Posts Tagged ‘seiu’

maxresdefault

Can’t tell if this Riverside Tax Payer was Tased by the shock of Higher Sales Taxes, or simply stumbled on the Transparent California Web Site and found out what our Public Employees really make!

The City of Riverside currently has $472 million (and growing daily) in unfunded pension liabilities (money due to employees in the future that has no dedicated revenue stream at the moment).  That’s more than 1 year’s general fund budget – you could shut down City Hall for a year and we’d still be $200 million short.  This is simply not payable, the City’s answer is to pillage the taxpayer for more taxes.  What we have been told by prior City Financial Officers, is that “we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem,” and I’ll leave it there.   As compared to the City of FRESNO, which has NO Unfunded pension liabilities and a $300 million pension surplus!  Go figure.  The City of Fresno is not only doing their City right, they are doing their taxpayers right.  It’s unfortunate that we have a culture of entitlement within the City of Riverside, specifically in public safety employees who believe they are worth more than what the market can bear.

The taxpayer of Riverside has been bullied, strong armed and shakedown by the public employees unions for years, and we are sick and tired of it!  Taxpayers hate the City Union threats, “YOU MUST PAY US MORE, OR WE WILL SLOW SERVICES, OR YOU WILL NOT HAVE ANY SERVICES!”  Again what many taxpayers are telling TMC, is that they feel “a profound sense of betrayal by our City Government.”  This is a City Government which left you behind, which didn’t protect your tax monies, which didn’t do what they meant and didn’t mean what they said and fiscally didn’t take your best interest at heart.  The following is the cost per resident in order to fund total compensation including pensions in these cities 2014.

RIVERSIDE: $828
COLTON : $631
CORONA :$575                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        FRESNO: $566
SAN BERNARDINO: $460
MORENO VALLEY: $157

We don’t have any services now, that is because they, the City, have cut our services to pay the salaries of our so called “heroes,” Fire and Police,  in lieu of their employer, the taxpayer.  The Council of Riverside has been fiscally irresponsible for many years.  Councilman Mike Soubirous is the exception.  The problem has been that our City Council has been all purchased and paid for by Fire and Police Unions, especially Mayor Rusty Bailey.  Of course, the Riverside Chamber of Commerce and the Rain Cross Group, support Measure-Z, because they couldn’t survive in the real world, without their taxpayer handout, they simply could not make it on their own.  They are a good example of a City subsidized entity. City Pensions have been a priority to City Officials, as opposed to fixing our pot holes, cutting our trees, fixing our curbs and public safety.  Why is that?  Maybe because they are afraid of the dam unions?  If you are week, you will get no where, if you are strong, you will challenge those who you supposedly run to represent, the taxpayers of the City of Riverside.  As a representative you should represent them, the taxpayer, regardless of the consequence.

The City currently pays 35% of public safety employee salary every year to CalPERS; 25% for other employees.  These rates are rising at meteoric levels as CalPERS realizes the full extent of their problem.  Many of these employees have six figure salaries, and most have never paid 1 cent into their own CalPERS retirements, which max out at 90% of top salary when public employees retire at 50 (safety) or 55 (non-safety). There is nothing in the private sector that even remotely compares to these plans.  In fact, for some of the top government earners, it would be illegal under IRS rules in the private sector for companies to fund such a level of retirement pay.

While the private sector has still not seen their total compensation (adjusted for inflation) getting back to 2006 levels, when you include these unfunded benefits; Riverside’s employees have been getting well over 10% raises for the past decade.  Think about that: their compensation is up over 100%, while the rest of us have stagnated.  It is squeezing out public services surely but steadily.  They have literally hijacked the taxpayer to pay them more than should be reasonably compensated in the private sector.  This is criminal!

mixsalaryone     mixsalarytwo     mixsalarythree

Once the average citizen educates themselves about this Ponzi scheme, these guys (fire and police) are going to retire in their early 50s making hundreds of thousands a year, while the rest of us, in the real world, work to our late 60’s with not much more than Social Security (currently $32k/year) and whatever dollar you we’re able to save in our IRA/401k (typical American has enough money for another $20k/year in income in retirement).  Then what do these public workers do next when they retire at 50?  They go get another City job and work a second pension.  Folks like us are not going to work another 15 more years for packages half as good as government workers, it simply makes no economical sense..  The taxpayer is not going to work harder, IN ORDER TO FUND THESE GOLDEN PARACHUTE DEALS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES, while accepting lower quality services from their government.  This isn’t fair, and they, the unions, don’t care.

