Was City Manager Brad Hudson Allowed to Dismss an Ethics Complaint by the City Government?

UPDATE: Riverside Police Department wins $5 million in COPS grant money to fund 15 officer positions.

[press release]

The Riverside Police Department has been awarded a $5,140,185 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) office. The COPS grant provides funds to hire 15 full-time, entry-level police officer positions. “This grant will assist the Riverside Police Department to fight crime while enhancing our community policing and crime prevention efforts, keeping our neighborhoods safe”, said Chief of Police Sergio G. Diaz.

The grant funds will provide 100 percent funding for entry-level salaries and benefits for 15 full-time officers over a period of 36 months. The city will be required to retain all of the grant funded positions for a minimum of 12 months at the conclusion of the grant funded period.

The Department of Justice awarded $298 million to fund the hiring of 1,388 law enforcement officers throughout the country. Due to the high demand and limited funding available, only 379 requests or 8% of applicants were funded. The City of Riverside received the second largest award in California for a police department, while the City of San Jose received the highest funding (16 officers).

The police department will initiate the hiring process for these new police officers in the very near future.



UPDATE: City Attorney Gregory Priamos in vehicle accident last night. Car struck by another car and is at corporation yard.





UPDATE: Another power outage hits thousands of people in Riverside after a substation "malfunctioned" somewhere around University. The city has been impacted by power outages during and apparently after the record heat wave sizzled the city several days ago. Ancient transformer equipment blew out during the 114 temperature several days ago knocking out power for over 2 1/2 hours. Some of these areas of the city used to see 5-6 lengthy power outages every summer. Hope at least those days are over.








[The City Hall in Riverside where apparently the city manager can revoke an ethics complaint according to comments he made in the local newspaper]





Not long ago, the La Sierra/Arlanza Neighborhood Alliance filed an ethics complaint against Riverside City Councilman Steve Adams for engaging in a violation of Section 107 of the city's charter which prohibits interference in administrative service. It was his second such complaint to be filed against him in less than a month's time. Since then, allegations have arisen from another La Sierra based community organization that Adams attended one of its recent meetings and tried to control it but the moderator told him no.

This complaint was detailed in this blog posting and it was also detailed at a site called Our La Sierra. soon after it allegedly happened in earlier September. Earlier, Adams had a complaint filed against him for administrative interference involving the promotional process of two police captains in 2005 and 2008 of which misconduct was alleged in lawsuits filed by two former police lieutenants. Extensive depositions taken in relation to the lawsuits detailed conflicting versions of these events by Adams and city employees including former Police Chief Russ Leach.

Response to the revocation of these ethics complaints by various factions at City Hall has been fairly vigorous since the blog postings detailing these events were published so these are incidents which have attracted a lot of attention from many people in this city. But then 2010 so far has been a year which has unfortunately not been one of Riverside's best or brightest.




[Riverside Councilman Steve Adams had two recent complaints filed against him for administrative interference which were both tossed out by various parties at City Hall.]




[Mayor Ron Loveridge heads the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee which hears ethics complaints filed against elected officials. Where was he when City Manager Brad Hudson disqualified a complaint?]






[Riverside City Manager Brad Hudson said he instructed two city employees to leave a LANA meeting instead of give a scheduled presentation but also said he dismissed an ethics complaint filed against Adams in relation to the meeting.]




LANA apparently refiled on its earlier complaint this time changing the text to say that Hudson had been told by Adams to tell the employees to leave the meeting. That was covered by the Press Enterprise but what's really shocking about the article are these statements apparently made at some point by Hudson.



(excerpt)

The alliance first filed a complaint Sept. 13. City Manager Brad Hudson responded last week with an e-mail, saying Adams had received complaints that the group "was misrepresenting (its) scope and authority," and was there to give information. Hudson wrote that he, not Adams, decided not to let staff members give their presentation, and so he was dismissing the complaint.

The city charter says council members are not to interfere in personnel matters or give staff orders.

Okay, so what authority does the city's ethics code and complaint process in this ordinance give to the city manager to dismiss complaints filed against elected officials? The city manager's role is to be involved in being invited to participate in the Code's annual review. The role of deciding on ethics complaints involving ethics complaints is assigned to the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee which unfortunately has been extremely reluctant to embrace that rule handing off that responsibility to City Attorney Gregory Priamos (who's role is to be "advising" not arbitrating on complaints) in violation of the city's own ordinance governing the committee.

That violation wasn't addressed by the city government until last year's ethics code and complaint review. But now is this an example of once again a complaint that's vetoed by a party outside the established process of hearing ethics complaints because there's no role that's to be played by the city manager in dismissing ethics complaints. Hudson's employers, the city council and Loveridge should immediately investigate the handling of this complaint to determine whether Hudson really dismissed it and then provide a public reporting on their inquiries to city residents. Because Hudson may be viewed as omniscient by the people who are supposed to be his bosses at City Hall despite all the transgressions that have taken place in City Hall under his watch since he first arrived from Riverside County in mid-2005 but no elected officials, he doesn't have the power to dismiss ethics complaints involving his own employers. But it's part of what many city residents think when they watch what's going on in the building that belongs to them, scratch their heads and wonder who's really in charge there.


Is the dog wagging the tail or the tail wagging the dog? Perhaps an answer to that question will be provided during next year's election cycle.

This complaint should have gone to the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee to be handled. As flawed as that process is and has certainly proven to be (mostly by not doing its assigned job), that's what the ordinance states. The complaint has issues because some can argue that because the wife of the main challenger against Adams for his seat was in attendance at the meeting and that issue would no doubt be addressed by the Committee during the hearing on the complaint. But one could also argue that if the allegations of the LANA complaint are true, that Adams targeted that particular meeting to grandstand at precisely for that reason. But by having Hudson running around and canceling complaints in lieu of having them appropriately handled by the Committee, it just makes it look worse with him anyway like he's manipulating the handling of a meeting to silence it and also one of his direct city employees to essentially shut the meeting down.

One can agree or disagree with the content of the LANA complaint or whether or not it should or shouldn't file it but what should be agreed upon is that if Hudson actually dismissed the complaint as he claimed in an email sent to the local publication, then he acted outside his own scope as the city manager and that once again, the ethics code and complaint process was circumvented by City Hall. If people argue that LANA's complaint was simply a political attack for a councilman running for reelection next year, then people can also ask whether the circumvention of the code's complaint process was done to protect the political campaign of that same councilman. But if it's true about Hudson's role (and if it's not is he lying then?) then it's becoming abundantly clear that the city council's not leading Hudson, Hudson's leading the city council and Loveridge. And those individuals who are set to vote in next year's round of city council elections need to ask themselves if this is really the type of "leadership" they want from their elected representatives before going to the election polls.

Hopefully, there's at least one elected official who will remember his or her role in the municipal pecking order and will address this situation immediately. But then there hasn't been much leadership from the Seventh Floor (outside of Hudson of course) when it's come to the scandal after scandal which have come to light making Riverside the second biggest laughing stock in the state behind Bell.


Is this blog or the Press Enterprise attacking Adams simply by pointing out the obvious? Some individuals closely tied to the political figures at City Hall might think so but should the city's daily publication really be sitting on its hands when all this takes place? Is that really the effective and responsible way for a media outlet to seek the truth? This blog is not launching any form of "aggressive campaign" against Adams or anyone else, it's just difficult to ignore after reading hundreds of pages of material on what's been going on in City Hall since at least 2005 to notice that in several cases, the trail points back to Adams. Why is his name popping up in association with allegations and documentation of some of those allegations from influencing police promotions to alleging that he was an undercover police officer in Newport Beach to cold plating his vehicle? In contrast, many fewer allegations of misconduct have been made against Councilwoman Nancy Hart for example. Her name doesn't keep popping up as the subject of nearly as many allegations.

What the allegations show is that there's a clear pattern of alleged misconduct including illegal conduct coming from inside City Hall whether it's illegal weapons sales needing to be laundered only after being investigated by the state or flat badges (also illegal)being produced for city employees and apparently for elected officials as well. The city's already seen the resignation of Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis who had his finger in most of these incidents, his fingers in the destruction of public documents under request by the local newspaper (despite having worked as a public information officer for years with Riverside County) and side deals made or attempted with police employees who either sued or threatened to sue the city over what had been doing on in the wake of the Feb. 8 traffic stop involving former police chief, Russ Leach.

Asleep at the switch has been the Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco who should have assigned his Public Integrity Unit to look at some of the allegations coming out of City Hall not to mention having investigators look into whether any of those who testified in deposition for the lawsuits filed by former Lts. Tim Bacon and Darryl Hurt perjured themselves given the vastly contradictory testimony provided by some of them in connection to different allegations of misconduct including the cold plates. Several years ago, criminal charges were filed in San Bernardino County against a former Riverside Police Department officer for perjury on a deposition so why is there not a similar investigation taking place here given that the questionable testimony pertains to that surrounding criminal allegations involving different parties.

But still waiting in the wings is a federal lawsuit filed by another former police detective that will at some point begin its own deposition process and allegedly some witnesses are set to make star appearances to testify on some of these allegations raised by Bacon and Hurt including the cold plates scandal. Some say that's why DeSantis had been so eager to work out a retirement package for this former employee which included about $125,000 payment. That deal was rejected by the city council in a closed session some time back, when members told DeSantis they didn't want to hear about it but wanted Chief Sergio Diaz to address it. Diaz wisely said it was out of his hands including to members of the leadership of the police union.

It will be very interesting to see what develops there but if the depositions turn out to be as interesting as predicted, it will most likely be the city council next time that wants to make this lawsuit go away.

It's truly impossible after reviewing information including documents the past year to really stop thinking, stop seeing and pick up the pom poms and engage in a rah rah cheer for City Hall and its denizens. Too much damage has been done, too much has been covered up by the people entrusted by the city's residents to be accountable and transparent in their leadership and too much remains unaddressed. And nearly everyone it seems is just waiting for the next shoe to drop and you better believe it's out there somewhere.

It's late 2010 in River City, the town that wanted to be a metropolises that never sleeps. No doubt there's attempts right now in City Hall to make sure the public that owns that building an offers four-year leases out to those who occupy its highest floor doesn't find out what else is hiding beneath its rather lumpy rug. You can take that to the bank because just take a look at the pattern and practice so far. This blog isn't here to make City Hall happy or to promote what's going on inside its walls. There are plenty of individuals out there to do just that while closing their eyes to what's been going on. Illegal conduct comes out as taking place and they'll say don't look at that, focus on the very pretty tree over there. This just isn't that kind of blog. Adams himself called it the "what's brown that's flushed down" at a public city council meeting several years ago and this blogger's been called a "dog and pony show" (while being very impressed that Adams managed to sit still for the entire public comment) because he was really angry for having to go to a lawyer's office before that meeting to be deposed for a lawsuit.

Adams makes his contributions but he's had his allegations against misconduct against him too that seem to persist even as City Hall continues to white wash them or have individuals like Hudson apparently inappropriately involve themselves in the ethic's code and complaint process. Remember Hudson was in the dog house for a while after his involvement in the guns, plates and badges came to light. He was subject to a non-routine performance evaluation in July (instead of waiting for the regular one at the end of the calendar year) and so he knows that his survival depends solely on his ability to keep at least four members of the city council on his string and happy enough to ignore his more problematic tendencies. And so far, he's proven to be greatly successful at doing that but as election year approaches, the same politicians in his court have to start thinking about their own political survival so will they continue to laud him or cut bait especially if any more transgressions come to light?

But what the city government needs to do is to follow the appropriate process for receiving and processing ethics complaints which isn't having them dismissed by Hudson. If not, the city council needs to issue a public statement why it's allowing for the hijacking of the process by one of its direct employees. It can answer that question or four of its members can wait and answer that question next year on the election trail. Because what kind of city allows ethics complaints against those in its highest positions, which are elected officials, be dismissed by one of direct employees. They tried that with Priamos with earlier complaints and were caught violating the ordinance and when caught, the city council averred that it would allow the Committee to handle and decide on ethics complaints. But what the city council has essentially done now is to hand off that job yet again to another city employee instead of keeping it with its own subcommittee assigned that task.

What's happened in Bell has made everyone look closer at their own representative governments as they should. That should include Riverside.

And remember folks what you know now about your city and its scandals, you were never, ever supposed to know including about Leach's vehicle incident let alone anything else that came to light in this, the Year of Scandal in the All American City (tm).

Another City Union Leader Steps Down

[Riverside city employee, Gregory Hagans to retire on Oct. 14]

SEIU union leader and city employee Gregory Hagans will be retiring from the city's work force by Oct. 14 after decades of service for the city including years spent working in the Park and Recreation Division.

In a city now helmed by a city manager that's not union friendly, Hagans had to represent many employees in grievances and will be representing a human resources employee in a grievance to be heard by the Human Resources Board on Oct. 4, its first such hearing in many years. But Hagans faced many challenges during his tenure on the SEIU's leadership team as the city's largest bargaining group had to address the challenges by city management to terms of its MOU labor agreement with City Hall. Hagans was also one of a group of Black city employees to file lawsuits against the city in 1997 alleging racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation.

With former presidents of both the Riverside Police Officers' Association and Riverside Police Administrators' Associations having filed lawsuits against the city for retaliation against them, news of Hagans' own retirement came quite suddenly. But he's now got more time to focus on an election campaign to run for the Water Board.







A campaign forum is being held for Menifee political candidates.



Records were broken all over the south land during a sizzling day of heat. Two localized power outages took place in Canyon Crest and the area near Tyler Mall.








Flags were at half mast in city facilities in Riverside in memory of the life and death of former judge, Victor Micili whose funeral will be today. He was heavily involved in many projects including the Evergreen Cemetery renovation and the implementation of Riverside's Ethics Code and complaint process by serving on the research process. If the city officials are so into honoring the life of this man, maybe they could pay more than lip service to that code.




Suicide inside the NFL

River City: Why the Ethics Code is Worth Less Than a Bucket of Warm Spit

[The directions given for the DUI checkpoint at the University and Park intersection in the Eastside, the most common location for similar checkpoints among the city's 28 neighborhoods according to stats provided on the DUI checkpoints going back several years.]








[Riverside Police Chief Sergio Diaz (l.) observes a DUI checkpoint being conducted at University and Park in the Eastside on Sept. 25 shortly after a controversial checkpoint conducted just outside St. Catherine's Church near Brockton.]





[Riverside Police Sgt. Duane May and Lt. Guy Toussaint from the Traffic Division supervise the DUI Checkpoint where four DUI arrests were conducted and 33 vehicles impounded.]





Even though there's a certain bar that's very well known and is located in the Riverside Plaza that allegedly has been the scene of numerous drunken brawls requiring police response, the Riverside Plaza area has seen very few DUI checkpoints even though city employees are among those who patronage it. In contrast, St. Catherine's Church was the focus of a recent DUI checkpoint where everyone attending the church had to leave through the DUI checkpoint. Maybe concerns that they hit the communal wine a bit too hard? It's great that drunken drivers have been arrested and taken out of circulation albeit not nearly enough of them but is a Catholic church the best place to roust them out?

How about spreading the checkpoints to other areas of the city including Wood Street where a woman cycling was the victim of a fatal hit and run several years ago in the early morning hours. Her killing still remains unsolved. And also run the checkpoints a bit later and end them later, when there are quite a few inebriated drinkers driving home from bars and strip clubs. Because when these businesses close, the inebriated patrons have to find some way to get home and many of them get behind the wheels of their cars that brought them there.

