First Council Meeting of 2013

https://twitter.com/RialtosNowThis is the link to click on Twitter to get a play by play of Rialto City Council meetings we try to attend all of the meetings.

Current sitting Council from left to right. Shawn O'Connell, Ed Plamer, Mayor Robertson & Joe Baca Jr.

Current sitting Council from left to right. Shawn O’Connell, Ed Plamer, Mayor Robertson & Joe Baca Jr.

The meeting held January 8th 2013 was not long but it was full of interesting items.

Rialto PD Community Officer Cpl. Cameron Nelson is giving a presentation on the dangers of synthetic drugs

http://youtu.be/3BArWvTjysI opens his presentation.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/latest-videos?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=6714960 Dangers of “Spice” video.

http://youtu.be/-mil_VdTabk After the Video

http://youtu.be/mDbQRyhLL1g Continued presentation

http://youtu.be/BWea3iMX0Io Ends with a Question from Councilman Joe Baca Jr.

Councilman Palmer is asking questions about park cleanliness. This was in reference to Item D2 on the Consent Calendar. Councilman Ed Palmer raised concerns over park cleanliness and the quality of work being done by the outside contractors. His solution for one of the biggest and most used parks is Jerry Eves Park is to allow the Soccer League who uses that park the most to have the responsibility of keeping it clean and getting paid for it.

This is a good idea it raised allot of concerns from other council members of not including other sports leagues and giving them the opportunity, what about changes in the Volunteer ranks of sports leagues and what about parks that had no sports field. They approved the allotment of $39,661 to Azteca Landscaping for Landscape Maintenance District and Grounds Maintenance Services from now until June 30th 2013. In that time Public Works Director Marcus L. Fuller will put together a plan to include community partnerships with groups in Rialto. City Manager Mike Story suggested that the sports teams caring for their own fields could be used to eliminate some of the lighting fees the city has began asking the teams to pay with cuts in revenue.

June Hayes lambastes council over confusing utilities concession agreement. There are businesses and homes outside the city limits that are tied into our waste water system. These individuals are charged 3 times the amount a waste water customer is charged inside the city limits. With the new connection agreement the talk was if the rates would be necessary or fair. The justification of the higher rates remaining was to allow a buffer to exists to help bridge any unseen accounting issues over the next year.

At the last council meeting Councilman Shawn O’Connell asked the city staff to go over the figures and better pin down what was needed and if they could do with a smaller buffer in an effort to bring outside customers in line or close to that of customers inside the city. June Hayes argument was the councils apparent lack of foresight and continued damage to potential businesses by charging the external businesses at such a higher rate. They made a decision to lower the rates for the residential customers from 3 times what Rialto Residents pay to 1.3 times the rate. The rate for the businesses effected outside the city would remain at the rate of 3 times. The reason was to make sure that if Veolia the outside contractor running the wastewater systems number were incorrect the Rialto Rate payers would be in jeopardy of having to fill in the gap with even higher rates. Council echoed the notion you feed the family (Rialto Residents) first. After a year they will re-evaluate the charges. City Attorney Jimmy Gutierrez stated they can legally (in his opinion) charge outside customers higher rates and make a profit.

Councilman Palmer asks for true transparency no more wasting tax dollars on veiled vacations. City Council in an effort to show that they will do whatever they can to show they are sharing in the cuts. This was done by a Motion Councilman Joe Baca Jr. that all trips, conferences and trainings would be frozen for the remainder of this year’s budget ending June 30, 2013 if someone thought there was a reason to attend an event or travel they would have to bring the item before the council and let the people hear what the money was being spent on. Staff reported that there was $22,343 left in the council’s budget and $6,400 for supplies.

Joshdularny@inlandnewspapers.com

Joshdularny@inlandnewspapers.com

Josh Dulaney of the San Bernardino Sun Newspaper called this an attempt to look in the couch cushions for spare change in a effort to balance the budget. If Mr. Dulaney ever spent any real time at council meetings or even getting to know the city he would have known the reasoning for Councilman Ed Palmer to bring this up as a TAB item. Councilman Palmer stated that when he first became a Council Person that he was told the trips were vital, after a few though he began to see it was more vital for city staff to attend conferences and such since they were the ones getting the deals done. He also stated that trips to Washington were more like tax payer vacations because if he wanted to speak with (then) congressman Baca he could see him when he was here in the district.

