Who's Declared War on Whom in RiverCity?

UPDATE:

**JOIN Team Sahagun**

Don't let the city thrown him under the bus



First a Custodian, now a Police Officer 



I wish I’d done this a long time ago. I didn’t think it would really
happen, until it happened.”

---Sahagun, who grew up in the Eastside about becoming an RPD officer at the age of 39



call city council and mayor at 826-5991
or send emails to protest the city hall's actions:

mgardner@riversideca.gov
asmelendrez@riversideca.gov
rbailey@riversideca.gov
pdavis@riversideca.gov
cmacarthur@riversideca.gov
nhart@riversideca.gov
sadams@riversideca.gov
rloveridge@riversideca.gov      






RPOA Weights In; Blasts City Hall

Says Officer "thrown under proverbial bus"
(I do agree by the way) 

RPOA LETTER 
 (Brian Smith wrote a pretty epic letter in my opinion, it's definitely a must read)

 

Meet Chief Gregory Priamos



City Attorney told him to do it 


RPD Incident Report  (N.Sahagun/Romano and supervisor Sgt. Lisa Williams_)   (PDF file for downloading)





Police report involving the arrest of  Karen Wright points finger at City Attorney Gregory Priamos. Priamos refuses to give his side of the conversation with the officer citing "attorney/client" privilege as the story of the latest embarrassment in Riverside spreads across the land...


“Priamos requested that during future meetings, I should stop S1 [Wright] from going too long past the three minute allotted time.”

---Officer Nick Sahagun from his police report 

Glad this finally came out. I never believed for a second this arrest came from anywhere but the city council dais. Now can the CC and mayor explain again in public why they threw the officer under the bus?  And why they denied having any control of the handling of gadflies by the police?   Their change of protocol behind closed doors, if they thought the actions were appropriate?  These and other questions challenged the veracity once again of our city council and mayor. 

I mean if you can derail a promotion or block it with a phone call from somewhere on the dais, it makes you wonder who's really in charge. 




Hyatt Hotel Vs Riverside





The city might wind up owning this hotel...and its debt.




Dan Bernstein writes on the mess with the Hyatt Hotel.


Who wants to bet the developers for the Hyatt don't file a lawsuit and include an injunction against further "loan" payments until the lawsuit is litigated?  I wouldn't bet against this scenario.


The Most Disturbing Officer Arrested Ever

 NYPD Officer Arrested for Alleged Cannibalism Plot

 More coverage on the City Council Arrest:

Los Angeles Times Blog

The Mayor in the blog posting says the city council chair will make the decision on who to expel not the police officers from now on. If the police were always making the decision and the arrest was justified under that discretion, why change the practice now?  Or did Mayor Loveridge just throw the police officers under the bus?

KTLA news report on incident

CBS News in Los Angeles

Press Enterprise on changes to expulsion protocol

Dan Bernstein on the incident 

Fox Chimes in on how she must have gotten under someone's skin 
  

 

Karen Wright handcuffed  after she'd turned away from the podium after exceeding the three minute rule  (picture: TMC)

The police department's newest captain comes to supervise handcuffing of Karen Wright

(Photo: TMC)

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

--Benjamin Franklin

Eyewitness narrative of incident 

Press Enterprise Alicia Robinson Twitter at meeting

Should City Council critic have been handcuffed at meeting?

Councilman Andrew Melendrez has found himself in between a few political cross hairs for asking the wrong questions

Alas, things are not currently very peaceful in Riverside, or River City as it's affectionately or not referred to by people  who follow the political tides that have shaped the city going back over a century. But while the denizens of the dais had for the most part held their cohesiveness together for the past several years as one regime or another marched in and then were voted out of office, that era might be coming to an abrupt end as there have been some dust ups on the dais and all out war is threatening to break out between various elected officials.  It's getting harder and harder to create a scorecard for all the conflicts that have erupted in public not to mention those brewing behind the scenes.

Councilman Paul Davis and Councilman Steve Adams have been at odds with each other to say the least going back even before the last election impacting Adams' ward back in 2011.  In that election, Davis supported Adams' challenger, John Brandriff who hoped to oust Adams but it wasn't to be and Adams quite easily won his reelection. Since then, Adams appears to have been itching to get Davis back for that transgression, that break from the unity that had defined Riverside's dais since well, before Davis got on it in 2009.

Davis has his flaws like any politician. To be one is to be flawed but he's got his strengths too and one of them is breaking from the traditional "go along to get along" and "I didn't see/hear/say that."  Which in some ways sets him apart from the others in the dais.  He asks questions on various issues from the whole AMR monopoly to the issue with the Red Light cameras and it's these two particular issues that quickly enough got him into trouble.

Picture at least six people on the dais doing just this all the time!

But as it turns out, Adams is busy getting ready to go to war with another councilman and that's Andrew Melendrez.  This war is really one that is linked to two major issues, the aforementioned Red Light Camera issue and also the complaint filed against Davis by an employee from the city's fire department. Adams right now is loading himself on information to use as ammo against Melendrez in upcoming days as rumors have been brewing for several weeks that a huge blowup is looming on the dais. 

Meanwhile, several of the city council members and one former one now running for mayor have shown up on an email that was written to Melendrez from political consultant for hire, Michael Williams which looks like some sort of cease and desist notice to Melendrez that he shouldn't be expecting any help from Williams and Company the next time he runs for election which will be for city council next year. All those carbon copied on an email sent by Williams to Melendrez two months ago are clients of Williams either for the mayoral election or for city council.  Missing is Councilman Rusty Bailey who was a client of Williams during his city council reelection bid last year but he's not shown up on the client list for his mayoral bid. 

Williams already had allegedly not accepted Davis as a client when Davis first ran for city council in 2009 because as some have said, he was pressured by others on his client list that they'd rethink their own status with Williams if he accepted Davis. At the time, there allegedly wasn't any bad blood between them, it seemed amicable and civil involving both parties that just wouldn't be working together. But it's clear that judging from Williams August 2012 email, things have changed.

First city council member to appear on the Williams' blacklist during his 2011 campaign

Councilman Steve Adams doing some digging on Melendez and appears on the carbon copy list along with the mayoral candidate that he endorsed of Williams' email.

But even some time after Williams had drafted his email to Melendrez, Adams was off doing his own research on Melendrez on the Red Light camera issue submitting a request for the paper trail between Melendrez and the city on that extremely polarized issue.

Adams sent this email to the city clerk's office to get into that paper trail. 

From: Adams, Steve
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 1:27 PM
To: Nicol, Colleen; Morton, Sherry
Subject: Public Records request

Please provide me with any and all e-mails sent or received by Council
Member Melendrez over the last 60 days in regards to the Red Light
Camera Program and or Council Member Steve Adams.

Thank you,
Steve Adams

So what is Adams looking for in relation to that issue? Well the answer's really quite simple. The two erupted in what was one of the most contentious issues to come across the formerly peaceful dais in years. The city council had voted 3-3 (with Nancy Hart being absent) on a motion to keep the controversial, money losing program. Mayor Ron Loveridge cast the deciding vote in favor of the program but it was supposed to come back for reevaluation after a period of time. Imagine the shock of some of those in the dais when their own employee, City Manager Scott Barber tried to keep the program running as  is with some changes without bringing it to the city council for a vote which was the stated purpose of the approved motion. He just said the problems in it had been fixed and that was that.  But the issue being treated like that created a brouhaha and like what happens in situations that cause furor among city residents, it went back to city council and  then the issue arose of putting it on the ballot next June for people to vote on its fate.  But in the meantime...two motions were in conflict, one to dismantle it until the election and one to keep it going until the election.  Guess which one Adams led the charge on?

The Red Light Camera issue is probably the best intended project ever to get totally screwed up so that it became an ineffective, overreaching, nonenforceable, possibly illegal (or at least being seriously challenged as such), costly mess of a program in the city's recent history.  It's not uncommon as a pedestrian to see cars slow down for intersections with cameras and then completely blow the red light of the next one in their path and vice versa. Some people just like to blow red lights period. What hasn't been studied by the city is that there's a relationship between the Red Light Camera program and the decrease in police officers assigned to the traffic division. At one time in the early 1990s, there were about 18-19 traffic officers assigned to the streets but even as Riverside's streets became more congested, there were too few highway off and on ramps and the population grew, the number of traffic officers steadily dropped as low as 13. Were the cameras one way of dealing with this trend in the diminishing of these positions including two that were phased out even before being implemented in 2008?  Did they supplement the traffic officers or supplant them?

Anyway, whatever the merits or pitfalls of the Red Light Camera program, the blowup between Adams and Melendrez if it can be called that happened not because of the issue itself, but by the fact that Adams had actually participated in the vote to decide its fate.  Most people know by now despite the Press Enterprise's initial under reporting of it that Adams' brother, former police officer Ron Adams is one of the retired officers hired to part-time to run the program. At least as of a few years ago, he was paid a salary out of the former city manager's discretionary fund.   But Adams participated in the vote to keep the program going which meant that his brother would keep his job there.  Melendrez questioned that and Adams took offense.  He asked City Attorney Greg Priamos about it and Priamos said that under the law, since the Adams were only brothers and not father and son or married that it didn't constitute a conflict of interest for him to vote.

But Priamos didn't touch the city's ethics code of conduct in his narrative. Under the code, the perception or appearance of a conflict of interest is also governed under the code and its complaint process which differs from the law. Priamos clearly chose to dodge that issue by not including it in his rather expansive narrative on the issue.

The two argued back and forth about it at the most recent and prolonged meeting on the Red Light camera issue and Adams complained that Melendrez had sat in the negotiations involving the contracts with the Riverside Police Officers' Association even though his son, Aurelio was a police officer and a member of that union.  Melendrez said that they could discuss the appropriateness of that but stood his ground on the ethics of allowing Adams to vote on the Red Light Camera program's fate.

At evening's end, the vote was very tight with Hart there to cast her vote and Adams as well. As it turned out, Adams vote to "save" the program was needed which is why he didn't recuse himself.  But no matter how he phrased it, the consensus was that he voted to keep his brother employed by the city and he can't really blame anyone for that. The voters will ultimately be the ones who will decide the fate of this problematic program where any money made seems to go everywhere but back into perhaps funding traffic education programs (which are funded by diminishing sources of  grant money). That would make some sense to put it rather than paying the lion share of money to a private company in Australia that has a satellite office in Arizona.

 But it was clear that Adams and Melendrez only postponed an even bigger confrontation ahead.

Melendrez and Adams also tangled over the complaint filed against Davis by a fire department inspector at a event earlier this year involving a food truck festival which involved a disagreement or argument where Davis allegedly acted disrespectful to and interfered with her performance of her duties.  The employee filed a complaint against Davis which was her perogative under a system that's available. But the investigation including its process was fraught with problems.

The investigation was mentioned as being "independent" meaning by an investigator working for an outside form. That was technically true but mostly due to a chain of events tied with the state's enforcement of employment rules pertaining to PERS retirements. Jeffrey Collopy the investigator who did the investigation was a former employee first of the police department where he retired as a lieutenant and then he went to work for Priamos directly as an investigator in his office. It was only because of the enforcement of new rules involving PERS that he's still not an official city employee today. The investigation of a complaint against an elected official should have been done by a business outside the city's own employment roster but that didn't happen.

Plus the investigation process wasn't explained at all to the public either before it happened or even after.
Apparently some of the members occupying the dais didn't understand it either because Melendrez asked questions about how it had been handled. He'd been ill with a heart  condition when it had been handled so he was asking followup questions on the process and some of them were critical in nature. But this was an appropriate action for him to take to ask questions as part of a fact finding process.

Was investigating a complaint against Davis wrong?  No. But the process followed seems very problematic at best and when an elected official asks questions about it he shouldn't be penalized for it.But apparently Melendrez would be paying a price for his inquisitiveness.


Then Michael Williams  of  Michael Williams Company sent out the following declarative statement on how he felt about the city council and mayor these days. For those who don't know, Michael Williams is one of the top political consultants in Riverside specializing in the area of campaign finance.  He helps candidates throw those parties to attract partygoers who will donate funds to the candidates' campaign chests. He's pretty popular and boasts an impressive roster of clients.  

It was in response to the apparent resolution of the complaint against Davis.


Loveridge. Ron 

From:   : admin@michaelwilliamscompany.org 

To:  Melendrez,Andy

Cc:  EdyAdkison; Loveridge,Ron;steveadamsward7 @yahoo.com;ChrisArthur

Wednesday,August 29,20126:54 PM 

Subject: Yesterday'sCouncilMeeting.

 August 29, 2012 

Dear Andy, This letter pains me to write, you are a very nice man. We probably disagree on alot of issues, but you're a good honest man. I have been extremely disappointed with the current council and mayor of this city. Yesterday is probably the best example of what I'm talking about. Through my extensive rumor mill, there was to be some discussion about misconduct by one of your fellow members. I know you were absent during the meeting, but the result has me very disturbed by the LACK OF WILL TO STAND UP, by this council and current mayor. 

The Dom Betro's/Frank Schiavone's/Ed Adkison's/Steve Adams's/Art Gage's/and yourself were vital in the creation of the Renaissance program and implementation in this city. These people took risks and in some cases it cost them their jobs. This current council has borne the fruits of these risk takers and taken the accolates of this. That's politics. Frankly, I don't know where you come down on the mayor's race, but there needs to have someone in that position and on the council seats who want to STAND UP and not roll over on everything for the lowest common denominator to NOT get anyone upset. If a council can't make a basic decision on conduct and show some leadership, why are they there. At this point Andy, I think that it best that I NOT do your fundraising and frankly, during the next cycle I will just do stuff for Steve and Chris. Davis has won re-election already because NO one will join a chorus. This is very disturbing.

 If this council can't do the right thing against Mr. Davis .... why is the Council there? The bully has won and those that have enabled him totally, in my opinion, lack any character on this issue and others. Some of my past emails also have referred to things that I got involved with this city ...particularily the Fox Theatre. No one listen to me then .... everyone rolled over to a mayoral appointment committee that did exactly what shouldn't have been done ... and you have a $34million White Elephant on your hands---with NO solutions to deal with it. And, I could go on about other issues as well. The Emperor and some colleagues have no clothes ... all of your council members are friends of mine, but the disappOintment with the lack of will to do the right thing is pathetic. Andy, like I said, this pains me to say no to you at this time. But, until I see some spunk (LEADERSHIP) out of this council, I think I'm going to pass on all the races in 2013. 

My best always, 

 Mike Williams 

This Council (with a few exceptions) and Mayor can't stand up 




Williams is right on about the Fox Theater in that it's turned into a white elephant at least financially speaking because it's losing money. But his view that the Renaissance was this great program that involved elected officials taking risks and losing their jobs wasn't exactly factually true. The electeds didn't take the risks themselves, they made sure the public took the risks, after all it's not their money they gambled on and then when it wasn't spent (including utility revenue funds used to pay for expenses outside utilities), the city borrowed, and borrowed and borrowed some more, putting itself in debt over $2.1 billion just on the Renaissance.

The city's going to face major cuts because it won't have the cash to spend. Only last week, reports came in that police chief, Sergio Diaz was telling people including his own advisory board that the police department won't be able to address certain crimes, and that there will be more streetwalkers and such due to the budget cuts to the police department. Other reports include programs like UNET not being adequately funded on the city's side and such including the Vice unit. And if the police department is facing these kinds of budget cuts and more then what does that say about the state of the city?

But will Williams go through with his boycott of Davis and now Melendrez or will he change his mind or just fund other candidates? Stay tuned, after all the email was written in August and there's been some developments since then including one that will surely impact Davis' reelection bid. 

RPOA Declares Neutrality in Mayoral Election

(So now there's at least two of us)

The Riverside Police Officers' Association is neutral in mayor's race according to this letter submitted by its current president, Sgt. Brian C. Smith.

Text of RPOA letter:

To Whom It May Concern: 

After careful consideration and a thorough review process that included one on one interviews and questionnaires, the Riverside Police Officers’ Association has determined that both Mr. Bailey and Mr. Adkinson are exceptionally qualified to serve as Mayor for the City of Riverside.

 The Riverside Police Officers’ Association has decided to stay neutral in this race and not endorse a specific candidate. Each Candidate has wide range of experience and differing views on how to best serve the residents of Riverside and are prepared for the challenges that await them once in office. 

 The Riverside Police Officers’ Association looks forward to working with the Mayor’s office to help promote Riverside as a city rich in history and tradition and a safe place to raise a family. I encourage every registered voter to cast his or her ballot in November! 

Respectfully, Brian C. Smith

I have to say that I thought I would be the only one to not choose to endorse either candidate though I've been pressured about having to endorse one or the other for a myriad of reasons. Not by the candidates so much but by supporters.  If I don't endorse one, I'm getting the other elected as if one vote truly equals a thousand. I'm flattered that they think my vote counts more than I do but I dug my heels in this one and said, no endorsement.   Sorry but my memory of history just isn't that short on either of them. They both have so much to prove and in some cases a very steep curve.  The people looking for a "reformist" mayor, better keep looking because it'll take someone who's never served on the dais to reform what's wrong with city government.

It seems that I'm not the only one. The Riverside Police Officers' Association's own PAC has opted out of endorsing either candidate either and as Smith stated, is taking the neutral position. All I can say is you go, union. I think that the union opted for the right choice in the mayoral race and I applaud it. Whereas the Riverside Firefighters' Association opted to endorse the closest thing to an incumbent (and historically its PAC nearly always endorses incumbents), the RPOA just said no...or if not to the candidates themselves, just that they won't pick one over the other.

Some people might view this as being indecisive but I'm not one of them. It's in fact very decisive. The reasons for my neutrality are the opposite of those stated in the letter. I'm not sure either of them is fit to be mayor not that the mayoral position is that powerful in Riverside and with good reason if you've studied local history going back into the 1920s when you had a Ku Klux Klan guy running for mayor, a financially corrupt government and a police chief arrested for public intoxication. They both would need to prove it to me and that's impossible without serving in the position.

Sometimes history repeats itself. But the union did have a struggle with this one or so I've heard and that's not surprising. It's a thorny issue to decide to endorse...nobody but sometimes it's just what you got to do. Allegedly endorsing either candidate would have created issues with membership that couldn't be reconciled. No matter what the qualifications of the candidates, what the union leadership might have been showing is that it listened as it should do to what its members had to say. That's a very good and important step on its part.

Any endorsement of Bailey would have been highly problematic for its leadership as Bailey had been accused by former Police Chief Russ Leach through his most latest deposition of interfering with the promotional process surrounding now Lt. Val Graham. The city's already paid out settlements to former police employees in part on allegations that Adams had interfered with the promotional process involving two police captains. Leach's second deposition which addressed Adams' alleged involvement stamped him even harder in that camp than his earlier one.

The RPOA wasn't the only police union that apparently opted out of endorsing Bailey as apparently the Riverside Sheriffs' Association did the same thing. Bailey had gone around looking for support among law enforcement and the issues pertaining to his alleged involvement in Graham's promotional process was one he apparently couldn't run away from.

Some also said that some union members were also leery of Adkison in part because of problems associated with the use of police officers by elected officials as "bouncers" to eject public speakers at the dais speaking on issues including two incidents. This happened when people like Dom Betro, Frank Schiavone and Adksion were on that dais, the ones mentioned in Williams' email. One incident involving four individuals including 90 year old Marjorie Von Poule and the other, an 82 year old woman complaining about a city pipe bursting and flooding her house who exceeded the three minute speaking rule.  Police officers were allegedly so unhappy with how a former quartet of council members ran the dais that it was getting harder to find enough of them willing to work security at the city council meetings back then.  Who really wants to be the police officer ordered to eject the 82 year old woman anyway just for speaking past three minutes like she's a criminal?  If someone does something like that, it should be an elected official instead.But none of them could apparently take responsibility for it so they had some officer or officers take the heat for it instead. Then during the first incident, several councilmen allegedly ordered former City Manager Brad Hudson to call up the DA and the detectives at the department to do cases against those four individuals but thankfully everyone they called refused to do it and frankly had other work to do instead as well.

This is just history in case memories have faded  or some people in City Hall don't want it remembered. 

At any way however way the RPOA reached its decision, it made the right one and I think future events no matter who wins (because one of them will) will bear that out. It was the best decision to make and it was the right one.

In the meantime, Rusty Bailey's campaign mailers ignite criticism from the Adkison camp causing many to question the integrity of his Team Bailey campaign.

Photo Gallery

The City Council Chambers while under construction to have prior re-construction undone to bring it up to governmental code.  But are other laws being broken inside it?

 We are family...I got all my brothers and...well that's the way it used to be for the now battling and fractured city council in River City.

Summer's over and city council is once again back holding its regular sessions.  In recent months, the city council have recently  broken away from their "go along to get along" Group Think (tm) way of doing city business and have started jousting with one another. It's hard to keep track of the playlist of who's ticked off at whom because it changes almost every week. Some of that was outlined in the above paragraphs but it's all subject to change at any moment.

One meeting got so contentious that Mayor Pro Tem Rusty Bailey had to take action. Outgoing Loveridge who's been mentoring Bailey has been skipping evening meetings so that it gives Bailey a showcase to show off  his leadership skills to the public both in the audience and watching at home or online. But lately that's meant breaking up some fighting on the dais between some of the other members. As already stated, Bailey and Melendrez have been going at it a bit on various issues.

At one point at a recent meeting, Bailey broke in at some point and asked Adams to vacate after Adams waggled his finger at Melendrez.  It's getting to the point where people in the audience want to hand out boxing gloves or nerf sticks to the battling city council members. As much as Loveridge has been grooming Bailey, he just looks lost up there.

The aforementioned red light camera issue came back to be rehashed all over again and the Press Enterprise blogged about city staff getting dressed down by elected officials as if that's actually news. Okay, the part about the city council members dressing down their city staff most definitely is news especially this part: 

( excerpt, Press Enterprise)

My issue is with staff asking us to rubber stamp something we knew nothing about,” Hart said.

“This is not the way we as a council want to do business,” she added.

Councilwoman Nancy Hart, you don't want to be a rubber stamp, don't act like one!

Maybe Hart's not aware of it, but she's been a rubber stamp used by "staff" for years.  After all, she's the one who as chair of the Finance Committee chose not to conduct meetings unless former Asst. City Manager/Chief Finance Officer/Treasurer Paul Sundeen said there was a reason to meet or anything to discuss. Public pressure put Hart in the hot seat of having to explain her inaction with the Finance Committee and when she tried to do her usual direct examination of city employees adding them leading questions, it didn't acquit her well. Soon after the Finance Committee dusted itself off and started holding monthly meetings apparently finding plenty to talk about from developer's fees to audits to amnesty periods on parking tickets.

But it was when the Finance Committee didn't meet was when most of the questionable expenditures and uses of the city's finances took place.

But the fact that city staff including City Manager Scott Barber (who's obviously picked up a few things from his predecessor) spent money to the tune of $2.5 million this time on that debacle called the Fox Entertainment Plaza isn't really news at all. It's called pattern and practice and city managers have been doing such in Riverside since way before two weeks ago.  And the other times, the city council and mayor sat up there like bobble heads smiling their way through it.




Every scandal that erupted in Hudson's watch was responded to as if the city council were bobble heads who thought if they smiled widely enough and pointed quickly away from the latest embarrassment at a pretty trinket, no one would notice illegal and/or unethical behavior. Point out anything untidy like illegal badges, illegally purchased guns and the city council and mayor would just smile and point out the lovely tree over there...you have to wonder why after that and more happened under the watch of past and current city council members why Hart's only complaining now about being a rubber stamp.

 The Citrus Towers stood at the top of a four way land swap which means that the city will pay $2 million plus annually just to make sure this project has its anchor tenant, Best, Best and Krieger.  Like the top end of any Ponzi Scheme like designed structure or just the first seat filled in musical chairs, this building looks splendid.

Okay, the Citrus Towers looks magnificent and it's filled with Best, Best and Krieger lawyers who vacated their old digs at the Wells Fargo building closer to City Hall to occupy space there. Loveridge even chose to have his very last (and  this time it's true) Mayoral Ball there on the sixth floor. If he did that to dissuade the people from seeing the situation involving the infamous quadruple land swap as a gift of public funds to the two private companies which benefited the most from it, all it did was raise more questions.

Questions like who's picked up the BB&K lease which is quite pricy at its old home and who's paying the $1 million or so of the bond indebtedness at the building on Orange Street near City Hall that's still housing a portion of the Riverside Public Utilities office.  Barber refuses to answer this question asked repeatedly at City Council meetings and in fact the last time it was asked, he was playing with his i Pad.  The answer as it turns out is that the Riverside Public Utilities is paying the "lease" on both buildings instead of just one of them.  It moved its administration and engineering division to space on the 3rd and 4th floor of the Wells Fargo Building (though the marquee of suite space on the ground floor hasn't been updated yet) and the finance division is still housed at its old haunt on Orange Street with the fate of Customer Service currently at its headquarters at a building that was transferred to the RDA before that collapsed unknown as to where it'll be going.

So basically what Barber doesn't want to say and no city council member either wants or allows or cares enough to get him to admit is that essentially the Public Utilities department is paying roughly twice the "rent" it was paying before this land scheme was engineered. If that hadn't happened, then this division would have simply stuck to paying the bond indebtedness on one building.  But the city needed Public Utilities to occupy both buildings so that the unused lease period of one and the bond indebtedness of the other could be paid for by utilities funds and then the cost passed on of course to the consumer most likely through rate increases and new fees and taxes.

Just like anything towards the end of a Ponzi Scheme, this building is a shell of itself with Riverside Public Utilities forced to pick up the tab for a building it barely occupies any longer, save for its Finance Division while it also allegedly picks up the tab for its pricier digs downtown. 

But the part of the land swap that narrowly avoided a bad situation was the police department. Originally the administrative offices at the Orange Street Station were going to fill the vacancy at the RPU building. That of course didn't happen because logistically it couldn't be done in a way that would work for the police  department services being relocated. The police department thus avoided paying $700,000 in renovation and relocation expenses not to mention having the department's budget or the general fund try to come up with the $1 million plus annually to pay the bond indebtedness. The police budget simply wouldn't be able to come up with this cash annually as it stands and it's also unlikely that it wouldn't have to pay at least a sizable portion because the general fund itself (which finances most of the police budget) is not able to really cover the costs either. Why do you think the city put RPU there instead to cover that bond debt each year? Because it has its own financial resources that it generates that the general fund doesn't. 

Imagine what would have happened if the city had tried to force this insane transfer through, given that the police budget is facing cuts at least that's what Diaz and his cabinet have been telling people in the communities of Riverside about police services. He's said to his band of "good" business and community leaders that some crimes won't be policed due to budget cuts. Other members of his leadership inside the department have been at meetings warning of cuts or reduced investment including financially in programs like UNET and Vice.

Chief Sergio Diaz and company have been warning their trusted band of business and community leaders about the impact of budget cuts on future policing

It's not exactly clear why Diaz is doing this or most anything for that matter because he only chooses to explain things to his set. But if it's in hopes that the leaders on his advisory board for example will take their concerns to the city officials to stop the budget cuts or if it's just facing the reality that the city's financially strapped, it's not clear yet.  But it makes what the city nearly did to the police department in the quadruple land swap a crime in my opinion. When the city was preparing to foist an extra start up cost of $700,000 on the department and that's before increasing its annual rent on its administrative headquarters from $1 annually to over $1 million, it should have been anticipating that the worst recession since the Great Depression might impact the city's budget including that of its police department. 

So why when they should have known that the budget could face serious cuts did they choose to help both Mark Rubin (who owns the Citrus Towers) and to a lesser extent, BB&K at what could have been high costs to both the police department and RPU?   Rubin needed to pay the $37.5 million in state bonds with lease revenue generating stream which was to have been the Raincross Promenade luxurious condos turned rental apartments which he hoped would be leased out.  The city claims that all of the units are leased out but that place is still quite dark at night and at any rate if it was fully occupied, it would have used the rent to pay the bonds on the Citrus Tower and the city would have never had to get involved in the business of helping promote private enterprise at the expense of its own city departments. So who was going to benefit from all this. 

Rubin, Citrus Towers: He gets an anchor tenant in BB&K so he can remain eligible for the bonds used to build the Towers by the use of lease revenue generation. Also an anchor tenant can attract more business for high-end office space which is not exactly experiencing a shortage in Riverside right now. 

BB&K:  The city's #1 law firm doesn't benefit as much giving up premium if expensive office space in exchange for what some in the firm have called smaller, more cramped digs at the Towers. And then there was the issue of not completing their lease on the Fargo building space. Presto, the city steps in and offers to finish out the lease for BB&K facilitating the move. 

Cost to BB&K: Maybe slightly higher but thanks to the city, it avoids a lawsuit by building owner for breach of contract.But city risked a lawsuit filed against it for "tortious interference".

RPU:  Winds up having an incremental lease hike as the costs of living at the Fargo digs costs more than what they were paying at the building that housed administration, finance and engineering. Now they're paying two lease tabs instead of one since after the deal with the RPD fell through, they couldn't backfill the space. 

Cost to taxpayers:  higher than what was paid in its current digs. Now it's paying roughly twice as much as earlier which will no doubt be passed on to customers.  

RPD: Would have seen its lease on administrative headquarters go from $1 (until end of 2017) go up to over $1 million annually. Not to mention the $700,000 to relocate most of Orange Street and additional monies of over $1.4 million to do the much needed relocation of dispatch, some of which was grant funded, the rest bond money tied up in the RDA mess. Dispatch was never going to be relocated to the RPU building and could have been relocated independently and in fact was relocated independently from the situation at Orange Street Station.

Cost to tax payers:  Anyone who thinks that it's not going to increase the cost to city residents by multiplying one's "rent" by over a million times, raise your hand. Or that it wouldn't have substantially worsened cuts currently being faced by the RPD to its services as told by Diaz and his cabinet at meetings.

The Fire Station That Just Wants to Be Finished

Construction halted on downtown fire station.  If you're a licensed contractor that can finish a fire station for a good price, the city needs you!

 An older photo of the new downtown fire station which has been in limbo since Edge Construction walked away from it. It does look a bit more finished than this photo but is unable to open.

Or that really pretty looking fire station downtown that hasn't seen a crew construction for months. You see Edge Construction bailed from the project and walked away, something that contractors usually only do when their bills aren't getting paid meaning they're out of liquid cash. But the company has indeed shutting down. Initially Randy Carter, its onsite supervisor at the fire station said the project would be completed but we're guessing that's not happening.What's confusing is that work shut down some time ago allegedly because payments weren't being made to contractors back when the building parcel was tied up in the RDA shutdown.

Councilman Mike Gardner did helpfully respond to an email on the matter.


Mary,

The surety company has taken over construction responsibility since Edge Construction failed.  Work has stopped until a new general contractor is brought on board.  I expect that to be fairly soon.  This may delay opening which was scheduled for right about first of the year.  The length of the delay depends on how long it takes to get in a new general and how long it takes them to ramp back up.

Hope this helps.  I know it is not 100% definitive, but it is the best information we have right now.

Best regards,

Mike



The project is currently on hold for an undetermined amount of time.But this project is included on the Building Watch. We'll all see what happens with this much needed fire station. The only thing that can be said is that hey, at least it's one of two city fire stations (with #4 being the other) that's not collateral on some bond deal including those involving private projects by developers like the Hyatt Hotel downtown.

It's so nice that the city did its best to loan money to a developer to get the Hyatt done on schedule but one of our fire stations which is badly needed is left fallow until at least early next year.

Former City Manager Brad Hudson has left the building but does his legacy live on?

City Manager Scott Barber got royally dressed down by his bosses, was he waiting for his BFF City Attorney Greg Priamos to bail him out?  

But Priamos has been too busy lately with his own problems and wearing his tongue out defending the right for Councilman Steve Adams to vote for a position that employs for his brother.

TO BE CONTINUED....

If Councilman Steve Adams isn't in his seat, it must be public comment time but the beleaguered councilman with the golden tongue is running out of buds on the dais.

In Search of the Naughty Nine?

Riverside's Police Administrative headquarters still resides here but what of the "Naughty Nine"? And how this elite list could wind up costing tax payers.

Did this leopard ever really change his spots?  And why slapping someone on the wrist for an offense that can get them fired isn't always "best practices".

Ever since Chief Sergio Diaz first arrived in Riverside with great fanfare in mid-2010, there's been issues arising within Orange Street Station with what's been going on there.  Whether it's a turf war between two members of Team Diaz leading to a call for a locksmith or a physical altercation between lieutenants that led to Diaz allegedly putting his hands over his ears and walking away from someone saying he didn't want to hear about it. The sudden vacations which arise after allegations of  on duty incidents arise  not to mention the internal investigation involving sexual harassment being done against one captain (who's expected to have the complaint reach that middle finding of not sustained). Then there's  another captain who'd brought baggage into the position from sustained misconduct some years ago facing a new crisis of sorts. That's all sometime after yet another captain allegedly tried (and failed) to get the watch commander of another police department to release his son (who was also hired by the RPD as an officer) without a booking trail.

I look at this and I wonder what the hell is going on here?  And how is this any different than the department under Leach at least when it comes to behavior or misbehavior at the highest levels?

It's hard to know what to make of all this given that the individuals at the very top are supposed to set the example for others in a hierarchical type organization of leadership and management. The public's left in the dark about the mechanisms of accountability used to ensure  that management adheres to professional standards of conduct and when someone who critiqued the Strategic Plan asked about such mechanisms and what they were, the answer simply is that the department doesn't share that information with its partners in the community. Then those in charge of it including Diaz wonder why or flail their arms and get upset when people challenge them or just ask them on that when one of the individuals they chose for a management position gets in trouble. 

What has Diaz actually done with management that's any different? Management personnel got in trouble under Leach, as witnessed by some major retirements on the heels of Leach's own medical retirement. Some apparently still get in trouble now and even when they allegedly commit assault and battery there's no investigation of "private" or "off-duty" matters. Two police officers get different types of discipline for committing sexual misconduct on duty by their chiefs. One, an officer re-offends and winds up being criminally prosecuted and convicted of a felony charge, another, a supervisor gets promoted at least twice. .It's hard to know how to look at these differences in treatment for similar offenses when the initial offenses committed by both most often lead to job termination. If an officer commits a sexual offense on duty and sees that someone above him in rank gets wrist slapped in comparison, does that make it seem like the department takes a hard stance against it or an easy stance or is which you get decided by rank?

Two officers investigated for making the same racial slur. One, a detective is going to get the book thrown at him. The other, the lieutenant in charge of the division investigating him gets nothing...except for a job with the city after his retirement. Once he gets nothing, the detective is retroactively un-disciplined which when you think about it seems fair on one hand but makes the whole incident somewhat bizarre on the other.This was under Leach but is it different under Diaz?