We need leadership and reform…none on the horizon that I see however.  Instead, our electeds’ have chosen to attempt to pillage the general public with increased taxes.  The earners are already leaving California for places like Nevada and Texas; this will just hasten municipal bankruptcies.  New contract have employees contributing 6% eventually to CalPERS, if raises are at least 2% per year.  By that time the City will be contributing the other 39% that’s being required.  And by tying their salaries to increased revenues under the Partnership Compensation Model, one can look forward to public safety union propaganda in the mail to pass new taxes, new developments, and higher utility bills every year…brilliant.

Remember, what seemingly appears to be the entitlement factor by Public Sector Employees, may be their own undoing.  Please continue to laugh in our faces.  The general public did not vote for your retirement packages.  They were a result of “elected officials” seeking special interest votes.  I find it will end in tears, not only for you, but for the taxpayer!  Union contracts should never be voted without public involvement!  After all we are the rightful employer.

When you look at total compensation, including benefits, pensions, over time and other pay, you will understand that what is paid out to public employee’s, is more than the base pay.  These cost our hidden from the public!  Purposely?  Good question.  Further, the revenue stream is not there, the contracts were made without financially assessing the final impact on the taxpayer.  Therefore, what we have is an unfunded pension liability, right?  The Council Owns this Fiscal Mess, including Davis!  Not listening to the Public.  Our current City Manager John Russo, who is banking on the taxpayer, tells Council Publicly to discount Public Comment!  “Asinine” and “morally corrupt,” as one public commenter indicated..Kevin Dawson to City Manager John Russo.

When you look at 250 employees at the City of Riverside making nearly $200K per year, it’s really 250 employees at the City making nearly $200K per year in total compensation, which includes their base pay, over time, other pay and benefits, which is not clearly addressed by them!

Back on August 16, 1937, President Franklin D. Roosevelt made this statement on “public sector unions.”  Listen closely Tim Strack, Fire Fighters Union; Listen closely Brian Smith, Riverside Police Officers Union; Listen Closely George Soros, SEIU…

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

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

Bottom line, this deal, like the previous firefighters and police deals, is a disaster for both the general public and the union members.  It creates the perverse incentive for our police and fire employees, through their unions, to support all new revenues measures (i.e. taxes, higher utility rates, new development)…like Measure Z (local sales tax increase).  It creates a us vs. them game concerning our wallets, which will create “distrust” issues (not the kind of thing public safety should be doing, particularly right now).

What Riverside Police Union President Brian Smith states in this video is inaccurate and defective.  President Sgt. Smith’s leadership within the Police Union is less than can be desired.  His care of his fellow police members monies is abhorrent.  The embezzlement loss of over $346K of police member monies, with over 15 Riverside Police Officers on their Boards, only makes you think how competent they are with accounting knowledge.  According to the Press Enterprise article, RPOA Vice President, Aurelio Melendrez (Son of current Councilman Andy Melendrez), stated, “It’s embarrassing for all of us, its a good lesson to the community that anyone can be victimized.”  Just for the record Aurelio Melendrez is a DETECTIVE for the Riverside Police Department!  He goes on to say, “Police aren’t businessmen.”  We suggest taking a course in accounting 101 at RCC.  It’s there that they are incompetent with member monies, and I can pretty much assume they will be incompetent with Taxpayers Monies.

embezzlement

Press Enterprise article where Measure Z is tied to fire and police salaries.  I find it repugnant once again City personal are out to community meetings pushing for the passing of Measure Z, but stating that they are their only for informational purposes.  Makes you lose respect for fire and police, and city personal and leadership.  The following is a propaganda video produced by the City of Riverside, paid by you, the taxpayer.  Beware, this is another City of Riverside “SCHEME,” known as the “Partnership Compensation Model.”  The City should not be in the business of doing business, but in the business of doing what is right for the taxpayer.

Sgt. Brian Smith of RPD, and also Union President, attempts to tell Riverside Taxpayers why Measure-Z should be passed.  It seems to be that it is all about Smith and his associates, but nothing with regards to the taxpayer!

On September 21,2016 Assistant City Manager Marianna Maryshevitz explains the City Manager John Russo’s new “Partnership Compensation Model” at the Janet Goeske Senior Center.

After Maryshevitz completes her explanation of the City’s new compensation model, Local Taxpayer Advocate & Riversidian Kevin Dawson unleashes against his opinion on the truth of Measure-Z.

Is there any reason that the City of Riverside Taxpayers should question new City Manager John Russo on any of his high falluting ideas? Should we even consider our City Manager John Russo as relevant to the City of Riverside’s welfare?  We need to renegotiate those union deals, or go broke.  We cannot sustain these contracts.  The past city negotiators were simply not good negotiators, and basically gave the farm away, in lieu of their responsibility to the taxpayer.  Shameful.  Many taxpayers feel as I do within our City of Riverside, “a profound sense of betrayal by our City Government.”  This is what TMC is retrieving from our subscribers.  Again they are questioning decisions made by are current and past City leadership. Why is it that our current leadership is unable to decipher the past wrong doing of our Council and justifiably make it right?  So taxpayers have a right to ask about the newly hired City Managers view of the foregoing future of our City.  Is his view of our City the same cookie cuter reproduction of the past?  Is it “Partnership Compensation Model” that Russo placed in Oakland California?  What happened there?

RPOA President, Brian Smith’s former boss was RPD Detective Chris Lanzillo..  What did RPD Sgt. Brian Smith learn from his from his former boss, former RPD Detective Chris Lanzillo, was it how to politically manipulate public politics?  Did Sgt. Smith attempt to do just that against Councilman Mike Soubirous?  Should Sgt. Smith be investigated?  Many in the community are telling TMC yes!

CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA HAS A PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PENSION SURPLUS..GO FIGURE!

According to a March 10, 2016 article in the Fresno Bee, the City of Fresno has a Pension Surplus!  In my eyes, according to the Fresno Pension Plan, Riverside is simply paying to dam much.  The following is the cost per taxpayer on property taxes per year in 2014, the figures taken from Transparent California.

RIVERSIDE: $828
COLTON : $631
CORONA :$575                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        FRESNO: $566
SAN BERNARDINO: $460
MORENO VALLEY: $157

AND, “the most shocking fact of all is that the Riverside City payroll INCREASED by $10,000,000 between 2014 and 2015.  The precise figure of our deficit. Think about it………” – Ron Todar

Bottom line, City Manager John Russo is not a proponent for the residents and taxpayer of the City of Riverside!  You as a taxpayer have been had.  Have your streets been fixed, trees cut, concerns of in home burglaries, theft from our front yards, drug deals, prostitution rings in our Wood Streets, drug deals in the Wood Streets,  shootings in the Wood Street?  Well Russo’s street has been fixed by the Riverside Gravy Train as expected. Sorry folks if your P.C., but the fact remains, “This is Piss Pour Politics at Hand,” and we should not tolerate it as taxpayers.  Russo is again a parasite who feeds on the “gravy train” of Riverside Taxpayers and every other city taxpayer that he has nomadically strives through.  Our Council is simply to dumb to distinguish the difference.

DID CITY OF RIVERSIDE MAYOR WILLIAM “RUSTY” BAILEY VIOLATE CALIFORNIA FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION’S RULES ON CAMPAIGNS?

VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z!

REASONS TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE-Z PER KEVIN DAWSON AT THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 1, 2016!  IS MEASURE-Z A RUSSO MONSTER?

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

LETTERONE   LETTERTWO   LETTERTHREE

CLICK THIS LINK TO VIEW LETTER SENT TO ALL CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR

The letter above was sent by the City Employees Association (CEA) in care of the Moreno Valley Management Association (MVMA), a group of approximately 72 mid-level managers.  Current Board Members of the MVMA are President Felicia London, Vice-President Shanikqua Watkins and Treasurer John Kerenyi.  The letter expresses their concerns about a certain volunteer, Vivian Moreno, which Mayor Jessie Molina accepted to work with him as a legislative aide a mere few months ago.    If you read the letter carefully you will see it focuses on the City Managers office, which is not a member of this organization.

In the city of Riverside, Vivian Moreno has been known to the community for years as a City watchdog and an advocate for the taxpayer, having spent two years along with a group of other active citizens in Riverside learning municipal financing and understanding how to read city documents.  She was successful in suing the city of Riverside on behalf of its utility ratepayers for Prop 218 violations and returning 10 million dollars back to the water utility.  Along with Dvonne Pitruzzello, Errol Koschewitz, Marilyn Whitney and many others, after 6 long years activists exposed the AG Park incident for residents taken ill by toxins.  Currently, AG Park has now been taken over by the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), the Evironmental Protection Agency (EPA) and our very dear friend Penny Newman through her organization.  The residents of Ag park are finally in good hands. Vivian Moreno along with some of her very special friends have been instrumental in reshaping and redirecting the City of Riverside.