Mayor Robertson objects to councilman Baca’s motion to eliminate council travel budget and vote on each instance as needed it appeared she saw it as an attack on her the vote passed 3-1 with Mayor Robertson voting No. Two of the amounts highlighted in the budget report were $25,203 for membership in the League of Cities and 5,200 for Mayors League of cities registration.

We move from council travel budget to slurry seal contracts. According the Public Works Director Marcus Fuller in the past the contractors have failed to cover the amount of area they promised so the city is behind their scheduled Slurry Seal plan. American Asphalt was the chosen bid and they came in well under the amount that Mr. Fuller had calculated. Mr. Fuller hoped to be able to extend the scope of work and catch up on the places they have fallen behind.

Visit this web link to learn what Slurry Seal is and what it is used for http://amasphalt.com/services/preventative-maintenance.asp

Moving right along to discussing how to fill the empty council seat the debate over filling the empty council seat was more how to appoint the person and less about if an election was even in the discussion. Mayor Robertson wanted the process to be identical to when she was appointed. With the mayor attending some events in Washington DC this month and the looming deadline of the Utility Tax ballot measure and the further city debt to deal with the councilmen O’Connell, Palmer & Baca decided to have interested parties submit a letter of reference to the city clerk’s office and the Mayor forced a 3 day deadline of last Friday 1-11-2013 at 5 pm. The word around is that 9 people submitted letters for the council to look over. We know that Joe Britt, Ed Scott & Raphael Trujillo were confirmed to have included their letters, the other 5 remain a mystery. Council will spend the following week to make a decision and will make it public on 1-22-2013. To hold a special election it will cost $285K for open council seat that made this avenue a dead issue.

Something confused me at this meeting & I plan to obtain clarification. I requested to speak on 2 issues at this council meeting. I submitted my intentions on the communications form and submitted it. For some reason Mayor Deborah Robertson chose to ignore this intent and force me to wait until the end at the Oral Communications portion of the meeting. It was my understanding that people were directed to this point when they were speaking on an issue not on the current agenda. Under the Oral communications section Council, staff or the Mayor are under no obligation to respond or address your comments. Is it Mayor Robertson’s intent to ignore the will of the people?

In the Oral Communications I (David Phillips) and Rafael Trujillo spoke out. I spoke on the need to be quick, fair & wise with the council appointment as well as highlighting more wasted money that was allocated to the rails to trails project in the amount of $14,500 through heavily populated gang area.

Rafael Trujillo spoke out on the large amount of graffiti that plagued our city over the holidays. Mr. Trujillo was so much calling out the city as he was pleading with them to take care of the graffiti in a timely manner. He said that his community takes care of graffiti inside his community (Elm Park) but he needed the city to pick up the slack on the outskirts of his community.

___________________________

Advertisment

Join us and help Rialto Rid itself of dangerous thugs and tagging crews by attacking their markings go to http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rid-Rialto-of-Graffitti/216882198324244

Join us and help Rialto Rid itself of dangerous thugs and tagging crews by attacking their markings go to http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rid-Rialto-of-Graffitti/216882198324244

Press Release from Rialto Water Services (WasteWater)

 

 

Rialto Water Services selects Veolia Water

 

to upgrade and operate City of Rialto’s water, wastewater services

 

 

 

Partnership will focus on updating City’s infrastructure and adding efficiencies

 

 

 

RIALTO, Calif., December 3, 2012 – Rialto Water Services has selected Veolia Water West Operating Services (Veolia) to improve, operate and maintain the City’s water and wastewater services.

 

Under a public-private concession agreement signed between the City and RWS in March of 2012, RWS will manage the Veolia contract and oversee a $41 million capital improvements program improving the cost efficiency, compliance, water quality, and reliability of the City’s wastewater and water systems for the 30-year life of the concession. The capital improvements program produces 445 construction jobs, and all affected City employees have accepted jobs at Veolia.

 

The RWS concession refinances the City’s aging water and wastewater systems, and provides the capital necessary to fix and replace water and sewer lines, develop necessary new infrastructure and seismic upgrades, improve cost efficiencies, and provide lease payments back to the City supporting additional economic development and jobs locally. Rialto retains full ownership of the water and wastewater systems, control and ownership of the water supply and water rights, and transparent public authority over all rate setting.