Just a thought from someone who was in a car accident involving a DUI driver. Not to mention going after businesses which knowingly sell alcohol to minors and also to inebriated individuals which unfortunately is still common in Riverside. Treat businesses with high police calls from drunken brawls more harshly in every area of the city including businesses in the Riverside Plaza, near Tyler Mall and remember that brawl where a man was nearly killed within 50 feet of a police station? The city's actually getting sued in state court over the latter incident which took place at Events near Magnolia and La Sierra.

The DUI checkpoints are funded through federal and state grants.

Ethics Complaints: Rejected

Hudson Takes Blame for Adams






"Someone ought to give Hudson a medal for jumping on that grenade for Adams."

---commenter at PE.com





I'm not buying Hudson's latest attempt to deceive. There's a simple way to prove it, however. A look at Hudson's cell phone records would show if he ever got a call from Adams, or his Public Works employees, that night. Even if the City wouldn't turn over the phone records to the newspaper, at least some Councilmen should ask him to show them so they will know the truth at least.

----commenter at PE.com





Naw, he owns Adams.
He will probably have him out washing his car this weekend.


---commenter

Sorry the deadline was missed. But damage was still done. What a way to get out of things. How can anyone truly trust Adams. The voters should not.

----commenter

If a complaint is filed with the Governmental Affairs Committee, then it needs to be considered by them and not the City Manager. It is always the same Councilmembers who find themselves at odds with the citizens and it always the same people who come to their rescue. Why did the City Manager make the decision to have the city staffers leave this meeting? Did the reporter who wrote this story ask this simple question? Did the Councilmember influence his decision? Perhaps, all of those who are involved in this matter should release their phone records. But then again, maybe this is why the Governmental Affairs Committe should have looked into this matter. This is how our City government works and until we the electorate vote these people out of office, we have no one to blame except ourselves. Maybe this will energize those voters to make this happen!!

– Delete – Edit – Moderate

----commenter

the east side think tank didn't think this through too well. what stupidity and sloppiness on their part!!

EPIC FAIL!!!!!

the riverside coalition for police accountability is similarly incompetent. good job on accounting. you can't even count days.

EPIC FAIL!!!!!

who are the blowhard gasbags that can't stand to not hear themselves opine, but ignore something as basic as how to file a complaint?

HAA!

useless malcontents. that's why they are not in positions of power or authority. that's why they are relegated to rabble-rousing, serving at the charity of the city government.

---commenter

Loveridge says he is on his way out by his own choice. Good Riddance- take your phoney baloney Emerald City plan with you.

Andy Meledrez has said he will be running for Mayor next. He shouldn't be mayor. His concerns lay with the under privileged in our city, i.e. anchor babies and their illegal families.As if that's not enough, he has a smile that can kill a goat. A small time cover up is the least of strikes against the Sanctuary City Councilman.

---"MayIseeyourID"

[because of course being Latino means you're for Sanctuary Cities which incidentally Melendrez has never advocated for in his council tenure. ]

....ooops! Your Coupon has Expired. It was only good for 30 days. Some limitations may apply. Read fine print for details. Only one registered complaint per household. Some restrictions apply. Consult your City Council for details. Must be over 18. Limitations are subject to change without prior notice. Void where prohibited.

---Commenter, Pe.com

A time frame does not negate Adams offense.

THIS MAKES ME SICK to my stomach.
Mayor Ron Loveridge and Councilman Andy Melendrez need to get their heads out, and stop patronizing foul play. Shame on you two!

The city government official need to be held accountable for BREAKING the LAW.

City government isn't a Target or Walmart, no returns after 30 days BS.

Ed Adkison will my vote when he runs for mayor, and NOT Melendrez!

---Commenter

i would like to know who adams claims complained abput the LANA group. ive been to all the meetings and they have NEVER once misrepresnted themselves. this seems more like ADAMS this seems to me more like the fact Steve doesnt like that Brandriff is running against him. i saw his tirade in the parking lot after he came out. i was not impressed with his behavior. i was a supporter of steve adams, but the more i learn less i like!


---commenter





This seems yet another example of Mr. Hudson's bully tactics. I don't personally know Mr. Hudson but he seems to dismiss any critisism of the way the city is run. This story alone shows him dismissing pertenant groups opinions simply because he claims they aren't properly recognized by the city for not going through proper procedures. The citizens of this city should wake up and demand accountability. If the city manager can dismiss complaints and expeect people just to back down on his command, this city is in really bad shape.

---Commenter





Another example of the fox guarding the hen house and then having its way with them. What's quite fascinating is Brad Hudson now Steve Adam's boss now. He made the decision to tell Councilman Steve Adams to go to this meeting, with the City Attorney Greg Priamos. DOES ANYBODY SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? This is going beyond Bell.

So everyone acknowledged the facts in the deposition, it was just a time issue? Where were those depositions released, on the City website, come on Andy. The settlement with Hurt and Bacon was supposed the prevent the release of this info. Add this to the cold plates and all his other questionable behavior including him not even living in the Ward for several years and we have ourselves a real “winner”. Let me get this straight this guy is involved with criminal and unethical activity and our Firefighters and Police are endorsing him. Really?





Mr. Adams was not at the meeting as a resident. He never even used to go to any meetings until he recently moved back into the Ward. Now with the coming election he feels the need to go to these meetings and try to take over. He was at an RRR (residents for responsible representation) meeting the other evening and again tried to take over. Fortunately the moderator would not play along so Mr. Adams resorted to belittling a resident who had done a presentation on graffiti. This young man has been, on his own time, been trying to keep the graffiti problem at bay and has even collected a $1000 reward from the City for his efforts. Mr. Adams was obviously enraged that he could not take over so I suspect that when it happened again at the LANA (la sierra arlanza neighborhood alliance) meeting he used his power to pull the City workers away from the meeting. There was also another posting on the other ethics article that stated Mr. Adams is being endorsed by the firefighters and police. I hope this is not true because I have respect for the police and fireman and would hate to think they would give him any money.





Former Vice-President John Nance Garner once said that the vice-presidency wasn't worth a bucket of warm piss. Well, the same thing could be said about Riverside's Ethics Code and Complaint process which in its brief history has provided quite a few examples of exactly why the process shouldn't be left up to the city council and mayor

But the ethics code and complaint process in Riverside's not worth a bucket of warm spit. It's become a tool that's actually used by individuals in City Hall to avoid accountability. And it's not clear that some individuals on the dais have learned from the travails of the Year of Scandal which isn't quite over yet. They will learn this lesson next year at the election polls.



This really isn't news but allegedly, City Hall has once again decided not to conduct hearings of multiple ethics complaints filed against Riverside City Councilman Steve Adams for violation of the section of the charter which prohibits elected officials from engaging in administrative interference. At least two other complaints filed previously against Adams several years ago were disqualified on technicalities including one where complaints wouldn't be filed by third-parties or witnesses to the behavior. The rejection of all the complaints against Adams had been reported here in the prior blog posting.

Adams as has been stated in previous blog posting had two ethics complaints filed against him by the Community Coalition for allegedly violating the city's charter by involving himself in the promotional processes of two police captains in 2005 and 2008. He also faced a complaint for allegedly impersonating an undercover police officer (according to sworn testimony in a deposition) during an incident involving his cold-plated, city-issued vehicle in Newport Beach. That complaint was rejected by City Hall.

In addition, the La Sierra/Arlanza Neighborhood Alliance filed another complaint against him for administrative interference in relation to a disturbing incident which took place at one of its meetings in early September. The fate of the LANA complaint was decided when City Manager Brad Hudson belatedly said he had decided not to let two staff members give a presentation at the LANA meeting not Adams. Very interesting development indeed, weeks after the controversial incident take place at the LANA meeting. It would be interesting to know what really motivated Hudson's sudden announcement in River City. What would be interesting would be to know whether or not the city staff members ever explained to the LANA group members why they abruptly left a meeting where they were scheduled to give a presentation and why was it around the time that Adams did after he was seen speaking with them? Why did Adams and City Attorney Gregory Priamos attend the meeting and not Hudson? It sounds an awful lot like one of the city council's direct employees covering for the behavior of one of his bosses. It wouldn't be the first time.