Never a dull moment but it's an issue of concern given how the promise of accountability of upper management and supervision was woven into Diaz' new Strategic Plan as one of its most critical objectives. That was an important stance to take given the crises of confidence impacting the RPD in 2010 where the trickle down effect of management that got into serious trouble including the chief may have contributed to the arrests of more than six officers within 14 months with some of them facing prosecution and conviction for crimes. That didn't just happen in a vacuum. It has partly to do with the very mixed messages that are sent officers when people higher up above them commit misconduct and not only are not investigated but sometimes have been rewarded for it. 

This issue is one that arose and was discussed in a matter of speaking already at the city's highest levels.

With Diaz and two of his cabinet members facing the ends of their three-year contracts in the summer of 2013, what lays ahead for the future of the police department including at its very top? Some say Diaz might be vulnerable and that Barber and he don't have the best relationship in part because Barber didn't hire him. Inhouse criticism of Diaz by several fronts has led to trying times for the police chief though it seems likely at least right now he'll survive that.  Some say that Asst. Chief Chris Vicino has his eye on the spot while others say that it's possible that Deputy Chief Jeffrey Greer who's practically invisible to everyone except when they need him to be in a hot seat on a controversial sell like the Red Light Camera program might be leaving. 

If that were to happen, who does the department have to replace him or anyone else for that matter? In the three years that Diaz has been here, who's ready to step up into those management positions? Who won't be bringing a trouble history with him? Will Diaz reign be a decade long like he predicted?

All this remains to be seen.

When There's Too Many Police Chiefs in the Kitchen...

UPDATE 

COMING UP: 

Is life about to get tougher for this councilman?

A Huge Fight looms on the dais over the "red light" camera as one council member declares war on another and how will it impact Election 2013? 



Frankly, I don't know where you come down on the mayor's race, but there needs to have someone in
that position and on the council seats who want to STAND UP and not roll over on everything for the
lowest common denominator to NOT get anyone upset.
If a council can't make a basic decision on conduct and show some leadership, why are they there.
At this point Andy, I think that it best that I NOT do your fundraising and frankly, during the next cycle I
will just do stuff for Steve and Chris. Davis has won re-election already because NO one will join a
chorus. This is very disturbing.
If this council can't do the right thing against Mr. Davis .... why is the Council there? The bully has won
and
those that have enabled him totally, in my opinion, lack any character on this issue and others. Some of
my past emails also have referred to things that I got involved with this city ...particularily the Fox
Theatre. No one listen to me then .... everyone rolled over to a mayoral appointment committee that did
exactly what shouldn't have been done ... and you have a $34million White Elephant on your hands---with
NO solutions to deal with it. And, I could go on about other issues as well.


-----Mike Williams, from Campaign consultant and fundraising firm, Michael Williams Company in email written to Councilman Andy Melendrezed and carbon copied to Councilman Steve Adams, Chris MacArthur, Mayor Ron Loveridge and former Councilman Ed Adkison




Oh what tangled webs we weave....

What are the newest "three amigos" discussing over Mexican food on the other side of town?

Alleging a conflict of interest is a political tactic, Adams said.
“This is an absolute harassment attempt by a group of people who are friends with another council member … to create an issue that does not exist.”


---Councilman Steve Adams to the Press Enterprise on questions asked on why he voted on the red light camera program which employs among others his brother.






Drew Peterson Convicted of First Degree Murder of Kathleen Savio 



Stacy, you are now next for justice,"

-----Nick Savio declared as he finished speaking about Stacy Peterson missing since 2007



While his attorneys swear to appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court if necessary, the question remains:

What happened to Stacey Peterson?

The Davis Investigation

Coming soon....



The RPD promoted its newest lieutenant, Valmont Graham. 



Sparks fly at City Council between Councilman Paul Davis and two other council members after City Attorney Greg Priamos reports on complaint filed against Davis, in open session. The best Dan Bernstein column ever was written in response to the total hypocricy of the city council's "independent" (yeah right, the investigator works directly for Greg Priamos in his office not an outside firm unless he's recently PERS disqualified) investigation and censure of Councilman Paul Davis.  Wasn't it ironic that the two loudest council members were both alleged to have violated the city charter when they interfered with police promotions at the captain and lieutenants' level?  

Where's the "independent" investigation and public censure of them?  Should the Davis incident have been investigated?  Yes as an ethics complaint (and none so far filed by citizens have been "investigated") but don't call your own city employee an "independent investigator." This should apply to Council members like Rusty Bailey and Steve Adams  for charter violations (which are integral parts of what the city has been sued over) as well if the process of investigation is a fair and ethical process. 





Former Riverside Police Department Officer in the hot seat over DUI reporting incident involving Costa Mesa mayor. On one hand, it begs questions of what happened with fingers being pointed everywhere, on the other, how  did the mayor avoid a breathalyzer test?   How do politics and range wars and spy versus spy play out in the OC?




UPDATE from City Hall

The letter that City Attorney Gregory Priamos sent to a law firm representing Mission Ambulance forbidding the firm and its attorneys from communicating directly with elected officials and city staff. 











UPDATE FROM ORANGE STREET

The fatal shooting of a dog at a residence by RPD officers while establishing a perimeter around a murder suspect sparks controversy as the the "Cheetos Brigade" responds. Hopefully there will be more information provided on this incident by Chief Sergio Diaz. 

Is the next major promotion lurking in the wings to be revealed soon?  And if so, who's really pulling the strings at Orange Street?

Stay tuned...

Summer definitely came to Riverside this month in the form of a blistering heatwave. So many people are cooling off even as the hot days of summer have reached the doors of both City Hall and the Riverside Police Department.

We Hate Bloggers, No We Love Blogs

How City Hall and the Press Enterprise Learned  to Love the Blog

The old stately courthouse is seeing plenty of attorneys hired by the city appear to defend it on employee initiated lawsuits

One of the most fascinating recent developments is how two entities who hate blogs have learned not only to hate them but to embrace this form of media in the past year.  That being the Riverside City Hall and the Press Enterprise both of which have started up blogs including in the latter's case an investigative journalism blog on municipal issues.

Now the coverage of the Press Enterprise on Riverside's issues has always been fascinating as have been its ties to the city which houses its headquarters.

In fact,  Thirty Miles of Corruption has revealed a little known historical fact  in its most recent blog posting. This has to do with  this public utility contract that the city council approved for the newspaper and Riverside Community College back in 2000. It's not clear whether this three year contract was definitively renewed beginning in 2003 and one would hope the city's only daily newspaper would veto any future contracts for lower rates.  After all, they write articles about people including those who lived on limited incomes including the elderly and/or disabled who struggle to pay their bills in the face of increasing costs with receiving that service. These people don't get the same sweet heart discounts and if the electric rate is so much cheaper to pay for as has been advertised by City Hall, why would entities like the Press Enterprise need these deals in the first place?  After all, wouldn't they and it be blessed simply by existing within the boundaries of a city with the most affordable rates in the state as is often said?

But the original contract is must reading because it appears on its face a clear gift of public funds to a media outlet. That's made clear by the absolutely ludicrous the reasoning the city came up with back then to offer the newspaper the lower rates.

Just read the sections under "fiscal impact" and "Alternatives" to see how ridiculous the city's been even in the past for justifying using public funds or a public service as a gift.  Under "fiscal impact", it states clearly how we the city residents benefit from the newspaper paying lower utility rates  "through the continued contribution from the Press Enterprise and the RCC to overall power costs".  Yet by paying their utility bills like the rest of us at the appropriate rates, wouldn't they be contributing even more money to "overall power costs". By paying less,  those contributions are less than what they should be wouldn't you think?

But if that's ridiculous, the city's rationalization under "Alternatives" is downright laughable ( and Riverside DA Paul Zellerbach are you reading this, you didn't like the four way landswap, this should drive you nuts) if you can read it without spitting out your morning coffee.  The city stated that if it didn't give cheaper rates to the PE and RCC then they would drop the city's electrical service and use another one thus costing city residents and utility customers money in the long run.  Wait a minute, doesn't Riverside own its own public utility company?  I wasn't aware that city residents or even businesses were given even one or two or a laundry list of other power companies to choose to do business with other than Riverside's own public utility.   And if that did happen, seriously how much money would the city lose if the PE powered its then tiny building with another source of electricity?

Really how stupid does the city view its own residents when engaging in business deals like this one?  It's perhaps controversial for public colleges and universities to get what amounts to subsidized utility rates (and the University of California Riverside at least for a while had its electric rates completely subsidized by the city).  But what for a media outlet that's supposed to represent the free and unbiased coverage of city issues, this is pretty alarming. I asked a journalism mentor of mine if he knew any other examples where media outlets had sweetheart deals with the cities that they covered and he could only think of one newspaper in Nebraska but it didn't involve reduced utility rates. It'll be interesting to research other media outlets who have been used facilities in Riverside including the Black Voice News and the Los Angeles Times and see if they received similar electric rates.  Though at the time the Press Enterprise was getting reductions in its operational costs, the Black Voice News had to spend money on attorneys to sue the city for removing 26 of its news racks off the streets and dumping them into a Public Works truck over the unilateral enforcement of a $1 million insurance policy solely against that publication. Because conversations with the Los Angeles Times and Orange County Register revealed that neither publication had ever been informed by the city that it needed a similar policty to operate news racks within city limits.  The Press Enterprise apparently wasn't paying it out either to the city.

It's interesting because some of the controversies and issues that Public Utilites has faced including one of the longest ongoing employment discrimination cases received scant coverage in the newspaper back that far. But it's not what is or is not going on in one of the city's largest department (though it's not clear whether everyone in the payroll of that department actually works in it). that drove that contract. This situation reeks of the involvement of current Mayor Ron Loveridge who if you recall was also instrumental for the city spending high six figures to hire a public relations firm (Sittrick which specializes in "crisis management") to advise and instruct the city on how to handle the news media.

Loveridge cursed the Press Enterprise (which was still family owned back then) even as he had close ties to the likes of Marcia McQueen (who served on the Charter Review Committee in 2003-04) because its coverage of the Miller shooting and its aftermath was extensive and helped put the city in the international spotlight and under its microscope courtesy of its subscription to the Associated Press.  The Black Voice News probably angered the city more but Loveridge and others followed some really (but hopefully not too expensive) advice to target that publication from expulsion and the city wound up settling a lawsuit with the publication.  The Press Enterprise which toned down its coverage in early 2000 deciding it was time to move on not to mention that like with the Black Voice News, the people connected to it were a llegedly getting anonymous death threats.

The city was especially nervous because after the months of addressing Miller were supposed to end, along came the controversial revelations involving the reverse racial and gender discrimination filed by a cluster of White male sergeants. The city had been embarrassed after then Chief Jerry Carroll found out that Loveridge had been the leader in brokering a settlement including the creation of two new lieutenant positions behind closed doors. Now Carroll was on his way out the door anyway but this unfortunate chain of events made his departure that much more expensive. It's interesting that the city's concern that its utility rates might be crimping on the Press Enterprise's ability to put out a daily newspaper appeared not long after the last mess surrounding Carroll's pique at elected officials including Loveridge involving themselves in the promotional process of the police department began to fade into the sunset.

What many people don't understand is that what's been wrong with City Hall actually predated the arrival of two of its most colorful inhabitants, former City Manager Brad Hudson and his assistant, Tom DeSantis. They didn't invent the bad behavior that inhabited a building, the climate that existed made it possible for them both to be added to its canvas.  Hudson was specifically targeted for recruitment to the city manager position perhap beginning before the ouster of George Carvalho from that position and he never failed to have a city council that didn't serve him.  Not only did they not prevent him from removing some key mechanisms of management accountability from City Hall they encouraged it.

Then the two of them went to town for over five years. But the playing field they enjoyed was well worn by their arrival.

Because it was former city manager, John Holmes who was the employee who signed on to this sweet-heart utility contract with the PE and RCC, not Hudson. It would have been former city manager, George Carvalho who would have signed on to its renewal if that's what happened in the summer of 2003 just before the new fiscal year started.

The Press Enterprise has facilties in different places in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties and when it comes to even the thinnest allegations of financial mismanagement or other forms of corruption in other places, the Press Enterprise has been right there even in one notorious case in the south-western part of the county when it was dead wrong.   But not so in Riverside where the Press Enterprise has vetoed coverage of the controversial awarding of employment contracts to the tune of over $600,000 to a part-time employee married to a department head.

The Press Enterprise allegedly backed away from covering the alleged interference of Councilman Steve Adams into the promotions of two police captains back in 2010. Even while it covered the scandals erupting on illegally purchased guns, illegally made badges and illegally issued cold plates, it wrote not one word on Adams' involvement in those two promotions.

Not until another deposition surfaced that was given by former Chief Russ Leach where he claimed that Adams had blocked the promotions of Captains Meredyth Meredith did the Press Enterprise write on this issue.  What was interesting in the latest article on the issue is that the reporter made reference to Leach's past deposition given in an earlier lawsuit and what he said (a bit less) about Adams' alleged involvement in the promotions. So the reporters at the newspaper clearly read the depositions including those by Leach but didn't write about the promotional issue until two years later.

The Press Enterprise didn't cover alleged incidents of preferential treatment given by Chief Sergio Diaz to employees who work in his office when they've been involved in off-duty incidents including an alleged assault and battery. Nor did it cover allegations that City Attorney Gregory Priamos at least planned to engage in pension spiking about nine years ago in relation to one of his former employees even when provided with evidence that this might have taken place.  That episode has come under attention in the past several weeks.

 Allegedly that one was stalled by concerns of what the city would do to the media outlet.   Interesting coming from a newspaper that back in the 1980s and 1990s hadn't been afraid of hardly anything.

Reading the newspaper back then especially in the 1990s provides a much better sense of what was going on in Riverside, both smooth and turbulent than reading the newspaper provides now.

Pressure had to be applied just to get already completed articles signed off by editors and published on the Bradley Estates controversy involving a former city councilman.

It's a shame because the reporters there are quite dedicated and talented but they're a long way down the food chain from making the decisions of what gets published in the newspaper that's gutted its staff in a serious of pink slipping and buyouts in the past few years.  Their hands appear to be tied because they won't report on anything unless the City Hall side of the story returns or responds to their inquiries or phone calls. The problem by adhering to that rule is that pretty soon City Hall realizes that all it has to do to kill a controversial story or just one it doesn't like is to just not return phone calls at all.   Most publications in its catagory of mainstream coverage just state that the person wasn't responding to requests for comment and after doing that once or twice, City Hall will start being more responsive to further inquiries because it will have learned that not responding no longer kills the stories.


All these observations made the news that the Press Enterprise would be embracing blogging more interesting to follow. It started with the blogs by giving its reporters this additional duty on top of their respective beats and then it most recently added an even newer blog into its roster.

City Hall had preceded it with a blog started by City Manager Scott Barber curiously at about the same time this blog was banished from the city's internet networks. It's been interesting to read although none of my suggestions on topics were ever embraced by it including the notorious four way land swap that seems to mainly serve to help two of the city's favorite private enterprises at its own expense or more accurately the expense of its city residents.


Like others I found it very interesting that the Press Enterprise started its own Government Watchdog Blog this past month. I found it also very ironic, because as a blogger since 2005, I'm fully aware of the evolution in terms of how mainstream reporters have related to blogging and bloggers since that form of electronic media began to take off.   Blogs became more populous after print media started its slow dieoff with newspapers cutting back in editions, pages and even closed shop including the Seattle Post Intelligencer and the Rocky Mountain News which both shut down hard copy production.

It's just that it's beyond fascinating to see how the print media is now embracing the same medium it used to curse. Journalist after editor after news anchor after talk show host used to complain that blogging wasn't "real" journalism.

Imagine the relief of bloggers everywhere that bloggins is now "real" enough for the mainstream media to embrace.  But a few postings into it, it's quite interesting including its focus on the use of the California Public Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act to be able to effectively cover even emerging scandals at City Hall. David Danelski who's probably the newspaper's best reporter and certainly its best investigative (and maybe only)journalist  which is rarer in print media than it used to be. When fewer business corporations (rather than families) started owning more and more outlets and then started slashing personnel and operational budgets, investigative reporting and indepth journalism were the first casualties of these actions taken by the Press Enterprise and other publications.

The latest blog posting is whether or not it's okay for lawyers to submit public information requests. While it's an interesting read, what really needs to be written about is what happens to Riverside's own city employees when they submit they utilize these federal and state sunshine laws.  Then, ask yourself  how much money have city residents paid out in the form of lawsuit settlements in connection with how City Hall has treated those who submitted these requests. More public documents could shed light on this issue but what is known is that three former police employees all with ties to the leadership of the two sworn police employees' unions had sued the city including for retaliation taken against them for union activities.

Former lieutenants Tim Bacon and Darryl Hurt (from the Riverside Police Administrators' Association during its most active and visible period) and Det. Chris Lanzillo (president of the Riverside Police Officers' Association) filed lawsuits that centered a lot on relaliation by city and police management or at its direction against leaders of collective bargaining units. Interestingly enough, all three former employees submitted pubilc records requests under the state laws defining such to receive public documents tied to expenditures by the city management and elected city officials in relation to primarily police equipment including but not limited to the following.

Police badges, police guns, cold plates, reversible tires, police lights, police radios and tire rims were among the items requested or utilized by city management, city legal and/or elected officials.  The punishment of the above employees which led to rather generous financial settlements of their lawsuits after varying periods of litigaton began after this search for information on illegal and unethical conduct at City Hall itself began. As one former deputy chief allegedly told one of them, you have a target on your back.

What's ironic (and there's so much irony) is that the Press Enterprise credited the CPRA requests it made for uncovering the majority of information on everything from the Leach DUI to the guns, badges and cold plates stories. But we both know that wasn't truly the case. Limited information was provided through public documents on the Leach episode including the CHP criminal investigative report which is public informatino under the law and the criminal case involving Leach was adjudicated at his arraignment.

In fact as I recall, most of the coverage on the CPRA aspect of the case was how former Asst. City Manager Tom DeSantis utilized a rather peculiar means of storing information on public documents, the post-it note.

Tom DeSantis's chosen method at storing public information

But anyway, after watching how mainstream journalism has always belittled the blog, it's fun to watch it embrace it. Danelski could turn it into something very special if perhaps the latest editor's not as restrictive as the last guard.

So happy blogging Press Enterprise, welcome to the club!

City Attorney Gregory Priamos, Thank You

and your buddy City Manager Scott Barber too!

The city attorney earned kudos for honoring the California Public Records Act request this month. A gold star for Gregory Priamos on his performance board.

Former Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach had plenty to say in his deposition

This blogger's been criticized in some circles for not being a little ray of sunshine at promoting City Hall and its busy agenda like other sites.  But lest anyone think that there's too much cynicism and criticism, this blog would like to extend a hearty thankyou to Riverside City Attorney Gregory Priamos for honoring the California Public Records Act request involving a request for depositions that were taken in connection if any with three lawsuits filed by Riverside Police Department officers against the City of Riverside.  Two of the cases were filed 1-2 years ago so it's likely that there would be depositions taken by either or both sides based on the timelines set by other lawsuits filed by city employees including those who work for the police department.


This was the content of the CPRA request.


Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 12:48 PM 

To: Barber, Scott 

Cc: Gardner, Mike; Melendrez, Andy; Bailey, Rusty; Davis, Paul; MacArthur, Chris

 Subject: CPRA request 

 Tuesday, July 24, 2012 

 City Manager Scott Barber
 City of Riverside 3900 Main Street 


 RE: Public Records Act Request 

 Dear Mr. Barber, 

 Pursuant to my rights under the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250 et seq.), I ask to inspect and/or obtain a copy of the following, which I understand to be held by your agency: 

 Copies of any and all sworn depositions taken in the following lawsuits against the city:

 Neely Nakamura vs the City of Riverside 

 Valmont Graham vs the City of Riverside 

 Duane Beckman vs the City of Riverside 

 I ask for a determination on this request within 10 days of your receipt of it, and an even prompter reply if you can make that determination without having to review the record[s] in question. If you determine that some but not all of the information is exempt from disclosure and that you intend to withhold it, I ask that you redact it for the time being and make the rest available as requested. 

 In any event, please provide a signed notification citing the legal authorities on which you rely if you determine that any or all of the information is exempt and will not be disclosed. If I can provide any clarification that will help expedite your attention to my request, please contact me at this email address. I ask that you notify me of any duplication costs exceeding $0 before you duplicate the records so that I may decide which records I want copied. 

 Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. 

 Sincerely,


Nearly 10 days later, I received an emailed response by Barber cced to all the people above.  He didn't include Priamos on that list but the request had gone through legal in the days preceding his responive email as the city had allegedly weighed whether or not to grant the CPRA request.


After careful review of your Public Records Act Request, there are a total of 47 pages of documents responsive to your request.  The City charges direct duplication costs of $0.60 for the first page and $0.10 for each additional page copied at the same time. Please remit payment in the amount of $5.20, made payable to the City of Riverside, should you desire copies of these documents.  Once payment is received, the documents will be promptly mailed to you.

This response to your request was made after consultation with legal counsel in order to ensure that this response complies with all applicable laws and regulations.


Very truly yours,



Scott Barber
City Manager

In response, the city manager's office through its adminstrator, Maureen Mitchell (who had worked in that capacity for the police department) authorized the release of  two depositions in relation to Graham's lawsuit which were those taken by East Side Think Tank president Mary Figueroa and Leach. 

Soon the Press Enterprise became interested in the latest Leach deposition and wrote about Leach's allegations of the "involvement" of two current councilmen in the police deparment's promotional process.  He expounded on the alleged interference of  Councilman Steve Adams which was more detailed by him in his April 2012 deposition than it had been earlier when he was depoed for the Bacon and Hurt lawsuits. 

Leach testifies about Adams crashing a meeting held by Hudson and DeSantis upset about Meredith's promotion.  Adams denied the allegations of promotional interference as he had earlier. Nonsense, he pretty much told the Press Enterprise which finally wrote on the subject. 

Here's an excerpt of Leach's testimony on the matter. 

"I got-- when I took an emergency call from DeSantis all panicky and said, "You're not going to promote Meredith are you?"

I said, "Yes. Best qualified this time for the job."

And he said, "No you're not going to do that."

And I found out Steve Adams marched into the meeting with both of them--meaning Hudson and DeSantis--told them emphatically she couldn't be promoted."


---Former Riverside Police Chief Russ Leach on April 9, 2012 about the aborted promotion of now retired Capt. Meredyth Meredith, one of two captain's positions that he alleged Adams interfered with.







Councilman Steve Adams and Capt. Jonn Carpenter sit together at a recent memorial obviously mending their fences. 

Then Leach moved on in his testimony about the promotional process that he said played out involving Carpenter.  That was the one where Adams, Carpenter and Adams' buddy, Esquivel met in some restaurant out of town (meaning El Torritos and the Salted Pig were definitely out) so no one they knew would see them together.  Leach testified twice that he had asked Esquival to help mediate between Adams and Carpenter as Adams' friend. 

What was interesting is how Esquivel played a prominant role in this episode as Leach testified he was pretty much out of the loop when it came to promotional decisions inside the department. 

"So I went to City Hall to have a face-to-face with Hudson and DeSantis to present what the testing process revealed and who we selected. And he said, "Well, let me think about it."

So I let him think about it And I hadn't heard from him for a while. And then I called back and he explained to me that Carpenter and Adams had bad history together. Adams was adament that he didn't want Carpenter to be promoted to captain."

---Leach on April 9, 2012

 In earlier depositions with the lieutenants' lawsuits, the parties involved in this get together said that they had mended their differences and issues and left happier. By noon, the following day Carpenter became the next police captain. 

When it comes to the alleged involvement of  Council Rusty Bailey, a finalist for mayor, Leach appears almost as bereft of details as he did in his initial deposition on Adams two years ago. He does say that due to his addictions to prescription pain medication between 2008-2010 that his memory's not great but what he does say about Bailey is interesting. 

It's not a given that he would be privy to how every promotion fell out or every conversation about the approval of his choice for promtion played out. Hudson and DeSantis kept quite a bit of their conversations on a lot of issues involving their heavy almost fetish like involvement with the police department behind their closed doors. 

The incident happened when Bailey attended a community meeting that was also attended by Graham when he worked under then NPC East Area Commander Larry Gonzalez.  People had asked questions about the number of police officers and their salaries and Graham had referred the qusestions back to the councilman for followup and response. Nothing that should be a big deal because after all if the councilman didn't know the answers then all he has to do is say, I'll research it and get back to you. May I have your contact information?  Next question.

 Bailey hadn't allegedly offered up any complaints when it happened but later he went to complain to Hudson and DeSantis according to Leach's testimony. 

What Leach said happened next is detailed on these pages. 

Page from deposition detailing Leach's alleged conversation with city management that took place not long after Bailey's complaint about the community meeting to it. 

The Press Enterprise article interprets the incident as being about how Bailey unwittingly got involved or interfered in the lieutenant's promotional process according to allegations raised by Leach's deposition. But Leach in his own words doesn't abscribe meaning or motive behind Bailey's actions as he testified to them.  He related an incident where he tried to even bring up the issue of promoting a lieutenant and DeSantis had immediately brought up Graham's name as don't tell me it's THAT person.  There's no context provided by Leach other than the incident involving Bailey's earlier complaint about a community meeting except to speculate that it could have been something else negative because Hudson and DeSantis had their own sources of information when researching various departments under their umbrella. 

But then Leach brings back the Bailey incident.

"The only conversation I had with DeSantis was about the Bailey thing and then he camed and asked me, "Who are you looking at for the upcoming lieutenant's vacancy?" Before I could answer that you know..."

In reference to when he felt that DeSantis had vetoed his choice when he had responded to him with "er.." given his use of that response in the past.  

Leach is certainly a vulnerable witness with a DUI history and even his statements that he had addictions to prescription drugs. He's been unpredicatable in the past when it comes to testifying but what his testimony shows best is the larger portrait of what went so terribly wrong at the top of the Riverside Police Department  including the civil war inside of it and what some would call its unholy marriage to the Seventh Floor at City Hall.  That's where the city's liability for damages and its risk lay not in the details that City Hall and its legal team are all wrapped in right now. It's not about whether Adams or Bailey even interfered with the  police department's promotional process thus violating the amendment in the City Charter prohibiting administrative interference, it's about the creation and proliferation of a culture that planted the seeds for wrongdoing of all different forms to take place.   If you look closely at all the depositions detaling the police department and City Hall whether you believe them all or not what you'll see is that all the major players at the top of the police department and City Hall know the games and they know how they play them. 

Let's just take one example. This impromptu out of town dinner by Adams, Esquivel and Carpenter in early January 2008 at a Corona restaurant. They all testified about it in 2010 as did Leach and none of them testified that it didn't take place. They all appeared to believe that it seemed perfectly legitimate for a police lieutenant to have to iron out his differences with an elected official to get promoted. Yet all three of them testified that it was best not to shop locally lest they be seen by other police department or city employees.

So how legitimate could the dinner have been if the three people involved would raise red flags just for being seen together at a restaurant?

It's amazing that just because Adams and Carpenter might have had a past conflict or problem that this would impact Carpenter's ability to be promoted by Leach and have that promotion signed off on by Hudson. 

This is even though the charter prohibits elected officials from engaging in administrative interference which means they really should have zero influence over the promotional process conducted by a department head. But if that were true, number one Leach would never have suggested this breaking of the bread session be done between Adams and Carpenter.  Carpenter never would have been in the position to accept that because it shouldn't have been germane to his engagement in the promotional process. Leach never would have had Adams' best friend and Carpenters' superior broker the peace treaty between the two.   

In other words, the dinner between the three of them would never have happened. 

It wasn't a dinner between equals as the heirarchy between Adams, Esquivel and Carpenter is quite clear and in that order. It gave Adams the most options and Carpenter the least in a process where it's perfectly legitimate for Carpenter to be involved but not Adams.  Try to sell this dinner date to a  reasonably intelligent jury and it'd never fly. 

It doesn't matter as much what they testified about why they met, the fact that they met at all and that Leach set up that meeting using Esquivel as the facilitator is why the city would have never been able to take the Bacon/Hurt lawsuits to trial and win in front of a jury.  All three parties can deny it to the high heavens that it spoke to a culture where elected officials dictate promotions and their subordinates in the department and management obey them. But their actions spoke louder.  You don't need to rely on Leach's flucutating memory to explain why it really happened. 

Somehow they all got copies of the same rulebook and they used it. What will be the city's legal defense for that reality? 

Some say the devil's in the details but while City Hall's so focused on them, it's missing what those details look like when they're all put together into what's called the larger picture. That's what will cost the city a lot if it tries to sell anything different in court. 

If this lawsuit goes to trial, it's that larger portrait that will be revealed and it's what will be remembered. Just like the trial involving Officer Roger Sutton became about much more than a racial discrimination and harassment allegation when you put the sum of all the sworn testimony together and an indictment against how the management of the department operated. It won't become absolutely clear until witness after witness for both sides goes up to testify in a public forum about their recollections that reality will sink in and by then it'll be too late. 

Current Chief Sergio Diaz hailed from the Los Angeles Police Department which also settled far many more civil cases than it tried and he's relying on its scant trial history to advocate vigorous litigation of police lawsuits in his new haunt. He's definitely raising an important point to the importance of the city not settling so quickly but he didn't study his local history even going back to just 2005. That's by his limited choice in terms of who would tell him. 

It's that total picture that resulted in the huge jury verdict in his favor. As shall it be with any employee lawsuit that the city foolishly opts to litigate all the way in front of a jury. 

Chief Sergio Diaz Promotes His Captain

The chief and two-thirds of his cabinet were involved in the promotion of the latest captain.   Deputy Chief Mike Blakely (not pictured) has been kept quite busy in his assignment to oversee the depositions of two police employees currently suing the city over practices in the police department. 

Chief Sergio Diaz however doesn't even pretend to be friendly to bloggers unless they promote him. After all, this blog in particular has been banned on all the city and police department networks since earlier this year. It had been restored on the public libraries' internet networks after mistakingly being banished from that venue as well under the apparent direction of City Manager Scott Barber.  It made total sense because Barber was trying to launch his own foray into blogging, the so-called Barber's Blog at the same time.

But anyway, Diaz and his cabinet were busy this past week because it came time to promote the new captain who would be replacing a recently retired Meredyth Meredith.  The short list allegedly included candidates Gary Leach, Bob Williams, Vance Hardin and Guy Toussaint. A couple dark horses loomed including Ed Blevins and Larry Gonzalez.   Diaz' calendar and that allegedly of his boss, Barber's had been busy with dinners and other meetings with some of the candidates showing that the public sector isn't necessarily that far removed from the corporate climate.  But others just went through the process without lobbying much at all.

At the end of his process, Diaz went with Blevins and in a first for him, he had one of the candidates, Public Information Officer Guy Toussaint issue his first press release in ages on a departmental promotion nearly 24 hours after it was announced here.

Blevins is a former president of the Riverside Police Officers' Association and had served in that capacity when Diaz first came onto the Riverside canvas through the recruitment and hiring process. He also enjoyed the most seniority among lieutenants even apart from those competing for the spot and worked different assignments.

His promotion didn't open up a lieutenant's position because his had been filled by the promotion of Sgt. Mark Rossi but the retirement of Williams this month did create a vacancy.  After former Deputy Chief Pete Esquivel vacated his job as head of security at the Tyler Galleria allegedly due to the night work schedule, allegedly Williams was offered to apply for that position.

 It's not clear yet whether or not Diaz will choose to fill it or simply backfill Williams' post overseeing Internal Affairs with a lieutenant from another assignment.  What isn't clear that if he does intend to promote another lieutenant will he do it off the currently active promotional list or wait until October or November when the testing and ranking process for the next lieutenant candidates' list is certified.  The job posting for anyone interested in applying to be a lieutenant opened and will close at the end of this month.

The usual group of candidates is expected to reappear on the list along with newer candidates which may or may not include several new sergeants including Pat McCarthy, Dan Russell, Gary Touissant, Dan Warren and Brian Dodson.

 It's always great when newer people engage the process and this could turn into one of the most interesting lieutenants' application and testing processes in recent memory.

The sergeants' rank is facing at least two retirements from its most experienced ranks. There are currently 50 positions at that rank down from 55.

RPOA's Thoughts Weigh Heavily on Who to Endorse for Mayor

Alicia's blog in the Press Enterprise detailed how the Riverside Fire Fighters' Association has endorsed Councilman Rusty Bailey for Mayor.   That's hardly surprising given that traditionally this bargaining unit's opted in elections to back incumbants.  That makes some sense because usually incumbents are strong favorites (though they don't necessarily parlay that to a win) and if you back them and they stay in office, you don't risk pissing them off or getting on their bad sides so they can punish you for your disloyality the next four years.  

That is, if the elected officials are so inclined. 

The Riverside Police Officers' Association has endorsed incumbents sometimes but they've endorsed newer candidates too. Remember Roy Saldanha who ran against Councilman Steve Adams in 2007? Adams didn't take too kindly to losing out on that endorsement by the RPOA and the Riverside Police Administrators' Association to the newcomer and that allegedly set up the stage for Adams' name coming up when controversies regarding two captains' promotions arose. 

The RPOA allegedly mended its fences with Adams after being upset by a misleading letter circulated by his campaign as well as some comments made him over a cup of coffee after that election. 

Councilman and mayoral candidate Rusty Bailey comes under fire for whether or not he interfered with the promotion of a Black  police sergeant now suing the city

Bailey had survived having his house burgled and items including a laptop computer stolen but the thief was caught not long after leading one Press Enterprise letter writer to compare it to the still unsolved burglary of his own home months ago where among the items stolen was his father's Purple Heart awarded after he was killed in the line of duty at war. 

But he's hit a roadblock with several law enforcement unions in terms of their endorsements though the RPOA plans to meet with both him and Adkison soon for interviews and a decison on whether the union through its political action committee will endorse anyone at all.   And now with the issue of Bailey that arose in Leach's latest depo, it's not clear whether or not the police unions will want to embrace him as a candidate for mayor. 

So what about former Councilman Ed Adkison? 

Former Councilman and the other mayoral candidate, Ed Adkison isn't necessarily feeling much love from the police union either

As it looked, he had his work cut out for him too with the RPOA which didn't appear too enthused about him either.  Whether or not that has anything to do with a union's frissure that took place when his colleague Councilman Frank Schiavone ran against his successor Paul Davis in 2009, it's not clear.  Ruptures in the process of endorsement seem to occur most often when two different groups of people involved go into the process supporting a candidate or in some cases even promising him or her the endorsement. 

That usually doesn't bode well when it happens.  

But it's not written in stone that a bargaining unit or union has to endorse either candidate. Sitting this one out might be a smart decision.  In such a close competition, there's not much to gain by endorsing one over the other. The most important part of the process is learning as much about how they stand on the pertinent issues including in their own words.