Many cities have legislative aides. The city of Riverside, with a population of 300,000 has legislative aides in order to help Councilmembers be efficient and effective.  City of Riverside’s Mayor William “Rusty” Bailey has a Mayor’s budget of close to 1 million dollars and several staff at his disposal.  The city of Moreno Valley has a population of 200,000 and have never had legislative aides or a Mayor’s staff.  Mayor Jesse Molina’s budget is zero.  In order for California cities to progress to the next level, legislative aides are necessary.  Moreno Valley is not a, “one horse town,” anymore.  If they want to be an economic contender in competition as the world logistics’ arena, they will need more employees at the legislative end in order to properly project the city into the future, as the city moniker states, “The City That Soars…”

With this in mind it is rather remarkable that the MVMA in conjunction with the CEA would attempt to take the city down by focusing on a volunteer to the Mayor. Why is that? Why the concern? Why the attempt to discredit, slander and libel this one volunteer? A volunteer who has worked for Mayor Jessie Molina without pay for two months on her own time.  Some ask, “What is her agenda?” to which we reply, “None, except for the fact that in every city, taxpayers need protection from those with unscrupulous motives.”

The focus of the letter quickly becomes focused upon the executive staff.  We ask, “Are they there to protect and serve the Mayor and Council, or are they there to primarily serve themselves?”  One of the biggest issues in Moreno Valley is retrieving public documents.  Documents don’t lie, which is why we often post them here.  If documents are difficult to retrieve, we have to ask ourselves, “Why?”  The difficulty in acquiring documents within the required time period required by the California Public Records Act makes a municipality look suspicious.

The first thing we noticed about the letter was that no one appeared to want to take responsibility for the claims in it – it’s unsigned and without a printed name.  Was someone afraid or was it simply an oversight? If there was a problem at the employee and management level. where was Chris Paxton, Administrative Services Director, aka Human Resources?  It would seem that city policy would direct an employee to contact the HR department first.  Has the CEA taken the place of the Human Resource Department liason?  If so, what does Paxton really do?

Our attorney called the CEA, and spoke specifically with Director Robin Nahin.  Nahin was told that the letter was not signed.  Nahin replied that the letter should have been signed by someone from the board of MVMA.  What’s quite remarkable is the letter at the bottom, has a line, where a signature should be, with the CEA as the responsible party.  Secondly, the letter is written on CEA letterhead.  There is nowhere on the letter that addresses the inference of a signature referencing the MVMA.  Befuddled? Your guess is as good as ours.  As we understand, before a letter such as this was sent to the City, there should have been a notification process to all members of the MVMA by board members.  Then a vote by members of the MVMA in order for the letter to move forward to the Council.  We are trying to find the the minutes of this meeting.

CEA’s Robin Nahin seemed to have her own set of problems in the past as indicated in this SEIU video.  By the way Nahin is not an attorney.

Looking more into this Union/Association we find more inconsistencies.  Teamsters Union actually challenged CEA as a real Union, the following video exposes the real City Employees Association according to Director Robin Nahin!

According to the Arcadia Patch, Nahin become involved in a suit filed by Attorney Wendell Phillips. Phillips who consults for the Arcadia Public City Employees Association (APCEA) and, until his break with Nahin, did work for the City Employees and Public Works associations—accused Nahin of choosing a “path of least resistance” as her approach to salary negotiations in order to minimize company time spent on clients.

TMC’s investigative team contacted Attorney Wendell Phillips and he told us that… Sunshine Kills Fungus, Just Shine the Light On It!  Wendell Phillips also gave us a quick lesson on Robin Nahin and CEA.  Just watch the videos and you can figure this out for yourself. Its really not that difficult!  Phillips also stated of the CEA, “You get what you pay for.”

What is also quite remarkable is that according to the PE,  Councilwoman LaDonna Jempson (a Human Resources professional no less) said she’s concerned about the letter.  “Employees have a right to work in a peaceful work environment,” Jempson said, “and it’s up to Molina to defuse a situation that could be costly if the city is ever sued.”  We’re a bit taken back that a Human Resources professional would assume that the letter is valid without appropriately suggesting an investigation of the complaints first.  Further, we find it odd that she did not check with Human Resource Director Chris Paxton, to see if the complainants initially contacted him before contacting CEA.  As a Human Resource professional she didn’t find it odd that the complaint or issue was not taken to HR, as with most City policies?

Jempson also found it necessary to make a personal attack by pointing out that Mayor Molina has an ego problem.  “I’m hoping maybe he’ll move his ego out of the way and make a logical, sensible decision based on what is best for the city,” Jempson said. “The best thing for the city would be to move Ms. Moreno out of that position.”  At the WLC meeting, Jempson made it known publicly that we as a community need to begin to get along.  Maybe she should practice what she preaches.  TMC suggests that she move her ego out of the way and make logical, sensible statements based on what is best for the city.  The public knows when you are just dishing up lip service.  I wonder if Mrs. Jempson noticed that the letter was not signed?

We also find it quite interesting that a former City Councilmember Richard Stewart was contacted for comment.  It was probably easy finding him at his usual hang out.  We all know where that is, right?  (Hint: correct answer pays 3 to 2)  But current council members, Dr. Yxstian Gutierrez, Jeff Giba or George Price were not contacted for comment.

Moreno Valley has a contract with the Moreno Valley City Employees Association as indicated below:

MVCEAone

MOU-MVCEA2015-2017

Their contract is signed by both the CEA and MVMA as indicated below:

MVMA   MVMAsigned

MOU-MVMA2015-2017

Who are those behind the writing of this letter?  According to the letter itself, the focus appears to be on the City Manager’s Office, which is mentioned numerous times, and it’s relationship with Council and Mayor.  With this in mind, it leads one to ask the question, “Shouldn’t the City Manager, Michelle Dawson, know what is going on under her nose?”  According to the PE, she knew nothing about the letter prior to receiving it.  I would imagine that at least MVMA President Felicia London, the city of Moreno Valley’s Management Analyst would know, but she declined to comment.  Julie Reyes declined to comment.  CEA Director, Robin Nahin declined to comment.  No one knows anything!

Shouldn’t there be a friendly relationship between City Manager Michelle Dawson and Chief Financial Officer Rick Teichert? Or is there already one. How about between Julie Reyes and Councilman George Price?  Bottom line is all should have good relationships with the Mayor.

But what is the real problem with City Hall in Moreno Valley?  Does the staff mploy a culture of misdirection? Is executive staff disengaged from their subordinates?  Or is it simply a disconnect between the legislative body and executive staff? An executive staff unable or unwilling to serve at the pleasure of those they claim loyalty to?  Is the foundation so broken that everyone may just simply need to be replaced?

“Fear is the foundation of most Governments…”       

– John Adams, 2nd President of the United States of America,  January 1776

HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT:

CEA and MVMA claims Moreno is causing a “hostile work environment.”  Last we checked, lawsuits over hostile workplaces must be based on hostility caused by individual discrimination against an employee based on, e.g., race, age, gender, disability, etc.  As Attorney Letitia Pepper said, criticizing someone for their personal conduct (e.g., using sexual favors to secure a promotion) or lack of ability (e.g., being unable to properly notice a meeting) does NOT constitute any unlawful conduct on the part of Moreno. The average person doesn’t realize that an UNLAWFUL, “hostile workplace environment,” can’t be based on criticism of an employee’s conduct –unless the criticism is (1) false and (2) motivated by the employee’s characteristics (e.g., race, age, gender, disability) — as opposed to his or her conduct.

One example of sexual harassment for instance is the hostile work environment it creates for co-workers.  A relationship between a supervisor and a subordinate can be troublesome. Favoritism arising out of a personal relationship is damaging to the whole department. Two major issues could arise, Conflict of Interest between the two and not enough time being spent on doing work assigned. Not to mention the target of office gossip in the blogosphere or elsewhere consuming the office dialog causing distractions. Wide spread favoritism, and nasty rumors can create a sexually hostile work environment. Employers face greater risk from a workplace romance. California Supreme Court rules that office affairs may give rise to sexual favoritism claims. {Miller v California Department of corrections} Employees in California may now sue their employers for sexual harassment if the sexual affair between a superior and a subordinate results in sexual favoritism. It is a Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

“Sleeping her way to the top” was the basis of this lawsuit. Numerous women were romantically and sexually involved with their boss. Women got ahead and were promoted if they performed sexual favors for their supervisor. Preferential treatment, raises, promotions, company perks were all part of the repeated incidents of sexual favoritism. The outcome was a hostile work environment.  Sexual Favoritism sends a message to female/male employees that they must demean themselves by becoming sexual playthings in order to get ahead at work. In this particular case it was proven that “Boss’s favorable treatment of lovers can be harassment to others.”  Relationships between equals that effect other staff can also constitute a hostile work environment similar conditions exist.

Bottom line is work place relationship can hurt the taxpayers through the liabilities it creates.  She knows…

“The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service,” Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, “I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place” in the public sector. “A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government.”  – Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd President of the United States

b70-8505

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE!  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!

iloveny

 

MATCH THESE FAMOUS SLOGANS:

“I love __________.”                                                                                          Texas

“Don’t mess with _________!”                                                                             Riverside

“What happens in _______ stays in _______.”                                                       New York

“________: There’s simply no conflict-of-interest we can’t ignore.”                           Vegas

 

Ok, well maybe the last one isn’t quite famous yet, but our City leaders sure are trying their best. Whether it be the Chamber/Riverside Public Utilities insider dealing, the systemic rigging of quasi-judicial hearings, or the longstanding practice of City execs hiring investigators to clear themselves of allegations with your money, the City is the paragon of duplicity when it comes to conflicts-of-interests.  In fact, we hear the City recently received the Platinum Prime Select Ace A-1 Lifetime Achievement Award for Bestest, Transcendent, and Outstanding Illusion of Transparency and Fairness demonstrated by local government.

This award, chosen by the preeminent body judging such matters that no one has ever heard of – Twenty Kilometers of Crraption (not affiliated with this site…nudge, wink) – was in fact, bought and paid for, by the City itself.  It’s that dedication to underhandedness, which demonstrates the City’s deservedness (a word we just created) of this distinction.  Cities of Bell, Vernon, City of Industry?  Morons!  They’ve got nothing on our dear River City; and secondly, they all got caught!

As it’s election season, we figured we’d offer another interesting (or not) anecdote about how the endorsement game works in our dear municipal corporation (aka, city).  The players: Ward 1 Councilman Mike Gardner, SEIU Political Coordinator Becky Whatley, the SEIU (Service Employee International Union), and a cameo by Ward 1 Challenger, Tom Podgorski.

SEIU Town Hall

CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TO VIAGRA-IZE

 

Both Ward 1 candidates were invited to a SEIU “endorsement” Town Hall meeting on February 26, 2015 by SEIU Political Coordinator, Becky Whatley.  The SEIU routinely holds these events before elections and gives not just their atta-boy endorsement, but also a fair amount of cold hard cash to the person it sees as most sympathetic to its cause.  Seems innocent enough.  We’ve learned the hard way though that nothing is ever what it seems here in Riverside, and so we decided to start digging.

Turns out, Ms. Whatley wears several hats in town: one of them happens to be Councilman Gardner’s former campaign manager.  We hear that she’s been telling folks, including publicly at a recent Latino Network event, that she’s Gardner’s CURRENT campaign manager!

whatley service

THE NOT-SO-SECRET LIFE OF BECKY WHATLEY

 

Another hat Ms. Whatley adorns is that of small business owner, running a local printing company: Quality Printing. [Sarcasm alert] Surprise, surprise, Whatley has been getting paid by Councilman Gardner to do his mailings, invitations, and response envelopes!  She was also instrumental on setting up Gardner’s fundraiser on February 11, 2015, being reimbursed for drinks and desserts.

quality printing

 

gardner 460       gardnerb 460

A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, BUSINESS AS USUAL, OR BOTH? 

 

So….Ms. Whatley was Councilman Gardner’s campaign manager during his last election.  She was cavorting about town telling folks she is currently his campaign manager.  She is organizing his fundraisers and getting paid thousands to print his campaign materials.  Meanwhile, she was presenting herself to newbie challenger Tom Podgorski as the non-biased, Political Coordinator of the local SEIU, hoping he would never catch on….well, at least until it was too late.

Rumor has it Mr. Podgorski was given the run-around in the days leading up to this Town Hall meeting.  Dates were changed, questionnaires required at the last second, etc., etc., eventually leading him to cancel his participation in the event all-together and forgo the SEIU’s endorsement.  Too bad, because we bet the SEIU’s membership would’ve liked his message…but that’s exactly what the other side didn’t want.  So, Podgorski was given a Hobson’s choice: waste his time participating in a rigged scheme, or drop out.  To his credit, he chose the latter.

We hope Mr. Podgorski is familiar with Aesop’s Fables.  This lesson is entitled The Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing.

wolf   gardner endorsements

DID THE SEIU GET USED?  OR WAS IT “IN” ON THE GAME FROM THE ONSET?

As you can also see from the above image, Mike Gardner is supported by Ward 7 Candidate, John Burnard, and vice versa.  It’s just how the game works: you scratch my back with donations and endorsements, I’ll scratch yours with votes and appointments (Ms. Whatley serves as Gardner’s choice for the Parks & Recreation Commission).  It’s the dirty pool that’s been played in Riverside for quite a long time now…we’re just shining a light on it in all it’s despicable glory.  If you want change, vote for Tom Podgorski in Ward 1 and Alysia Webb in Ward 7.  Unless you’ve been dealt “in” on the fixed game, we don’t see how you can afford not to.

It almost goes without saying whom the SEIU eventually ended up endorsing, but we figured we’d show you anyway, on the slick mailer Ms. Whatley most likely put together for him:

gardner mailer

RIVERSIDE’S MOST WANTED, GARDNER ENDORSERS, OR BOTH?

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST, “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

vote2015

 

Strategic planning, rising utility rates, public participation encouragement vs. discouragement, redevelopment wind down, the legality of tiered pricing on our utility bills, $400 million in underfunded pension liabilities, customer service, additional taxes to renovate the main library, the trolley, transparency and marijuana: these are just some of the 2015-16 election issues.

In anticipation of the upcoming June decision, Thirty Miles of Corruption has decided to take a thorough look at all the candidates.  But first, we’d like to talk about what their endorsements really mean…

When a candidate is supported by the Service Employees International Union, Riverside Police Officers Association, Riverside City Firefighters Association, etc., etc., in return for their money and in-kind support, they will expect you to vote in their best interests. The union-backed candidate is expected to favor of ever-higher salaries, perks & pensions. The endgame to that is a lower quality of life for the general public through either higher taxes or cuts in services. Its classic, “pay to play,” politics.

The candidates in the 2015 race that have this support are Mike Gardner and John Burnard. These are the go-along-to-get-along candidates. This is the “Lazy Money”, usually demonstrated by the amble cash on hand they use to send out all those mailers that end up filling up your trash. We call it lazy money because it usually makes a candidate lethargic when it comes to doing any real work during a campaign. When the voting public see these kind of endorsements on a candidates’ support page, we believe its almost necessary from a self-preservation perspective to vote against them. This kind of support is what has perpetuated political favors, and is the ugly side of politics.

A vote for a union candidate is a vote for unsustainable spending, plain and simple, in our opinion.

When the City-insider interests wants a candidate to win, a familiar pattern emerges: the unions will donate a lot of money. It’s an, “us against them,” kind of mentality, Citizens vs. City-insiders.  Take for instance, the case of Valerie Hill vs. Mike Soubirous.  Ms. Hill cleaned up on endorsements that race: almost $100,000 in total.  She had all the fancy flyers and her signs were everywhere. Soubirous did the real work, shoe leather to pavement, with a small fraction of the endorsement money.  He connected with all citizens in Ward 3 and won handily.

So what did the Riverside Police Officers Union (RPOA), City Manager Scott Barber, and Police Chief Diaz decide to do then, sorry losers that they are? They started a bogus investigation with the help of Mayor Rusty Bailey, Steve Adams, Jim Perry, Chris MacArthur, Mike Gardner, and Andy Melendrez and wasted $100,000 of taxpayer money. It’s the kind of retaliation we’ve grown so accustomed to seeing in this City – all paid for on the public’s dime.

But something different happened that time. Mike Soubirous, with help from Paul Davis (also accused of doing his job in direct conflict with the City-insiders’ wishes) won again.  An enraged public smelled a rat and convinced a thoroughly-embarrassed Council to drop the case all-together.  And in doing so, they exposed the dirty deeds of the RPOA, Chief of Police and City Manager Scott Barber, who ended up resigning in disgrace over the issue (aka, “retiring early,” at our dear City).

As long as we allow this culture to exist by voting for the “endorsed” candidates who do not have the general public’s best interests at heart, the retaliation and lousy customer service our City has become known for will never change. VOTE NO ON UNION/CHAMBER ENDORSEMENTS.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “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