Officially, the first two complaints were denied in writing by a staff member of Mayor Ron Loveridge's office but allegedly there was some involvement by City Attorney Gregory Priamos as well. The listed reason was that the alleged behavior took place more than 30 days before the complaint was filed which is the statutory period according to the municipal ordinance. But what this very narrow window does is ensure that if elected officials engage in ethical violations or other misconduct, if they cover their tracks well and aren't transparent to city residents, then they're in the clear.

Rather than promote accountability and transparency among elected officials, this requirement only promotes corruption by rewarding individuals for doing a good job at keeping misconduct under wraps and from coming out in any public arena. The behavior in the complaint did happen earlier but didn't come to light until much later because efforts were made at City Hall including paying out tax dollars on civil litigation filed by two former police lieutenants to keep it from ever coming to light. When elected officials, city management and a police chief knew that there were strong indications that Adams had engaged in charter violations pertaining to the promotions of Capt. John Carpenter and Capt. Meredyth Meredith, were any efforts made to provide accountability and transparency in either case by anyone at City Hall?

Sworn testimony under penalty of perjury make it clear that three individuals provided a fairly similar account of events while another, Adams came up with somewhat different testimony pertaining to the first two ethics complaints filed against him. But then there's other problems in the deposition with conflicting testimony including that of former Police Chief Russ Leach and former Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis regarding the cold plate scandals. Perhaps DeSantis is pondering this from his special assignment which he's allegedly doing from his home.


So far from actually discouraging corrupt and unethical behavior by denizens at City Hall, the Ethics Code and Complaint process actually through rewarding those who cover their tracks well from the public eye encourages those forms of behavior. All under the guise of the city claiming that it's doing something about it.



[Multiple ethics complaints filed against Councilman Steve Adams alleging charter violations are once again bypassing hearing dates with the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee]







[Mayor Ron Loveridge has denied at least two ethics complaints filed against Adams and has not responded to a third complaint filed against the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee for engaging in conflict of interest for hearing the complaints on Adams, a Committee member who's been allegedly been endorsed for reelection by other Committee members and elected officials.]





[Councilman and Governmental Affairs Committee Chair Andrew Melendrez allegedly played a role in denying the first two ethics complaints. ]





[Riverside City Manager Brad Hudson jumps on the bayonet for Adams, belatedly saying, "I did it", when it came to ordering city employees to depart from the LANA meeting. Yeah right, and there's some lovely beach property in Idaho. ]




When the Press Enterprise first wrote about the badges, guns and cold plates scandals, one of the councilmen who had his car plated, Adams, dismissed the revelations as "old news" and he's right because to City Hall, it was all old news. It was much older news to them than most of the city's residents because the scandals didn't come to light until several years after most of them had taken place including an illegal gun sale that had to be redone through a private dealer and the illegal uses of both cold plates and flat badges for city management employees and elected officials.

If the complaints should have been filed when the scandals took place beginning in 2005, they probably would have been filed during those time periods if City Hall had been forthcoming with the behavior taking place within its walls and not kept it hidden from the city's residents. But City Hall chose to put a shroud on unethical and illegal conduct to keep the public from every finding out. The city council even decided to settle the two lawsuits in an attempt to keep the guns, plates and badges scandal as well as the alleged charter violations buried but as history has shown, the opposite took place. The scandals which admittedly were several years old finally came to light.

The ethics code complaint filed against Adams on the alleged charter violations involving two police captain promotions did finally break the veil erected by City Hall on that conduct allegedly by the councilman. Steps hopefully have been taken so that candidates for promotion in the police department including at the upper management levels don't have to undergo such treatment from City Hall as faced by the two whose promotions by Leach allegedly faced interference from Adams.

But despite the use of the code to reward city officials and employees who successfully cover up unethical and illegal behavior and misconduct for a period of longer than 30 days, the Ethics Code and Complaint process is rife with other problems including the use of the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee to hear the complaints and the misuse of the city attorney to disqualify complaints rather than serving in his role as an "adviser" on the code.

Guarding the Hen House

[Once again, an ethics complaint bypasses its proper hearing venue, the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee which serves as the body which receives and hears ethics complaints. This committee has been the subject of two complaints alleging conflict of interest for being allowed to hear complaints involving elected officials. ]



Very few ethics complaints that have been filed have actually been heard. Nearly a dozen were submitted and only three ever reached the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee. Most others were disqualified by Priamos' office for some reason or another and in one case, one was disqualified because even though the councilman was acting in that capacity getting ready to make a speech at the Fox Theater across the street from where he allegedly threatened a city resident, Priamos said the complaint didn't apply and then a month later, the involved council member, Dom Betro and former councilman, Frank Schiavone through Governmental Affairs Committee voted to pass the so-called "anti-24/7" language which was approved by the full city council some months later.

It was revoked at the Sept. 21 city council meeting where the creation of a committee of board and commission chairs (and Group member, Jennifer Vaughn-Blakely) was created to review the code and complaint process. But the rejection of the complaints filed against Adams show that the code and complaint process as it stands has very little real value. The time limit of 30 days from the alleged incident accomplishes nothing but to reward those who are most successful at covering up or keeping their corrupt behavior under wraps. It encourages the circling of wagons of elected officials to prevent the public from finding about corruption and other misconduct from within their midst.

The rejection of the LANA complaint against Adams simply shows that the dynamic which encourages corruption by having direct employees take the blame for their employer's behavior still exists and becomes more clear when any alleged misconduct or ethical violations come to light. It shows that the dynamic which has put the city of Riverside on the map as a den of problematic behavior inside its City Hall is alive and well in River City. The breakdown and dilution of one of several mechanisms that the city residents have to keep their city officials accountable is but the canary in the mine clearly showing that larger problems in City Hall remain to be uncovered. Many people wonder as this latest year prepares to wind down, what's next behind the curtain. But whether Hudson and company at City Hall intended it or not, the shutdown of the LANA complaint actually casts Adams in a worse light than if the complaint would have been sent to be decided by the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee as heavily defective as that process has proven to be. The single most important action that the Ethics Code and Complaint process has shown since voters put it in the city's charter in late 2007 is that there's ethical problems at City Hall to greater degrees than most people ever knew. If there weren't, then the ordinance wouldn't have been violated at least twice by City Hall and there would have been creation of an independent panel to hear them.

But still firmly in place among city residents is the power to vote and it's anticipated that the first round of city council elections in June 2010 could even as a mail in election see huge voter participation and it's even more so forecast that the voters in the city of Riverside will be sending a loud message to City Hall. How many pink slips will be handed out in the third round of elections that have served as house cleaning at City Hall and already sent three former council members into early retirement? Remember, those pink slips were issued before all this disgusting and embarrassing conduct came to light earlier this year.

So while the code continues to die on the vine, when it comes to Election 2011, Bring it On!



To be Continued....

Hudson's Manager Salary Second Only to Bell's

First there's Bell, then Riverside...in terms of how much money the city managers are paid.

Hudson pockets a total salary and benefit package of $419,000 annually.





Riverside loses the second round of that foolish lawsuit it has against several Southern California port cities. Round three of this lawsuit will cost the tax payers more money especially if the city's required to pay the legal fees which it only has to do when lawsuits are deemed to be frivolous.




Parallels to Bell, so writes Cassie MacDuff of the Press Enterprise.




Columnist Dan Bernstein writes about the passing of a judge.


Has Menifee's elected officials been spending too much money?




Should corrupt-plagued San Bernardino County get a new sunshine law?

No Riverside City Council Meeting This Week: Fifth Tuesday



Next meeting, Tuesday, Oct. 5





Airline pilots, no one thinks about them until situations like this happen but many beginning pilots rely on food stamps due to low salaries from which their uniforms and training costs are deducted.

City Hall Reads Writing on Wall; Revokes 24/7 Language from Ethics Code

UPDATE: Will City Manager Brad Hudson and City Attorney Gregory Priamos arbitrarily dismiss all the complaints against Councilman Steve Adams based on technicalities? What happened to the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee for complaints on elected officials and why is once again the decision coming out of offices outside that process?






[The location of the most recent discussion and decision making on the Riverside's Ethics Code and Complaint Process]




The same day that city officials were arrested en masse in Bell including those in city management as well as on the dais, the Riverside City Council voted on several motions involving the review of its own Code of Ethics and complaint process. In a sharp contrast to a year ago, they voted to eradicate the so-called "24-7" language passed in late 2007 by the city council and reaffirmed in a narrow 4-3 vote last year.

That vote was changed to 7-0 in favor of striking the "24/7" language, which was introduced initially in a Governmental Affairs meeting in the summer of 2007 including by a council member who had been the subject of an ethics complaint that had been squashed by the City Attorney's office.

It was clear that the events of the past eight months played a significant role in the change of hearts of Council members, Rusty Bailey, Chris MacArthur, Nancy Hart and Steve Adams. All the city council members appeared at the city council meeting and all of them, even Adams remained planted in their chairs during the entire portion of public comment. Not at the meeting was City Manager Brad Hudson whose behavior including that involved in the guns, badges and cold plates scandals had led the charge for the inclusion of city administration in the ethics code.

After all, former Chief Russ Leach was "off-duty" during his DUI incident on Feb. 8 but did that really make a whole lot of difference in the damage that followed to the department and the city?

But whereas there was a huge debate on the issue last year, this year one by one the city council members including a visibly discomfited Adams said that they would vote to revoke it. The most adamant opponents to it last year had been Adams and MacArthur (who feared he might have complaints filed against him for his conduct on the campaign trail) with Hart and Bailey more or less trailing along on that vote.

Even at the Sept. 1 Governmental Affairs Committee the motion raised to strike that language elicited no enthusiasm from Adams or Bailey and didn't get through. Mayor Ron Loveridge kept that one alive by raising it in a letter to the committee supporting the removal of that language and in his initial comments on the agenda item at the city council meeting which set the tone for what would follow in a way that minimized conflict on the dais.



[Mayor Ron Loveridge opened up the discussion by outlining the agenda of the city government in the first couple of minutes and sets the stage for the removal of the "24/7" language.]







[Councilman Paul Davis proposed adding Group Chair Jennifer Vaughn-Blakeley to the ethics review committee, a move that stunned a couple of council members. ]






[Pulling a no-show at the meeting was City Manager Brad Hudson whose antics which came to light the past year have led to many of the calls for inclusion of city administration in the city's ethics code and complaint process. ]







The most interesting part of the evening had to be the part where there was discussion of the creation of this so-called review committee that would be established to review the code including conducting a review for "best practices" (which mirrors the work done by the original research committee) in the state. Adams complained initially that his ward might not be represented among the board and commission chairs and that Measure GG which states that all there shall be Representatives from every ward on every board and commission should be implemented. But what was interesting is that apparently he has so little knowledge of his own ward that he didn't know that apparently three of the chairs are from his ward and none were from Ward Four, which is Davis' ward. So the Measure GG rhetoric from Adams faded quite quickly with that knowledge.

Then Davis made the move of proposing that Jennifer Vaughn-Blakely be put on the committee and the reaction on the dais was fascinating. Adams naturally balked saying that her presence would "taint the pool" and open it up to other council members wanting to choose appointments. Melendrez first supported her inclusion then had second thoughts but ultimately, the city council voted 7-0 on the committee including the addition of Vaughn-Blakely who actually is probably the most qualified person in Riverside to serve on it.

Davis expressed strong confidence that Vaughn-Blakely would keep the process an accountable one. People had expressed concern about the appointment of the chairs of the city's boards and commissions to the committee given that they were appointed by the city council and mayor to their respective boards and commissions. However, city officials said that given that the chairs were picked by their peers, this would provide a layer of separation to the process. Others expressed concerns that there was so little turnout and even less input by the boards and commissions that they hadn't expressed enough interest in the process to preside over it. But that lack of responsiveness can work for or against the process. Lack of interest would certainly be a problem but then it could make them more objective as well, less vested in one direction or the other. It remains to be seen what will happen but it will be an interesting process to follow.

All meetings will be advertised and open to the public as well as receiving public input in the form of a hearing, Loveridge said.


The dates for the committee meetings haven't been set and a timeline was set of 60 days to meet and come up with a proposal to take to the Governmental Affairs Committee with a 45 turnaround between the committee and the city council. However, Loveridge said that either process could expand its timeline if it couldn't meet it leaving the process somewhat open to manipulation by the city government to trail it out further as the city appears for its next election cycle.


But if council members engage in such gamesmanship, it will be pretty clear to most of those paying attention and they might not be rewarded for that at election time. So with that in mind, they should proceed cautiously with this process and make sure that their political ambitions come a distant second to addressing some serious problems in City Hall.



There's been some complaints about the focusing on Riverside's transgressions in the past eight months stemming from the Feb. 8 DUI incident involving Leach. After all, this is Riverside, not Bell. But the thing about Bell, is that it didn't all happen the day before it came to light, Bell was some years in the making and it began with decisions which most likely violated civic ethics before any illegal acts were alleged to have been committed. It also resulted from a lack of engagement by Bell's residents which happened for a variety of reasons but even if they had been engaged and had enough transparency in their government to ask questions, they would have been dismissed as complainers, haters and gadflies. Some of them might have been ordered evicted from meetings or even arrested as happened to several "gadflies" in the oh-so-ethically-inclined San Bernardino County. Governments that are not doing what they're supposed to be doing, that are doing things they shouldn't be doing and are trying to hide either or both often display open hostility or disdain against the same residents they purport to represent and serve. After all, they've already done that in Bell apparently by voting themselves enormous salaries during one of the most difficult economic recessions in history and then defending them.

They may do the same to the men and women they employ in different city departments as well. Ironically, the beleaguered scandal-plagued neighboring city of Maywood had laid off all of its employees including its police department (on the eve of a consent decree with the state) and contracted the services to Bell. That contract was rescinded when the situation of corruption in Bell came to light. And for all the complaining about the media focusing on the negative aspects of cities and not the more positive ones, that's a point well taken but the situation in Bell only came to public attention after the Los Angeles Times (facing its own economic crisis through its parent company, Tribune Company) did a study of governmental salaries in Bell. One which rightfully shocked many people including those at the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office and Attorney General Jerry Brown. Investigations were launched by both offices and also the feds and the arrests were the outcome of the county's probe.

If it weren't for the Times, it's very likely that these officials would still be commanding these outrageous salaries, apparently ripping off the monies in the city's coffers and possibly even engaging in election and voter's fraud.

Riverside's too engaged at this point to be Bell because many people in this city are upset about what has happened in every ward and they have been vocal in complaining at City Hall and the police department (during the Leach incident and its aftermath) about what's happened. The happenings at City Hall during the ethics review by the city council and the striking of the 24/7 language are hopefully signs that there are people listening there. Because next year as many have stated, the ultimate ethics process comes into play called an election cycle which involves four councilmen who will be fighting to keep their seats amid a city where the political climate is somewhat different than one year ago. The police department is essentially being rebuilt from the fallout of Leach and its handling by City Hall since at least 2005.

It probably didn't ask for all the turmoil that it faced although there definitely signs of problems before Feb. 8 including the arrests and prosecutions of five police officers for on and off-duty conduct in a 14 month period that embarrassed many officers in the department not engaging in that conduct. The costs of what's happened in this city might not be comparable to Bell but only because a timeline of what was likely progressive misconduct was brought to light (some several years after the fact) before it could reach the point of Bell. Although it's really hard to say because it's not likely that the full extent of what happened at Riverside's City Hall has come to light. Also, the district attorney's office in Los Angeles County is more proactive than in Riverside County. After all, it's fairly clear that in the depositions which were taken of city officials and police employees in the lawsuits filed by former lieutenants, Tim Bacon and Darryl Hurt that perjury was committed by one or more parties, simply because not all versions of what happened could coexist or take place simultaneously.

There are accounts of the cold plates issue given by Hudson, departing Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis (whose office was stripped clean after his announced departure) and Leach that contradict each other so clearly someone or some individuals lied under oath when relating these events. Also there is testimony given by Adams that contradicts three other individuals who testified about the same thing including two captains promotions in the police department that he allegedly influenced and the incident involving him in Newport Beach.

So where's the investigation by the District Attorney's office into why the testimony contradicts. After all, a former Riverside Police Department officer, Laura Digiorgio was arrested, prosecuted (albeit in San Bernardino County) for perjury on a deposition and a jury convicted her. So why was she investigated for perjury on a deposition and not the individuals who testified in the Bacon and Hurt lawsuits? Shouldn't they be afforded the same circumstances of treatment as she had been or do they deserve protection from a probe because of their higher status?

Legal violations were uncovered by the State Attorney General's office involving the gun sale brokered by the police department, the acquisition of the conceal and carry weapon permits by the two management employees and the creation of flat badges for city management employees. This is stated clearly in letters written by a representative from that office's criminal division to Leach. But that office clearly gave the city the benefit of the doubt by treating them as "fix it" violations. Meaning that if these things were "fixed" including a gun sale that was clearly "laundered" through a private dealer (again upon reading available documentation including the sales form from the police department), then the state would take no further action for these violations. Whether people outside of city government would be afforded the same treatment, well many people don't seem to think so and the perception in this city is fairly high at least that this wouldn't be the case.


The Press Enterprise has written many articles about positive things about Riverside, but if even those complaining that they are not are remaining focused on what's written that's not so positive then they are part of what they're complaining about. And if the press is writing about what's been transpiring in this city or what's come to light about the recent scandals in its midst, then it's actually doing its job. No body's really out to get City Hall or make it look bad because as some have stated, it's doing a grand job of having its own transgressions help define it, whether those who reside inside it like that or not. And it doesn't help matters when council members caught up in those transgressions dismiss them as "old news" when the reason why it's old to the governmental officials and not to the public is because that "news" has been covered up by City Hall.

That's what was supposed to happen with the Leach incident after all. No one was supposed to know that Leach drove intoxicated and got stopped by officers in his own department, that he even damaged his car, perhaps that he even had a car at all. Even Priamos allegedly told people early on that no alcohol was involved even though officers told the CHP that they suspected he had been intoxicated and at least three officers at the scene told former Asst. Chief John DeLaRosa that they believed this to be true. Hudson had somehow gotten wind of it even though his city-issued phone which had allegedly been turned off received or made no phone calls until later in the evening of Feb. 8.

The written report on the "traffic collision" to be "filed away" probably was written a bit later and it was signed by former Deputy Chief Pete Esquivel (but not the copy provided by City Hall). No outside investigation was initiated by the police department or City Hall, until nearly two days later when the phones began to burn off the hook at City Hall and the police department. One former detective who raised that issue in a roll call just happened to see his 18 year career go up in flames in just a couple of months. Lt. Leon Phillips was to be the officer blamed for it by receiving the most discipline but then apparently he turned the tables in a meeting with his lawyer and DeSantis. And DeSantis of course apparently had been tossed under the bus a final time by Hudson with his departure.

When an anonymous tipster contacted Loveridge about the incident, he didn't issue a press release telling city residents about what happened. No, there was fact finding done by him so that he could learn enough to try to figure out the best way not to tell people. That's how City Hall handles its scandals as the belated revelations of guns, plates and badges revealed. It doesn't issue statements or press releases admitting to any of this conduct, it comes out in other ways outside City Hall's control and then it tries to damage control.

Which as history has shown in Riverside just as it has shown in Bell never quite works the way it's hoped. In Riverside at least there are two ethics processes. One is tied in with the ethics code and complaint process which has been the target of considerable discussion and even greater manipulation and then there's the ballot box.

City residents here in Riverside need to let Bell residents address the serious issues in Bell including the complete lack of both city management and a city government (save maybe a councilman) and people here need to address what's going on in Riverside so it doesn't become a Bell in the future. One important way to do that is to register to vote and to educate and participate in the election process, whether it's running for office, working on campaigns or encouraging the holding of campaign debates or voter registration and participation. Another way is to keep in communication with your elected officials including council representatives and to attend and participate in governmental meetings including city council and its subcommittees. Join and start neighborhood organizations whether they're officially recognized by City Hall or not.

If you have city residents truly engaged in city government and holding its feet to the fire on accountability and transparency, there will be much less chance for a Bell here. Otherwise, there's a chance for a Bell or worse to happen just about anywhere.

Steve Adams Subject of Second Ethics Complaint

[Riverside Councilman Steve Adams received a second ethics complaint filed against him, this time by the La Sierra Neighborhood/Arlanza Alliance.]



Our LaSierra detailed this incident involving Councilman Steve Adams's conduct when he along with City Attorney Gregory Priamos appeared at a meeting of the La Sierra/Arlanza Neighborhood Alliance. Now a complaint has been filed against him through the Ethics Code and Complaint process from members of that organization have formally filed a complaint through the city clerk's office alleging Adams with violating Sec. 407 of the city's charter which prohibits administrative interference from city council members. It's the second such complaint alleging such interference filed against Adams in the last few weeks.

The text of the complaint is as follows:


On the evening of September 2, 2010, LANA met at the Senior Center at La Sierra Park. Our guest speakers for the evening were Cindie Perrie, Public Works Manager and Tom Boyd Director of Public Works; they arrived prior to the meeting in business attire, briefcase in hand and ready to present. Councilman Steve Adams arrived early and brought with him Greg Priamos, City Attorney for Riverside Councilman Adams told Co-Chair of LANA, Taffi Brandriff[John Brandriff's wife] that he (Councilman Adams) WOULD be speaking at the beginning of our meeting. He cited undocumented "complaints", allegedly received, regarding the manner in which LANA meetings were conducted. He was advised by Mrs. Brandriff that the agenda had been set, and that time did not allow a speaker added at the last minute. He was advised that time would be given at the end of the meeting for any, and all, interested persons to have the floor for a set time period. He was invited to participate in a future meeting by making a timely request. Mr. Priamos discussed with Mrs. Brandriff the nature of LANA, its affiliation with the city and queried Mrs. Brandriff on the possibility that LANA was organizing as a Governance Group. Mrs. Brandriff reiterated that LANA was a community group through the RNP (Riverside Neighborhood Partnership) and in no matter had ever indicated or acted in any way to suggest that LANA was organizing as a Governance group. Both Councilman Adams and City Attorney Priamos left the meeting room.

Councilman Adams Legislative Field Representative was seen informing Public Works Manager Cindie Perry that Councilman Adams would like to speak with her outside. They were viewed speaking at length in the parking lot. After their conversation, neither Ms. Perry nor Mr. Boyd returned to the building nor answered our call. Since Ms Perry and Mr. Boyd were seen by many in readiness to present at our meeting and then left the rpemises after a conversatino with Councilman Adams, the concern is that Sec. 407 of the City Charter was violated. We are asking that this be investigated and a report be given to us regarding the findings of that investigation. This Community should not be penalized because of politics and this is another reason why this matter must be investigated by you. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.






This complaint will go to the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee after being "reviewed" for legal reasons by Priamos who's mentioned in this complaint and could be a witness in it although he would have to give a statement involving one of his bosses. Adams himself serves on that committee but like former Councilman Dom Betro before him, would have to recuse himself from the actual complaint. Not that doing so really makes that much difference because Adams will have his complaint heard by city council members who have apparently already political endorsed him in his reelection campaign. The fact that Taffy Brandriff is married to Adams' political rival John Brandriff will be discussed by the committee just as it did when former political candidate Letitia Pepper filed a complaint against former Councilman Dom Betro. How that complaint was handled by the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee was actually the biggest argument against allowing city council members and the mayor to be involved in reviewing complaints against their colleagues. Not just in the decision making but in the comments that city council members made in that meeting which clearly showed biased in favor of the candidate most if not all of them had already endorsed for the 2007 election.

But there are other witness statements as well that paint a disturbing portrait of what happened at the LANA meeting because if he directly prohibited the two city employees from giving a scheduled presentation, then yes, he did violate the city's charter provision against administrative interference. He's not their bosses and if they didn't give the presentation as scheduled after talking to him, then clearly something happened and some order was given to them by Adams to leave the premises. And if Priamos participated in this conduct if administrative interference was involved, then his bosses, the city council and mayor need to investigate his role as well and whether he was given an order by Adams that coerced him to engage in behavior violating the city's charter.

A date for hearing either one of Adams' ethics complaints hasn't been set yet by City Hall.







[In the foreground, are three of the members of the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee who will hear the complaints against Adams. As you can see, Adams is on this committee but will be excluded from the process. To his left, is City Attorney Gregory Priamos who is an unnamed party in this complaint and a witness as well as the committee's legal advisor. What is wrong with that picture?]




In other news, Administrative Analyist Mario Lara is once again acting manager of the Community Police Review Commission while it fills its second management vacancy in just three years. The last time he managed the CPRC, it fell quite a bit behind in complaint handling which has already experienced delays on the police department's end. Hopefully that will be avoided this time. Several commissioners hope to alleviate that problem by taking their responsibilities back and going to the office and doing more work.






Outgoing Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco is under scrutiny again, this time for cashing out over $1 million in vacation time leading to budgetary questions for the incoming district attorney, Paul Zellerbach.



The Riverside County Sheriff's Department officially rejected the county grand jury's criticism on taser use.

response on tasers

response on less lethal options

Public’s assistance needed in identifying attempt bank robbery suspects

Riverside , CA -- On Tuesday, September 21, 2010, at approximately 1530 hours, the Riverside Police Department’s Communication Center received a call that three males with guns were outside the Premier Services Bank located at 3736 Arlington Ave. The caller further advised she feared the bank was going to be robbed.

When officers arrived they learned the three suspects approached the bank on foot. As the suspects were walking towards the entrance of the bank, one suspect, armed with a rifle, turned his attention to a female sitting in her vehicle in the parking lot. As the female started backing her vehicle out of the parking stall to flee, the suspect possibly fired one round at the vehicle. The suspect dropped the rifle and fled through the parking lot. The female victim continued backing her vehicle and struck the fleeing suspect. Two of the suspects fled through the parking lot to an older burgundy colored mid size vehicle in poor condition. That vehicle was last seen south on Glacier towards Arlington . The third suspect was last seen running east on Arlington from the bank. The suspects never entered the bank.

Detectives from the Robbery / Homicide Unit and an Evidence Technician responded to the bank and took over the investigation. The rifle and other evidence were collected at the scene.

### P10-136589 ###

Anyone with information that may help identify these suspects should contact Detective Dave Smith (951) 353-7103 or Detective Mike Medici (951) 353-7104.

River City: City Hall to Discuss Ethics at Meeting during the Year of Scandal

UPDATE:

Another Ethics Complaint filed against Councilman Steve Adams



UPDATE:

BUSTED IN BELL

Current and former city officials arrested in corruption case.

[The Governmental Affairs Committee and City Attorney Gregory Priamos (l.) listen to the public provide input at its Sept. 1 meeting when it conducted the initial stage of City Hall's annual review of the ethics code and complaint process.]




This Tuesday, Sept. 21 at the Riverside City Council meeting, the government will convene a public hearing on the annual ethics code and complaint process, the second stage of what had already begun at an earlier Governmental Affairs Committee meeting on Sept. 1.

It's expected to be even a more contentious gathering to grapple with such thorny issues than it had been last year, before the Year of Scandal unfolded. But what remains to be done is what the city council and mayor will do in the wake of an eventful winter, spring and summer which has generated increased distrust in city government among city residents. Also what is hanging over the discussion will be if any of the elected officials takes a leadership position on the issue in a way that could lead to any meaningful change in how government does its business because the city residents have seen it themselves and it's not pretty.

There should be a vigorous discussion on the issues that have arisen involving ethics in this city which seem to be in short supply, ironic now that the city does have an ethics code and complaint process of sorts in place. The city government owes its constituents and its bosses, the residents of the city that much.



This report which includes the text of the code and complaint process was submitted to the city council and Mayor Ron Loveridge by that committee. What's interesting is that towards the end of the report, there are emails and responses to a survey submitted by one elected official who asked them questions in relation to the current ethics code and complaint process. Former Councilwoman Maureen Kane submitted her opinions on the issue.




Dan Berstein of the Press Enterprise offered his take on the situation which is very interesting indeed. Challenging a city council member on their stance on the ethics code has become "sharp words". But then Bailey has said at least once that the city council was a full-time job that required a lot of his time and if anyone wanted it, they could have it. Whether or not anyone in his ward takes Bailey up on his offer or challenge, will be clear by early next year.



The evening of the city council is sure to be chock filled with entertainment and some golden moments and sound bytes (particularly by Councilman Steve Adams) to be sure but whether anything productive or meaningful comes out of it, remains to be seen. The recommendation of the Governmental Affairs Committee was to create an ad hoc committee to review the code and complaint process and make recommendations which would then go eventually back to the city council for decision on whether or not to implement them and if so, which ones. But Bernstein at the very end of his column explains the immediate problem with this strategy. Especially since some have seen the creation of this committee is a way to stall the actual implementation of the code or any much-needed improvements like striking the 2007 language and creating an independent panel to handle complaints by elected officials until after all or most of the 2011 city council elections.


Because after all that's transpired in the past eight months and all that's been revealed to precede that time period, if the city council is either still clueless or playing coy, then individuals displaying either don't belong in the chairs that they're sitting on.



(excerpt, Press Enterprise)



When a complaint is filed, city electeds judge its merit! But if they pass the buck to a citizens group (assuming it's not stacked and rigged), electeds might end up rejecting even tougher rules (i.e. an independent ethics panel) proposed by a monster of their own creation. That'd make them look awful. Serve 'em right, too.




But at any rate, here are the cast of individuals who will be making decisions about how to hold themselves and each other ethically accountable which no doubt will show the city once again that people in positions of power can't police themselves. The voters have to do that as they have clearly shown that they have done in the past and likely will continue to do so in the future beginning next year.



[Mayor Ron Loveridge, perhaps ever mindful of his legacy in public service, penned a letter to the Governmental Affairs Committee expressing his view that the ethics code should apply to elected officials at all times.]





[City Councilman Paul Davis said his questionnaire on the ethics code and complaint process among his constituents has elicited a lot of responses and that there's been great concerns on these and related issues since the Feb. 8 incident involving former Chief Russ Leach.]




[Councilman Steve Adams led the charge last year against striking the controversial 2007 language restricting the code's application to when a city official is acting in that capacity. A year's passed and the only thing that's changed is that now the public has a better understanding of why he held his stance.]






[City Councilman and future mayoral candidate Andrew Melendrez tried to push for a recommendation to strike the controversial 2007 ethics code language but the motion failed.]




[Councilman Chris MacArthur expressed concern during last year's review that he didn't want to worry about complaints filed against him for how he conducted his political campaigns and after the contentious 2007 race, he might have a good point given that he hired political consultant Brian Floyd who's been hired to do what some have called, mudsling during election cycles.]






[Councilman Rusty Bailey balked on supporting the motion to strike the controversial 2007 language and the motion stalled in Governmental Affairs Committee. He said he expects it to be nullified in an interview with the Press Enterprise but where will the votes come from?]






[Councilwoman Nancy Hart has said that no one in her ward has complained about either the ethics code or the ethics of governmental officials. Her response to the discussion and decision making on the dais at the meeting will mostly likely be, whatever the last person who spoke said.]









[Councilman Mike Gardner voted for the motion in the city council meeting last year to remove the 2007 language but the majority of the council voted against that. Will he take a leadership role here going into what's expected to be a competitive election cycle?]






[Riverside's city council members have pretty much nixed having their own direct employees including this one covered by the Ethics Code and Complaint process after spending the past eight months showing exactly how effective they were at addressing...problems by at least one of them.]








The Press Enterprise Editorial Board said no to a full-time Riverside City Council.




(excerpt)

Discerning any public benefit in that change is tough, though. The council sets policy, but does not administer city business. Riverside has professional staff to handle the day-to-day operations of the city. The city's government has also survived until now without a full-time council -- which hardly suggests a pressing need for change.

And shifting to a full-time panel would almost certainly result in higher council salaries, even though some council members downplayed that possibility. Council members say the office requires so much time that holding an outside job is difficult, yet the pay -- $39,408 annually, plus benefits -- is not sufficient for people to give up other employment. Those factors limit the pool of potential council candidates.

Giving the council full-time status would only alleviate those concerns if pay also were to increase. Sure enough, in 2002, the Riverside City Council voted itself a 60 percent hike in pay -- justified by the argument that council service was really a full-time occupation, and so deserved higher compensation.

Former Asst. Chief John DeLaRosa Creates Waves at Retirement Event

[Asst. Chief John DeLaRosa, now retired, stirred the pot while emceeing at the retirement luncheon for Det. Steve Shumway]




The end of this week saw the retirement of long-time Homicide Det. Steve Shumway who has one of the longest and most distinguished careers in the police department including in that assignment. He closed and solved many investigations and he also was heavily involved in the Homicide Division's "cold cases" section. So when he retired and had a going away luncheon, over 300 people from inside the police department and from other law enforcement agencies attended including Chief Sergio Diaz and Asst. Chief Chris Vicino to wish him luck during his retirement. With a career like his, it should have been a day free from the controversies which the department and city have already seen this year.

Emceeing the event was former Acting Chief and Asst. Chief John DeLaRosa who retired in late July but had been attending events like Diaz' first promotional ceremony at the Riverside Convention Center as well as lunching with the department's management and some of the lieutenants who were more recently promoted as well as others.

He came up to the podium and allegedly said that now that he was retired, he didn't have to be politically correct in the three things he wanted to say. First, he said that if Tim Bacon came up, he couldn't speak more than three minutes. That elicited some laughter and an acknowledgment from Bacon who was in attendance. He then said that if Deputy Chief Michael Blakely came up, he would only be able to speak no more than a minute. That brought upon some laughter as well.

Then DeLaRosa said that if Capt. John Carpenter came in the room, he would kick his ass.

The response to that apparently was somewhat more subdued and in some ways shocked.

In some ways, it's difficult to know how to read that comment that he made about Carpenter. The first comment had been about Bacon, one of the former lieutenants who along with Darryl Hurt had filed lawsuits against the city that were settled earlier this year but which left in their wake revelations about quite a few scandals inside City Hall. The second, Blakely who played a critical role in DeLaRosa's own development had his name come up in several discussions that took place involving a former assistant city manager and several police officers.

But Carpenter found himself the subject of an ass kicking?

Physically speaking, it appears to be no contest who would win a fight as Carpenter played football in his younger days and he's somewhat taller and larger than DeLaRosa but still you never know how a physical fight would turn out between the two men. Still, maybe the fact that DeLaRosa is saying such a comment about a man who might be able to physically kick his butt instead might be humorous as a joke. But what also might be read in his words is that this is yet another example about the dysfunctional culture which dominated the now depleted management staff and also the somewhat dubious direction of the crew of captains who are left. All of whom elevated themselves through various versions of doing whatever was necessary and beyond that to reach those positions while former Chief Russ Leach was in power.

The management level culture was more than laced with hard drinking, going to strip joints, womanizing and such, it also led to the creation of a promotional system which apparently valued those elements more than it did the actual skills of leadership and management. Competition was intense and far outweighed collaboration and it led to a dysfunctional, disconnected management staff that struggled with skills that hadn't been honed through their development let alone nurtured and having to work alongside individuals they might have stuck with stilettos sometime earlier in their journey to upward advancement. Was what DeLaRosa said really an attempt at humor or one last strike of the stiletto blade?

And given that this culture also permeated into various elements of City Hall including those with charter-designated or not promotional powers in city management and city government, it's not surprising that pure mayhem reigned after Leach's departure and that the management staff began falling like dominoes because this was an agency where at least at the top it seemed that words like teamwork and mentorship were from some foreign language. For the department to really get heading in the direction that it needs to go, this dysfunctional system of management needs to be demolished and rebuilt with a healthier foundation with a careful and willing eye to building the next generation of leaders rather than knocking down the ladder after you've climbed it.

The expectations that this promotional system would remain in place didn't disappear with Leach but likely is still in place which Diaz has probably already discovered in his short time here. It would after all be far less than surprising if he had been complete devoid of receiving promotional "suggestions" from city government officials for example, of course what he does with that is going to have to ultimately be a decision that he has to make and it has to be one that's backed by his own remaining boss. If he hasn't seen this yet, he will certainly see it at least once by the time the "honeymoon" period ends and particular characters on the political canvas are no longer on their best behavior. If he hasn't been already, Diaz will be hit up by the same characters at City Hall who tried to get their buddies promoted and knock those out of contention they didn't like and being in the right drinking, partying and vacationing crowd will try to reassert itself.

The city will continue to operate the way it operates, and try to get away with what it wants or has in the past until someone says, no and it actually means something. And at the end of the day that might require members of the city government to rein in some of their colleagues who try to violate the charter by involving themselves in promotions and to instruct City Manager Brad Hudson that he shouldn't micromanage his department heads' promotions either. With former Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis off the canvas, whether that will be easier or harder remains to be seen.



DeLaRosa and Carpenter apparently aren't much of friends and Carpenter was allegedly very unhappy when he found out later what had happened. So since the two weren't friendly was there malice behind DeLaRosa's humor in front of all those people who after all, were there to honor and recognize a colleague and friend? Maybe, maybe not but it seems like retirement events is often where interrelations between employees whether at the same level or at different ranks comes to play.






[Deputy Chief Mike Blakely was mentioned in DeLaRosa's "non-politically correct" comments during the retirement luncheon. Blakely mentored DeLaRosa during his meteroic rise to the top that ended with the revelation of the cell phone records in connection with the fatefal Feb. 8 DUI traffic stop involving Leach.]




[Capt. John Carpenter who was mentioned in DeLaRosa's speech was reportedly "devastated" by the comments he made at the luncheon.]




[Chief Sergio Diaz attended the retirement luncheon along with 300 other well-wishers from the police department and other agencies.]






[Asst. Chief Chris Vicino who's been invited to the chief's table at the Women of Distinction luncheon also attended the retirement luncheon with Diaz.]




[Brand new Deputy Chief Jeffrey Greer who was to start work in his new job that same day didn't attend the luncheon.]







Mennifee owes some money.





A San Bernardino County judge tossed out half of the criminal charges filed against former County Assistant Assessor Jim Irwin but they could be brought back in an amended complaint.




In Hemet, police officers there belonging to two labor unions face 5% cuts in their salaries. There's a lively discussion on that thread.

Public Meetings

Monday, Sept. 20 at 10a.m., The Public Safety Committee will be holding its meeting in the Mayor's Ceremonial Room at City Hall to discuss the Corona helicopter deal and an item in closed session.


Tuesday, Sept. 21 at 2 p.m. and 6:30p.m. the Riverside City Council will be conducting a meeting to discuss this agenda.



Wednesday, Sept. 22 at 5:30 p.m. The Community Police Review Commission will be conducting its meeting in the city council chambers to discuss this agenda.


The CPRC has two officer-involved death casebooks on line while it reviews them.


Fernando Luis Sanchez

Marlon Acevedo



And the latest version of the often amended policy #4.8 which governs the investigation of officer involved deaths and shootings.