 

For RWS, Veolia was a natural choice as Operator, considering Veolia’s 40-year history in California and 9 years providing environmental services and employment to Rialto residents as operator of the City’s wastewater plant and collection system.

 

Neighboring West Valley Water District will take an expanded leadership role on the City’s water supply side, heading up the perchlorate remediation to ensure the continued safety of the water supply, and expansion of the City’s water capacity. West Valley will continue to serve the balance of Rialto’s residents, and to innovate with the City on the 2013 debut of the nation’s first bioremediation plant approved for drinking water.

 

“The RWS partnership ensures that the City’s water and wastewater infrastructure is upgraded and run in the most cost-efficient manner, while also laying the groundwork for new economic development,” says City Administrator Mike Story. “We’ve worked with Veolia for years in the community, and with West Valley on water supply and treatment, and this arrangement allows for both continuity and improvement in the water resource and wastewater service, and assures us that the total commitment to the residents of the City of Rialto is met.”

 

Under the contract, Veolia Water will operate and manage (O&M) a sewer collection system consisting of more than 260 miles of pipeline, six lift stations, and a wastewater treatment plant currently operating at approximately eight million gallons per day. Veolia Water will also provide O&M services for the City’s water system, with a total user population estimated to be approximately 50,000. The water system includes five water reservoirs, distribution, eight groundwater wells, and related pumping infrastructure.

 

“We’ve worked with Rialto for almost 10 years and have established a relationship of trust that supports the community’s economic vitality,” said Laurent Auguste, president and CEO, Veolia Water Americas. “Rialto is taking the right step in restoring and improving its infrastructure, and we’re excited for the opportunity to help them through our new and expanded role.”

 

The financial backing and structuring of Rialto’s groundbreaking public-private concession was provided by San Francisco-based Table Rock Capital, led by Peter Luchetti. RWS is jointly owned with an affiliate of the labor-owned financial services company, Ullico Inc.

 

“With the loss of redevelopment financing, creative partnerships such as these are increasingly critical to communities who want to restore infrastructure, gain efficiencies, and get a competitive edge when it comes to creating jobs and economic growth,” said Luchetti.

 

Story praised all of the partners in the deal: “Table Rock has worked hard to back and structure this and get it right for Rialto, and we’re glad to see Veolia stepping in to take a supportive, expanded role in our community. Then the expertise West Valley brings to the City to manage the perchlorate remediation and ensure our water quality and supply is invaluable.”

 

 

 

###

 

 

 

Contact:

 

 

 

Steve Lambert, The 20/20 Network for Veolia/RWS, 909.841.7527, steve@the2020network.com

 

Mike Story, City of Rialto, 909.820.2525, mstory@rialtoca.gov

 

Megan Matson, Table Rock Capital, 415.497.2320, mmatson@t-rockcap.com

 

Sonia Axter, Ullico, 917.293.6754, saxter@ullico.com

 

Power Point Slides from the UUT Workshop

First Council Meeting Since the October Election Blackout

Seems like we should have had those meetings in October after all.

Because no City Council Meetings were held in October due to the Election we had a stacked calendar tonight.

They had the Utility Users Tax on the end of the agenda and choose to address that TAB item first. What that TAB item was for was city staff laying out the ground work for the workshop that will be held November 20th. What seemed the hardest was getting the council on board to attend the workshop, the biggest problem maker was Joe Baca Jr. I’m not sure if he was still licking his wounds from November 6th or if he really only cares about parks and that’s it but he had a scheduling conflict with that day and refused to adjust his schedule.

What the UUT (Utility Users Tax) is the 8% tax on all the utilities you use in the city of Rialto and amounts to a little more than 11 million dollars for the general fund. The way it was sold 5 years ago was a tax to help pay for Police and Fire operations looking back it was probably sold the same way Measure “V” was if you don’t vote for this the police and fire will suffer. I was young and not living in the city back then so I was listening to what my parents, in laws & friends were telling me about the UUT.

What’s scary now is they began floating the idea of raising the percentage to as high as 12% as a way to punish voters for not falling for their lies with Measure “V”. I don’t like this tax but if they are straight with the community and don’t raise the percentage because it means such a big piece of the general fund.

What also was annoying was the fact that things are changing with the sale of Rialto’s water and waste water systems to Viola and West Valley Water. The deal was for 30 million dollars, tonight it was brought up that there is an additional 5 Million the city can borrow, that we have to pay back. There was talk of your 100 percent increase in rates over 4 years would be more if they borrowed that money.

City Staff brought up bringing back the Per’s Tax. I’m not familiar with this tax but Council was scared to death of another lawsuit from our friends the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Apparently Howard Jarvis stopped Rialto from doing this long ago. If they bring it back and Jon Coupal wants to sue on a residents behalf I will be first in line.

Everyone kept saying we don’t want to raise taxes then talked about a new way to tax the community. Also Transparency is the buzz word right now all of the Council People want to provide it even though they have been hiding things from us for years. Even June Hayes RUA Committee member was blown away by the new talk of 5 million in available borrowed money.

Ed Scott tried to equate the 5 million to a homeowner who buys a house then finds out they qualify for more money and takes it. A homeowner can only take more money if the value of the house meets the desired loan amount. Also its not free money it does raise the interest and principle monthly payment.

So 5 million is what percent of 130 million its 3.84 percent almost a filth of the entire loan and when your talking millions that’s not chump change.

So lets re-cap:

*Water and Waste Water rates will go up for the next four years.

*Rialto wants you to possibly pay 12% on your UUT (up from 8%).

*Rialto pays 8-10 cents more per gallon than cities like San Bernardino that have higher sales tax than Rialto.

*Late fees were increased largely in part to Mr. Everyone Else Is Doing It Why Not Us.

So what should we do?

First off plan on being at the UUT Workshop on 11-20-12 at 6pm.

Second call, email and ask him in person if given the opportunity. Him I mean Joe Baca Jr. who for some reason refuses to attend the UUT workshop on 11-20-12 he claims to have plans. So do I Mr. Baca my parents will be in that week from out of state yet I will be there and I am not a paid member of the city of Rialto just a concerned resident.

Joe Baca Jr.

Email: Bacaj@rialtoca.gov

Phone: 909-820-2525

Second attend the Council Meeting on 11-27-12 because there they will make the final vote to officially sell off the water and waste water, vote on whether to put the UUT on the ballot in March and at what percent and its the last day for Ed Scott, Mayor Grace Vargas and Deborah Robertson’s last day as a council member so there may be some interesting exchanges at this meeting.

Tomarrow I will Re-cap the rest of what I stayed for.

 

City of Rialto Election Update

Looks like the winners for city council are:

Shawn O’Connell and “incumbent” Ed Palmer

Looks like the winner for Mayor is:

Deborah Robertson

We are proud to see Shawn and Deborah win their perspective elections. Its exciting to see some change finally taking hold.

Vote Count Percent
ED SCOTT 6,888 43.22%
DEBORAH ROBERTSON 9,050 56.78%
Total 15,938 100.00%

Rialto – City Council
46/46 100.00%
Vote Count Percent
SHAWN P. O’CONNELL 5,693 24.44%
SARMAD ”SAM” SYED 894 3.84%
JUNE D. HAYES 3,500 15.02%
RAFAEL TRUJILLO 4,438 19.05%
JOSEF ”JOE” BRITT 2,382 10.22%
ED PALMER 6,389 27.43%
Total 23,296 100.00%

Also we would like to anounce what appears to be the end of the BACA DYNASTY. Joe Baca Sr. & Joe Baca Jr. both lost in this open election to well know democrat contenders. We also learned alot via dirty mailers about Joe Baca Jr. and his past, must watch him as he still sits on our City Council.

Congressional – District 35
245/245 100.00%
Vote Count Percent
DEM – GLORIA NEGRETE MCLEOD 46,627 53.96%
DEM – JOE BACA 39,788 46.04%
Total 86,415 100.00%
State Assembly – District 47
284/284 100.00%
Vote Count Percent
DEM – JOE BACA JR. 31,811 43.77%
DEM – CHERYL R. BROWN 40,871 56.23%
Total 72,682 100.00%

 

Also Our Congressional District 31 here is the winner:

Congressional – District 31
443/443 100.00%
Vote Count Percent
REP – BOB DUTTON 55,940 44.81%
REP – GARY G. MILLER 68,892 55.19%
Total 124,832 100.00%

Also Measure “V” seems to have lost!!!!!!!!!!

Measure V – City of Rialto
46/46 100.00%
Vote Count Percent
YES 7,585 47.10%
NO 8,518 52.90%
Total 16,103 100.00%

WOMAN’S CLUB OF RIALTO A CANDIDATES FORUM

Below you will see the details on the first debate amoung the canidates looking to lead Rialto into the next few years.

We have included a map from google to better give you an idea on where the club is:

WOMAN’S CLUB OF RIALTO

219 North Riverside Ave.
PRESENTS

A CANDIDATES FORUM

October 4th, 2012 – 7:00pm (Thursday)
Mayor
Deborah Robertson
Ed Scott
RIALTO CITY COUNCIL
Shawn P. O’ Connell
Sarmad (Sam) Syed
June D. Hayes
Rafael Trujillo
Josef (Joe) Britt
Edward Palmer
CITY CLERK
Barbara A. McGee
City Treasurer
Edward J. Carrillo
MODERATOR
Lynn Hirtz
ALL WELCOME
Sharon Hughes (909) 875-3197
Angie Consolo (909) 4009

RIALTO AIRPORT: Move to San Bernardino advances or miss-use of Water Sale Money

Below you will find a story from the Press Enterprise Newspaper. The articles purpose is to highlight the work moving forward at the San Bernardino Airport with the closing of the Rialto Airport. We were told that the $30 Million the city would secure by selling off our water for 30 years and raising our rates over four years by more than 100% was going to go to allow the city to afford the types of upgrades necessary when your developing land where there isn’t drainage, adequate streets for expected traffic along with street lights and signals. Reading below at first sight you think your reading about the continued relocation of the airport to move forward with its closure, but that’s not the case to those of us who still fight against this evil deal.

The following was never made clear to the public:

  1. Anything about the bulk of land sales going to the San Bernardino Airport for relocation costs.
  2. That now that the land is worthless and not desired by anyone, the city made another bad deal on our behalf to give away the supposed Capital Development money obtained from the bad water deal.

What makes the water deal and now the Airport Closure stink are:

  1. Closing of the Airport puts our own Helicopter program in jeopardy. We will have to take our own helicopter to another Airport creating an unnecessary delay in response time (which newspaper article will we find tells us where our helicopter will be based since the city hates telling the community what they are doing).
  2. $30 Million isn’t allot of money when it comes to large development. If a BULK of the money must go to San Bernardino what money is left for all the BUSINESS they think they can attract to come to RIALTO?
  3. Why wont the city tell us all the people connected to the city who will make millions at Rialto Rate Payers Expense.
  4. The statement from Councilman and Mayor Candidate ED SCOTT that the settlement money from the perchlorate cases wont be enough to repay Rialto businesses who paid perchlorate fees for years right along with Rialto residents. So Ed Scott wants us to promote him to Mayor and trust him with the responsibility of attracting new business to the city. He has his hands super dirty in being on the committee that hired failed Superior for graffiti removal services, being a council member that still likes and wants American Water as the servicer of Rialto’s failed water deal and calls the police and makes false accusations against Rialto Residents because he doesn’t like what they say.
  5. Target, Super Wal-Mart and In & Out are the three projects on tap for the $30 million, if we have to give most of that money to San Bernardino how will any of these projects happen?

Read the article below, then email your council members and city administrator and ask them to finally be honest with us!!!!!

 

Little activity goes on at Rialto Airport these days. The last few tenants could find a new home at San Bernardino International Airport.

Seven years after an act of Congress ordered Rialto Municipal Airport closed, the effort to shift tenants to San Bernardino International Airport took a small step on Wednesday, Sept. 12.

The San Bernardino International Airport Authority awarded contracts worth up to $1.8 million combined for the design of hangars that will serve private pilots and the San Bernardino County sheriff’s aviation operation.

TR Design Group, a Riverside-based company that built a city call center at Riverside Municipal Airport as well as structures near March Air Reserve Base, was awarded up to $902,720 to develop plans, including architectural and engineering, for the sheriff’s hangar.

An $868,500 contract went to Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. for design work and oversight of the eventual construction of amenities for private pilots and their planes that would be relocated from Rialto to San Bernardino’s 32-acre site.

Funding will come from the authority’s related Inland Valley Development Agency. The agency has so far received approval from the state’s Department of Finance to use bond revenue for the new hangars and amenities. State law dissolved redevelopment agencies earlier this year and forced them to seek approval from the finance department when they want to spend property tax revenue on unfinished redevelopment projects.

The IVDA has estimated it could cost $9.55 million to build the sheriff’s hangar, according to the list of financial obligations approved by the state. The general aviation improvements could cost nearly $7 million.

In 2005, Congress made the rare move to close Rialto Airport because the city — the airport’s owner — wanted to see the land developed with homes, retail and other improvements. A large portion of the money earned from selling the land was supposed to have gone to the San Bernardino airport to create space for the tenants forced to move. But the economy soured, land values plummeted, and no land was sold or developed. Tenants still pay rent month-to-month at Rialto Airport, where weeds are visible sprouting from the runway.

Recently, the city of Rialto approved a complicated deal to contract out its water management in order to earn money to reimburse San Bernardino airport for a portion of the costs.

Rialto Airport, which has been further tangled in uncertainty because of the dissolution of the city’s redevelopment agency, is expected to close by 2014, said Chad Merrill, project manager for the IVDA and San Bernardino airport.

Municiple Bonds Become Volitile, What Does This Mean For Rialto?

“A decision by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. BRKB +0.28% to end a large wager on the municipal-bond market is deepening questions from some investors about the risks of buying debt issued by cities, states and other public entities.”

“Some investors said the decision to end the bet indicates that one of the world’s savviest investors has doubts about the state of municipal finances“.

Read more of the Wall Street Journal article at the link below:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443855804577601413630604118.html

So what I find funny in a scary way about all this is Rialto/RUA is looking to take out a $177 Million loan with $27.4 Million in existing debt. I was told that the overall rate is going to be between 7.25% & 7.5%. Yet the bulk ($144 Million) we will be paying 4.33% to 4.83% so the rates average out to be so expensive once we tack on existing debt. Why is that?

First of all because California has borrowed itself into a hole. That’s why governor Brown & a ton of other people have qualified tax measures for the November ballot. They have borrowed us into a massive hole and wont stop spending to save this state.

Second cities, school districts, counties and the state have been using bonds as a dirty band aide for their budget woes. Bonds were seen as good long term investments because municipalities made sure money was there for the bond payments to keep AA & AAA bond ratings or good credit scores. Now they just don’t have the money so they are defaulting on payments or just faulting altogether with Bankruptcy.

I have said time and time again, this deal isn’t good for the RESIDENTS in RIALTO! Yes the infrastructure needs to be upgraded but Rialto and the RESIDENTS are not in the position take on such massive debt while reaching into the pockets of struggling families. Do you know how we are going to pay the interest on this debt; we are borrowing money to pay the first three years. So that means we are borrowing more money than needed to pay interest on debt we cannot afford.

I have heard that this deal is worth $1 Billion to the parties involved. We need to stop this deal in its tracks, hold on and once our economy is back on track look into moving forward. Rialto will be $5 Million in the hole this year. Meaning we are using our reserves for what we can’t get out of our unions in the way of contract negotiations.

The amount of money we are in the hole ($5 Million) is the same amount that staff said was nessicary to bring all the county areas up to city code ($5 Million) since the city and the mangers of the Lytle Creek Development were strong armed by Josie Gonzales and the rest of the Board of Supervisors on the county board. They said if we wanted to annex the county areas in the proposed Lytle Creek Development we must also annex the areas already within our city limits. So when Ed Scott tells you that the water deal isn’t part of the Lytle Creek Development what are we supposed to think with this info. Looks like $5 Million is coming from the borrowed money to fund yet another project.

Warren Buffets recent actions means he dosent trust municipalities ability to re-pay the loans!!!! Said Ric Edelman of Edelman Finacial Services (see the podcast link below, fast forward to the last 7 minutes).

http://www.ricedelman.com/cs/radio_show/past_shows?id=1837

I have been told that this deal is also nessicary for attracting new development. What I find funny is In & Out is good to go for next year and Wal-Mart has won its lawsuits and plans to move forward with plans to re-locate to the empty lot on the corner of San Bernardino and Riverside Avenues (I don’t like this store). So why do we need 30 million dollars? To pay off the back room deals that Ed Scott and Ed Palmer have made with the Lewis builders (Target Developers) and Ron Pharrise the principle owner of the Lytle Creek Development. So once they have wasted the 30 Million dollars then what? Our CURRENT city government is so horrible at attracting real development that the community actually wants.

For example I have heard numerous council members say in reference to In & Out “we need more than another fast food place” or “we have enough burger joints”. We have too many crappy stupid chain fast food burger joints that hire the worst employees, pay the lowest wages and offer horrible customer service. On top of all that they offer a un healthy over processed food option.

In & Out is the best burger option in the State. They offer fresh quality food at a reasonable price. They also are and employer that looks for the best expects the best and pays a very fair wage. They are always clean, polite and productive. The next best option is Bakers but for some reason they are always right smack in the middle of the worst part of the city.

People in Rialto do you want to see this deal drag this city into ruin? How much more money do you want to give these defunct local legislators? Stop the back room deals and call them on this failed deal, also let’s vote for major change in November.

Below is a list of people tied to or working on this Water Deal call and email them and let them know what you think of their deal even if you already called or emailed do it again they have yet to get the message:

All Council Members can be reached at 909-820-2525 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            909-820-2525     end_of_the_skype_highlighting

Grace Vargas vargasg@rialtoca.gov

Ed Scott

scotte@rialtoca.gov

Joe Baca Jr

bacaj@rialtoca.gov

Ed Palmer

palmere@rialtoca.gov

Deborah Robertson

robertsond@rialtoca.gov

Contact Anthony W. Araiza General Manager

administration@wvwd.org
Table Rock Finacial:
Megan – 415-497-2320 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            415-497-2320     end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Lynn Smull – 510-326-3209 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            510-326-3209     end_of_the_skype_highlighting

855 W. Base Line Road P.O. Box 920 Rialto, CA  92377 Ph: (909) 875-1804 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            (909) 875-1804     end_of_the_skype_highlighting ext. 703 Fx: (909) 875-7284

Update and comentary on prop 218 count

Let me preface this article with a little piece of info. When your asking someone to invest in your company or idea you give a portion or percentage over to them for a certain dollar amount.
City Council and Staff along with the RUA valued the water and waste water at 30 million dollars of which they are cashing out in total. American Water is valuing the water and waste water systems at 130 million dollars, with a 3 million dollar reduction each year we honor the contract. So when the contract is so bad we just can’t stomach their lack of service and customer service people working in call centers in India we have to pay them at their valuation. So a city with no money as it is we will be stuck with this crappy bad deal. The city has already begun to sell your services down the drain. Street sweepers that under sold a contract to get the work to come back later for more money. Graffiti removal services where the owner actually said who cares if the tags stay up another day or two if it saves the city money.
Remove these people this november and send a message that we demand to be heard and represented.
RIALTO – A big question surrounding Rialto’s controversial 30-year contract with American Water Works Co. Inc. will be answered Tuesday.That’s when officials from the City Clerk’s office will count Proposition 218 protest ballots starting at 1 p.m.

Proposition 218 requires cities to have a vote of potentially affected residents when a rate hike is proposed.

In the case of Rialto’s proposed water rate hikes, a large number of ballots came into the city within the last 30 minutes of the deadline on June 12, Mayor Pro Tem Ed Scott said Friday.

That prompted the City Council to defer a vote on the final procedure to institute a series of rate hikes that would mean a 114.5-percent increase in water and wastewater

A wheel line irrigation system operates in an agriculture area near the offices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company in Hinkley. (Gabriel Luis Acosta/Staff Photographer)

rates by 2016.

The rate hikes are part of a plan to outsource the management of Rialto’s water and wastewater systems to American Water.

The matter will be taken up again at a City Council meeting on June 26.

While the vote tally could end the deal, that result is unlikely, election observers say, as more than half of the Rialto property owners and renters who are ratepayers – plus one – would have filed a protest.

But there’s another issue looming that could derail the water agreement and rate hikes.

On May 12, members of the Utility Workers of America turned in petitions with more than 6,400 signatures seeking to put the council’s water rate decisions to a vote, which could be held in November or at another time selected by the council.

Only about 3,800 signatures are needed to take the council’s action to voters.

The city hired the county’s elections office to validate the signatures.

Scott said he has not heard the result, but that too would come out on the council meeting of June 26.

Not only do signatures need to be valid, but the process to collect the signatures needs to be valid, Scott said.

Joe Baca Jr., who was the lone dissenter in the rate hike vote, said most Rialto residents understand that rates need to increase to pay for water system upgrades, just not so rapidly.

—————————————————————————————————————-

Advertisement

Social Media Marketing for all your needs. Specializing in Non-Profit, Community Groups and Public Safety Organizations. Visit us at www.davidsinlandempiremarketing.com

Won this (Water) Battle, Yet Still forging on the War Front

Below is the form email that went out from SOS Water, the organization that is spearheading the drive to allow City of Rialto Voters to vote on the decision to outsource our water and waste water systems. I hope this push proves a few things to the city council and mayor of Rialto:

  • Simple transperity isn’t enough when it comes to our water and a 30 year contract – Besides people who either work for the city, sit on a city commission/board or belong to a group or organization that is owned by the city government no one things that the information meetings were informative, they were more confusing. No other proposals were shown, staff presenting the information came off cocky and rude & people were left with more questions than answers.
  • When the people (Rialto Residents) speak listen – 80+ people signed up to speak on the impending vote on water services & the city council choose to instead listen to Union reps, possible future business owners, labor lobbies & inappropriate city mouth pieces (Ref June Hayes calling one of the speakers a card carving communist). When Rialto business owners and residents filled 4 rooms and spoke their piece and you still chose to ignore it, you work for us remember that.
  • For years this city government has made a choice to ignore the water system, now when RDA funds are gone we make a made dash for the first person willing to pay us off. How is this fair to the city? Why should the residents pay for your lack of leadership. It was best said today as Governor Brown was making his latest pitch for higher taxes he ask a reporter if she didn’t like his plan what did she think he should do and she said “THATS YOUR JOB”. IF the city water is in such disrepair then let’s get to work fixing it. Start off by using the 30 million dollars the Utility owes you and let’s get to work. Then lets talk about slow graduated increases that will hurt less over time to obtain the remainder of the money and finish the work. By the councils own admission this alone will bring business here that was avoiding us because of our water systems age and disrepair. I don’t agree that is why they are avoiding us but that’s for another post.
  • SOS is comprised from people out-of-state that have seen American Water at work and know first hand what type of service they provide. This doesnt bother me one bit because without the hard work and passion of the people of Rialto their efforts would have died out eons ago.

Dear friends and neighbors:

On Saturday, May 12, we filed our petition with the City Clerk with substantially more than enough signatures to place the water privatization scheme before the voters of Rialto.  Under California law, this means that the City will be required to present this critical issue to a vote of the people.

We needed 10% of the registered voters of Rialto to qualify for the ballot – or just over 3,600 signatures.  Instead, we turned in more than 6,400 signatures!

The people of Rialto really came through to let City Council know that the voters of Rialto deserve to have the final say on this misguided 30-year privatization scheme.

The next step is that the City will review our petition to verify that we have submitted a sufficient number of valid signatures.  After that, this issue should be presented to a public ballot sometime over the next few months.  We will need to re-double our efforts to make certain this water privatization contract is defeated at the ballot box.

In addition, in the next few days we will be sending Prop 218 protest cards to all Rialto property owner who are affected by the huge rate hikes that the City Council is trying to push through to finance this deal.  If a majority of property owners protest these rate hikes, then the City cannot impose the rate increases and the entire water privatization scheme fails.

We will keep you posted on both of these efforts as we move forward.

Congratulations again for all of your hard work and for standing up for the future of Rialto.

Mark Brooks

SOS Rialto Water

P.S.  I am posting below a link to the news story in the Sunday’s San Bernardino Sun concerning our success in getting the petition filed, and another link to a guest editorial from SOS Rialto Water members that was printed in the Sun on May 9.

http://www.sbsun.com/ci_20612243/more-than-6-000-rialto-residents-sign-petition

http://www.sbsun.com/pointofview/ci_20585383/rialto-voters-deserve-say-american-water-deal

 

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries