzello, Paula Priamos resolved to remain distanced from her cousin.

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

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

shystersdaughter

CLICK THIS LINK TO PURCHASE THE BOOK ON AMAZON

sexsalon23_priamos_3002                             7099642-L

Riverside County Counsel Gregory Priamos               Cousin and Writer Paula Priamos

SPEAKING OF CLOWN NEWS: HAM RADIO GETS CHOPPED LIVER WHEN IT COMES TO COUNCILMAN’S PUSH TO INVESTIGATE.

The Press Enterprise article states that neighbors were at odds, but commentors who were actual neighbors, stated that had no problem with it.  Hmmmm.  Radio operator Braiman’s next door neighbors, Patti and David Moran and a realtor Patti Triplett, had enough political pull to get Councilman Mike Gardner and Deputy Development Director Emilio Ramirez involved to try to find loopholes in City’s Municipal Code, again utilizing brute squad tactics to terrorize and financially threaten this one Wood Street resident.

We note Councilman Mike Gardner is currently running for re-election for his position.  The aggrieved neighbors claim the tower is a visual eyesore and decreasing the value of their property.  These neighbors must understand that the Wood Streets are not controlled by the structured rules and regulations of a Homeowners Association.  Neighbors have the right to be left alone and not be harassed by government, or of the few who feel that all should follow their utopian vision.

nnc8m1-b88388934z.120150424180829000gdj9co2a.10    nnc8m1-b88388934z.120150424180829000gb69cg1v.10

MR. BRAIMAN’S ATTEMPT TO FIND INTELLIGENT LIFE OUTSIDE OF RIVERSIDE CAUSES NEIGHBORS TO MOVE

We at TMC have been having difficulty getting the City to help us. Around our home we have these large 50 foot wood poles, with black wires that extend about 100 feet in both directions, and are attached to yet another wood pole.  Some of these even have small trash cans attached to them.  These are eyesores and I’m convinced they have devalued numerous resident property values. The City is telling me these poles are necessary…..hogwash!

telephone_pole     index

CITY-PROTECTED VISUAL MONSTROSITIES

Kidding aside, what we seem to have here is a few influential constituents, who decide for the rest of us what is visually offensive, who lobby and employ the local government as a weapon to retaliate and terrorize a single resident. What we have not witnessed (to our knowledge) is that a majority has a problem with Mr. Braiman’s radio tower.   The ugly truth is that many residents feel they cannot come to City Council and present their views because they believe they will be retaliated by code enforcement, etc, if they do.  They see their neighbors that do complain, and observe how they are treated.  And this is how the City controls free speech: through intimidation and fear of the populace…and it needs to end if we are to prosper as a community.

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

neighborhood-livability-program-sm_original

A Submission to TMC:

Former Riverside City Attorney Gregory Priamos and other Riverside City Officials have been involved in a scheme using the Code Enforcement Department to issue fines up to $100,000.00, impose liens on thousands of properties to force their owners in foreclosure to eventually take their money or their homes. If you or people you know have lost money or their home, or both, in their scheme, please go online to Grand Jury – County of Riverside, fill out the Citizen Complaint Form and mail it to the Grand Jury ASAP. A pdf copy of the Form is attached. It’s time to stop these corrupt people from using US government grant to steal millions of dollars in fines and dozens of homes from Riverside residents. Enough is enough!

IF YOU WERE A VICTIM OF THIS ALLEGED SCHEME PERPETRATED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S FORMER CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS, (CLICK THE LINK BELOW) TO DOWNLOAD THE CITIZEN COMPLAINT FORM, FILL IT OUT, AND MAIL IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO THE RIVERSIDE GRAND JURY.

grandjurycmpltform

The following article was submitted May 30, 2014 regarding this issue FROM THE DESK OF LOUIS J. JEAN-LOUIS regarding a scheme to take Riverside Property Owners Homes for profit by inadvertently coding them by city violations, placing a lean on the property, and eventually taking the properties of hard working residents.  This scheme was allegedly perpetrated by former City Attorney Gregory Priamos, who is now with the County of Riverside:

clownpriamos

THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL, PERSONAL & REAL PROPERTY GRAB UNDER THEIR OWN COLOR OF THE LAW? IS CITY ATTORNEY PRIAMOS THE CREATOR OF THIS SCHEME FOR PROFIT?

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED.  I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU.  RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS..  TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”, WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN NOW, SINCE GREG SKIPPED TOWN TO THE COUNTY)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!   COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  WE JUST CAN’T SPELL!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR TOXIC DIRT BY CONTACTING US AT:   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

How do we not cry about the abuse of taxpayer monies… Even our forefathers would find this unacceptable..

In regards to the $35,000 to former Police Chief Russ Leach’s wife Connie Leach’s Multi Cultural Youth Festival, in an email Assistant Finance Director for the City of Riverside tried to explain it to Dvonne Pitruzzello regarding the expenditure of the $35,000.00 from Police Assett Forfeiture to the General Fund, but again we must reiterate, the DOJ has precise criteria for the use of asset forfeiture funds.

catlettemail

AFTWO    AFONE

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW DONATIONS TO THE MULTI CULTURAL YOUTH ORGANIZATION FROM FORMER CHIEF RUSS LEACH TO HIS WIFE, CONNIE LEACH.

THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE GRAND JURY IS AS FOLLOWS.  IT WAS BEING INVESTIGATED, PEOPLE INTERVIEWED, AND THE GRAND JURY SUBMITTED REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS, The Coup d’état, Vivian Moreno was the person focused for the indept informational interview.  The investigation was stopped suddenly, that interview never happened.  A letter to Mary Figueroa, Board of Trustees, stated that the investigation was unfounded.

frontcomplainGJ

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW THE CONNIE LEACH RIVERSIDE GRAND JURY COMPLAINT

UPDATE

The Police Asset Forfeiture Fund (Equitable Sharing) is a restricted fund and has very clear guidelines on its intended purpose.  Losing this fund couild be devastating to the Riverside Police Department.  I question Ms. Aquino’s motives.  Are you protecting the taxpayer? or is this personal?

In June of 2010 Dvonne P., Mary S. and Irma F. went to visit Ms. Aquino to question the use or misuse of the Police Asset Forfeiture (PAF) Fund.  Her comment at the time was there is not any abuse in this department.  Ms. Aquino directed them to look at Public Utilities.

On or about July 2010 we received the PAF Fund detailed accounting and audits from 2006 to 2009; 2010 was not available at the time, we now have 2010.  The misuse of the PAF Fund has been ongoing in the City of Riverside since I’ve began studying Equitable Sharing.  I took my concerns to the City Council, the District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, the Grand Jury and Councilman Paul Davis.  All of which disregarded our complaint.

AF

CLICK IMAGE TO VIEW POLICE ASSET FORFEITURE EXPENDITURES

Here are some of the questionable items we found that were paid from the fund:

1. Running gear for officers to compete in the Baker to Vegas run (tennis shoes)

2. Payments to Connie Leach, the then Police Chief’s wife

3. Payments to the Multi-Cultural Youth Festival- Connie Leach’s youth program.

4. Al Johnson Florist

5. A birthday cake

6. Canyon Crest Cleaners- Russell Leach had his uniform cleaned, couldn’t he pay his own $8.00?

7. Hotel visits to the Ritz Carlton, $400 a night for Leach and Gonzales.

8. Office furniture which totaled $100, 000.00

9. Dell Computers for the Magnolia Police Station, $200,000.00

10.  Lunch, lunch and more lunch for Leach and his friendemies.

Ms. Aquino knew over 3 years ago RPD management was misusing PAF Funds.  The incident with John De La Rosa, the Baker to Vegas Run, happened November 2009.  Why didn’t she alert the media then?  Why now?

When Russ Leach wanted to pay his wife, go out to lunch, get his uniform cleaned, buy a birthday cake and stay at the Ritz Carlton, this was acceptable.  When Vicino wants to go out to lunch and golfing it’s not acceptable.  When your job is safe and secure it’s acceptable to turn your head at the misuse of Police Assett Forfeiture Fund and say or do nothing.  When you’re placed on adminstrative leave it’s not acceptable to misuse these funds.  You cannot have it both ways Ms. Aquino.  Were you a willing partcipant or a victim?

I’m going to speculate what will be coming next from Ms. Aquino.  There will probably be a tort claim filed, including all the malfeasance in RPD.  It will surely contain all the bells and whistles which we’ve been saying for years.  There probably will be a multi-million dollar law suit against the taxpayers of the City of Riverside.  I will say this again, are you protecting the taxpayer or is this personal.

To be continued….

HUSH MONEY PART 2

WE FIRST BROUGHT THIS STORY TO THE FOREFRONT MAY 18, 2011 IN HU$H MONEY PART ONE..

Telling the story of how this all began is an important one in order to understand why I have made the very important decision to run for the position of Mayor, Dvonne Pitruzzello, for the City of Riverside.  Approximately two years ago I attended a city council meeting and a friend told me about the city manager and his $50,000.00 discretionary spending.  It seems that the City of Riverside’s then city manager Bradley J. Hudson had an open checkbook to spend our money with no council approval.  For those of you who know me, you also know that this would be something that I would find unacceptable. So I requested that the city council put a mechanism in place to not only track his spending but to have it reported and approved by the city council.  A quarterly reporting would suffice.  Alas, my curiosity got to me.  I wondered just how much Mr. Hudson had spent and even more, what had Mr. Hudson spent our money on.  Now the journey begins.

After sifting thorough thousands of pages of documents I kept finding reoccurring expenses.  Connie Leach, Ironwood Construction, Provider Food Service, etc., etc.,  Thus began my relationship with the California Public Records Act.  You see all documents, except attorney client privilege documents are public records and must be given to those who request these documents, for a fee or course.  I’ll save the details of the power of the public records request act for another posting.  My first public records request act was for several items that kept revealing themselves in Brad Hudson’s discretionary spending.  Over 200 million dollars in less than five years. WOW!  And our city council current and former gave Mr. Hudson a blank check to spend our money.  So how did this all happen, was Hudson qualified? or was he as rumored, just a shoe in by the Tavaglione family?

But onward, I was not able to conquer all of this information single handedly, no, I had help, a few  close friends that had been victims of the cities oppressive policies.  Many meals around the table and later it was decided that the Connie Leach expenditures were extremely suspicious.  Also take note that the amount of spending that had occurred was so disturbing I could not walk away.  Approximately 200 million dollars in less than 5 years, what kind of city council would allow this?  Now that’s a lot of tax money. We wanted to find out exactly why this, “Blank check of trust” was given to a man who had a criminal record, but was hired by the city council and mayor regardless.

Our quest had deepened and we began to get our feet wet investigating the expenditures of Connie Leach.  Our lead investigator on the case Vivian Moreno worked tirelessly for months to help us understand why the then police chief’s wife Connie Leach had been paid in excess of $600,00.00, as a consultant to the Mayor’s Youth Advisory Council.  You see, when I, Dvonne Pitruzzello, was employed with the city and worked under Mayor Loveridge I did the same job for free.  As a part-time employee I assumed the duties associated with the Youth Advisory Council.  During my departure Connie Leach had approached the Mayor and stated that she would like to volunteer with children.  I thought, what a great opportunity for the youth council to have a high profile person giving credibility to their council.  It was to my dismay to find out less than a year after I left, Connie Leach began to receive payment(s) for her volunteer work.  Doubly dismayed because we already had in place a Youth Action Office where these duties should have been assumed by the director, not Mrs. Leach, to pay someone else to do the job was again, unacceptable.

On to what we found.  Contracts for over $300,000.00 and the remaining $300,000.00 were for various items paid for on behalf of the Youth Multicultural Festival, for which Mrs. Leach was a consultant also.  Connie Leach did have a business license on file with the City of Riverside, Impact Consulting, both she and her then husband Chief of Police Russell Leach signed the business tax license.  The question was, if Mrs. Leach collected donations from the community then why were these funds deposited into the general fund and not in a separate fund for specific expenditures for the Youth Multicultural Festival?  By the way Mrs. Leach’s contracts were paid from the Parks and Recreation budget, the Economic Development budget, Development Department, etc.  Depositing these funds properly would have been as simple as depositing them into the International Relations Council’s, non-profit account, Youth Multi-Cultural Festival, a perfect place for these donations.  Of course everything would have been on the up and up if this had occurred……Nevertheless, it did not happen.  When Mrs. Leach got paid for every taco she ever ate, and every cola she ever drank from Jack-in-the-Box, our suspicions grew ever greater.  We asked for every check and/or wire transfer that was distributed to Connie Leach from the City of Riverside, and here is what we found.

Connie Leach had been paid $35,000.00 from police asset forfeiture funds, these are extremely restricted federal funds and can only be used for the sole purpose of gang or drug intervention programs.  These funds under the supervision of her then police chief husband had been distributed to Connie Leach for her consulting fee as the advisor for the Youth Multicultural Festival.  A grand jury report had been filed, but funny it seems that the person most likely to be interviewed, Ms. Moreno who did all of the investigation was never interviewed.  Approximately two weeks after the grand jury served a subpoena on the City of Riverside for five years of police asset forfeiture records the complaint was dismissed, no reason given.  Wow, how did the grand jury read all of of those documents in such a short time frame?

Let’s move on.  Connie Leach was reimbursed for party hats from the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas, we know how much students love these hats.  She also had several parties at her house to reward the students for their hard work with all kinds of fancy cheeses and appetizers, students can’t resist the delicious Danish havarti cheese, these were receipts from Ralph’s grocery store.  $300,00.00 dollars later, even though she only collected $100,00.00 in donations, our former CFO/Treasurer Paul Sundeen stated in a finance committee meeting that Connie Leach had done a great job and deserved every penny that we paid her.  Shortly thereafter, his bound contract to the City of Riverside was found to be illegal, and he then faded away into the darkness of the Riverside sunset.

CONTRACT 1: AGREEMENT DATE AUGUST 30, 2004: FOR PRO CONSULT SERVICES RIVERSIDE YOUTH COUNCIL: AUGUST 30, 2004 TO APRIL 1, 2005 HOURLY RATE $50/HR NOT TO EXCEED 20K

CONTRACT ONE

CONTRACT AMENDMENT 1: AGREEMENT DATE JULY 22, 2005 (AMENDMENT OF JULY 1,2004 TO APRIL 1, 2005/ WITH EXTENTION TO JUNE 30,2005 CONTRACT ) AMEND TO JULY 1, 2005 TO DECEMBER 31, 2005: INCREASE BY 5K TO TOTAL 25K (PAY $25/HR)

CONTRACT ONE AMENDMENT

CONTRACT 2:  AGREEMENT DATE JANUARY 9, 2006: FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES APRIL 23, 2006 MULTI CULTURAL YOUTH FESTIVAL JANUARY 9, 2006 TO MAY 1, 2006  (NOT TO EXCEED 15K)

CONTRACT TWO

CONTRACT AMENDMENT 2: AGREEMENT DATE FEBRUARY 8, 2006  (AMENDMENT OF JULY 1,2004 TO APRIL 1, 2005/ WITH EXTENTION TO DECEMBER 30,2005 CONTRACT ) AMEND FROM DECEMBER 31, 2005 TO JUNE30, 2006 INCREASE BY 25K TO A TOTAL OF 50K

CONTRACT TWO AMENDMENT

CONTRACT 3:  AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2006: FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES AS YOUTH COUNCIL ADVISOR JUNE 30, 2006 TO JUNE 30, 2007 NOT TO EXCEED  50K (PAYMENT MADE BASED ON RECEIPT OF INVOICE)

CONTRACT THREE

CONTRACT 4: AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2006:  CONSULTANT FOR APRIL 29, 2007 MULTICULTURAL YOUTH FESTIVAL : NOT TO EXCEED 35K (PAYMENTS MADE BASED ON RECEIPT OF INVOICE)

CONTRACT FOUR

CONTRACT 5: AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2007: FOR PRO CONSULT SERVICES FOR APRIL 27, 2008 MULTI CULTURAL YOUTH FESTIVAL: NOT TO EXCEED 42.5K (PAYMENTS MADE BASED ON RECEIPT OF INVOICE)

CONTRACT FIVE 

CONTRACT 6: AGREEMENT DATE JUNE 30, 2007: FOR PRO CONSULT SERVICES FOR YOUTH COUNCIL PROJECT: JULY 1, 2007 TO JUNE 30, 2008  HOURLY RATE $75/HR  NOT TO EXCEED 50K

 CONTRACT SIX

CONTRACT 7: AGREEMENT DATE MAY 5, 2008: FOR CONSULTANT SERVICE FOR RIVERSIDE YOUTH COUNCIL FEBRUARY 16, 2008 TO MAY 16, 2008 HOURLY RATE $75/HR NOT TO EXCEEDD $9,750

CONTRACT SEVEN

In 2008, a PE news release on 05/07 stated she was resigning 05/16.  Connie Leach receives a contract for $9,750.00 on 05/08, in lieu that knowingly, the event would be canceled.  Regardless if the Council or Mayor knew, they are responsible legally and managerably, regardless of the actions of the City Attorney Gregory Priamos and Former City Manager Brad Hudson.    Well, regarding the DA, we get it he is a very busy man.. The Riverside Grand Jury…found no basis, during an incomplete investigation, while awaiting public records on asset forfeiture documents.  The City, the judges, the grand jury and the DA’s office simply found nothing responsive to the documents.  Zellerbach simply told us, “Is it illegal, or just bad business?”  Well we were hoping you know Mr. Zellerbach…afterall you are the Big Kahuna..  This leaves many questions of why was a blog site targeted as opposed to the questions, documents and facts brought forward to your office.  Questions of your association with the Grand Jury, City of Riverside officials, Judges etc.  Why Mr. Zellerbach was it important to your office that a file on Thirty Miles of Corruption was created?  Were you worried that your decision on the Karen Wright arrest could possibly change how the Riverside Police Officer’s Association would view you?

                               

CONNIE LEACH TIMELINE                       CONNIE LEACH PE ARTICLE

The bottom line is, in an article in the San Diego North County Times, San Diego Police said there was sufficient evidence to charge then City of Riverside Chief of Police Russ Leach with battery and they then fowarded the this case to the San Diego City Attorney’s Office for further investigation.

CONNIE SUES CITY OF SAN DIEGO

After all is said an done we find that Connie Leach now resides in the Carribean.   What secrets does Carribean Connie know regarding RPD, Police Asset Forfeiture and her prior employment with the City of Riverside and the activities of her Ex-Husband Chief Russell Leach?  How much did prior Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge know about all this?  Possibly plenty?

When brought to the attention of the Grand Jury, the item in question was squashed.  When brought to Big Kahuna himself, Paul Zellerbach, his assistant was more focused on who was behind the infamous blog site, Thirty Miles of Corruption.  They themselve had a file of copies of each and every article written.  When asked with the evidence brought forward to Paul, he only stated, “Is this bad business? Needless to say, our Grand Jury complaint was dismissed with out completely interviewing all the complainants under the watchful eye of Paul Zellerbach.

NEW PE ARTICLE REGARDING POLICE ASSET FORFEITURE AND RPD.  MORE COMING UP ON KAREN AQUINO AND NEW ACCUSATIONS REGARDING RPD.  POSSIBLY A LITTLE LATE MS. AQUINO? EVEN WHEN WE ASKED YOU FOR YOUR HELP?  DIDN’T YOU KNOW ALL ALONG?  YOU KEPT IT UNDER WRAPS SO LONG…WHY BRING IT OUT NOW MS. AQUINO?  TMC KNEW ALL ALONG…  GOOD LUCK ON THIS ONE DANUTA, WE WILL BE THERE EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.

AQUINO

Karen Aquino, Police Administrative Service Manager for RPD

…Aquino has always been a strong advocate for following the established rules and procedures for asset forfeitures, knowing that they have very specific purposes and that she would be the first person blamed if any findings were made in an audit…  – Attorney Danuta W. Tuszynska

danuta

Attorney Danuta W. Tuszynska

danutaletterfrontpage

CLICK LINK TO VIEW COMPLETE TUSZYNKA LETTER IN CARE OF AQUINO

These were Federal Funds and should have also been sent to the DOJ..  Okay Danuta, what now? How does this protect the taxpayer when your client may have possibly known all along the rules and law of Federal Asset Forfeiture?   Again is this Personal or in the Best Interest of the Taxpayer?  Or in the Best Interest of an Opportunity?  Again, contact TMC with your dirt at THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

TOUGH CALL FOR ONE LOCAL BUSINESS ON WARD 3 COUNCIL POSITION….

Realizing it is difficult decision to take a position on a Ward 3 Candidate, what’s a business to do when both candidates may have asked for support, we find this local business may have the answer…

IMG_0429

WHO SEEMS TO BE AGGRAVATED WITH EACH OTHER AND WOULD LIKE TO SEE EACH GONE…COMING SOON!  KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC.

Is Parks Director Ralph Nuñez really retiring at 54 years of age?  STAY TOONED TO TMC.

What is going on with the new Riverside Community College Culinary School on University and Market Street?

JUST FOR LAUGHS!

How important is golf in RPD culture?

vicino-diaz

Mr. D. could you wrap it up, I’ll be late for tee time..

vinciogolg

Yippee…made it!

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!   THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

Rivals to the end, approximately two years ago it appears that former District Attorney Rod Pacheco filed a complaint against current Riverside County DA Paul Zellerbach.  The agency, known as the State Commission on Judicial Performance admonished Riverside County DA Paul Zelerback for remarks of criticism made from the judicial superior court bench against the then DA Rod Pacheco. Others are asking the question of how much influence does the DA’s office have with the City of Riverside or vice versa, on sensitive issues concerning the community, to the extent of influencing the decisions and outcome of other such agencies such as the Riverside Grand Jury.  So if issues are raised, does influence have a part in the resultant decision? What if members of the grand jury have positions on city commissions? Would this effect their decision making process. Do past and current city personal as well as the DA’s office have influence on current grand jury issues or vice versa?  Does the DA have oversight over the Grand Jury?  The answer, would be affirmably..Yes!  What if the DA endorses a current city candidate?

For example, most of the City Council, Mayor and the DA Paul Zellerbach endorse a City Council member Steve Adams in which questions have  been raised on his ethical behavior.   Should we even dare to consider a quadrangle of influence, in which judges are friends of the DA, City Attorney and members of the grand jury?  What would these relationships bring to the table?  How would these relationships cover for each other and possibly effect the outcomes of relative cases the community and individuals bring to trusted individuals?  Does the Community of Riverside justifably have a case of breech of trust by elected and government personal who have not fulfilled their sworn duties to the communities they represent and serve?  The city of riverside has seen some interesting processes occurring in our community, but to what extent is this responsive from the triangle and culture of influence?  Can citizens concerns brought to the Riverside Grand Jury or the Riverside District Attorney effectively and fairly be dealt with, without having to go to outside agencies for relevent and unbiased opinions?

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DECISION & ORDER TO IMPOSE PUBLIC ADMONISHMENT 2011

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 PROBABLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE RIVERSIDE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR WHAT EVER REASON, AND THAT’S ALL WE’RE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S, COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS!  EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT!  THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM