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

Were not the only ones smelling coruption

Let’s start with some awesome news we have the attention of more than just or city council we have senators and senators of the future, financial advisors and Dr. Imran Farooq.

Mr. Farooq is a partner at:

The Omnius Group – The Omnius Group specializes in comprehensive economic development to dynamically integrate public and private sectors. Our experience includes real estate development, commercial finance, green technologies, workforce development and extensive relationships across local, state and federal agencies. Our objective is to pursue projects that incorporate economic, social and environmental value in the local communities.

http://www.facebook.com/DrIFarooq

His preliminary advice is to look at:

Is it possible to propose exemptions to rate increases depending on household incomes? This might be a way to protect the most vulnerable in the community but still facilitate the deemed ‘necessary’ upgrades.

Now we were sent an interesting piece of news. The article below is about the failure of American Water to secure the contract with the City of Rialto. I find it interesting that in the press release they (RWS) claim they decided to sever ties with American Water, but here it looks like American Water was the one cutting the ties. Insiders have told me that the cities decision to ignore the residents desire to put the outsourcing issue to a vote in November gave American Water an uneasy feeling about moving forward. The city attorney’s bad advice to the council now looks like a failed political move.

You see they didn’t put the issue on the ballot for a ton of reasons:

  • They don’t want to know what you think, at least the Eds and the city attorney. Call them sometime and try asking questions they will try everything in their power to shove you off they just want to make their money.
  • They know it’s an election year with a presidential election which means more people at the polls.
  • Putting the issue on the ballot would remove their ability to say that most of the people want this deal.
  • The city wants to have a stock pile of money to dip into to bring us “Development”. What happens once the $30 Million is gone and spent? How then will you bring us the economic development we desire?
  • The city tried to hide from their bad decision by saying it was a union issue not a community issue, let alone I saw hundreds of residents getting petitions signed the union got what they wanted and left, the residents are still here and a few of us refuse to stop fighting.
  • Lastly, from the looks of the words of American Water’s CEO American Water walked away. So the city took what they thought would remain secret and tell us we (Council) have decided to remove American Water from the deal and not change the deal just the players right before an election. They didn’t hear us if they did they would have started from the ground up and better involve the community and find ways to protect residents that are elderly, poor and struggling.

Also if this deal is to bring Development to our city can someone explain the consequences of their miss-direction and lies as seen at the bottom of this article from the Public Works Newsletter:

 

The deal called for American Water to be paid $26.5 million a year to run the system and cover certain maintenance expenses – but not counting the automatic price escalator each year. Multiply that out 30 years – and that’s just for the O&M, which of course must be covered by sufficient revenues from the ratepayers, on top of covering the financing for the improvements, the $30 million “catch up lease payment” to the City, refinancing existing RUA debt (at much higher interest rates), etc.

When I asked Megan Madsen from Table Rock Financial about the built in profit guarantee that was there for American Water she said she had no idea what I was talking about. So when information I stumbled across leads one to believe there is more than they are telling us. Does anyone know that 27.4 million is going toward refinancing existing debt?

 

No one will tell us the rates they are financing at or why it nessicary to add such a massive amount of debt to something that’s tied to our WATER & WASTE WATER systems. On financial person told me that depending on how the loan is structured it may very well hurt more than help if the city ever found its self in the same situation as our neighbor San Bernardino. I have been told we will be in deficit spending this next fiscal year in the realm of $5 million dollars.

We need to be wiser to WHO is sitting on certain sub communities when it comes to dealings with contracting out services.

 

What do you want Rialto’s Political landscape to look like

Are you going to fall for the same old tricks, only to find our city and your wallet in the frying pan?

I want everyone to pay close attention to cities like San Bernardino, Colton and Fullerton.

Let me preface this post by making something’s clear:

  1. We have a wonderful police and fire department. From everything I’m hearing both sides are doing their best to come to the table and negotiate to not only help the council and staff balance their budget but also still provide the community with the service we need.
  2. We have a police chief that takes the time to listen to the community and a command staff out their doing their best to put the community’s concerns as a top priority.
  3. Our chief of police is an out of the box thinker. By using grant writing abilities and technology we have the ability to see long term crime prevention. They do everything you can ask of an agency that plays by rules the criminals are not bound to.
  4. I have found that when left alone and allowed to talk to the community our staff is open and honest, but once our council members find out their talking to you the communication shuts down. There is no reason we shouldn’t be able to ask questions of staff, staff is well aware of what confidential council just loves their CLOAK OF SECRACY.

Voting for an incumbent for council is not going to work this go around, they only started acting like the councilmember’s we need over the last month because of November 4th the election. There are 3 people being supported by our fire and police agencies only one deserves your vote. City Councilman Ed Palmer is up for re-election and Ed Scott is running for Mayor neither deserve a vote “IN MY OPINION”. Shawn O’Connell has a strong desire to see more openness in city government. One shouldn’t to use the threat of a freedom of information act request to get information from the city or strong arm the city government by going around and over their heads to get information that should be available to everyone.

When it comes to mayor I am making the best choice available this time and hoping a better candidate comes along in four years just in case Deborah Robertson fails me. I am backing Mrs. Robertson because when I pressed her and questioned her intentions on issues over the years she didn’t:

  • Call the police on me and make up lies about crimes I didn’t commit.
  • Call me into meetings and ambush me with other council members and the Captain of the Police Department.
  • Try and create a feeling of distrust amongst people I know and deal with.
  • Accuse me of being a liar stating I never spoke to people I directly quote.

What did Deborah Robertson DO:

  • When I have issues with graffiti she steps up and begins to contact the people that handle the specific area in question.
  • For Example – When GPC and the city were arguing over who was responsible to clean graffiti on the freeway construction staging area on the corner of Ayala and the 210 freeway. I called on her to use her to use her relationship with Caltrans to move them into cleaning up and vacating the lot. It took work but now there is nothing to tag on that corner because it’s gone.
  • She continued that progress by letting Caltrans know that graffiti on our freeway sound walls needs to be removed quickly. No other city sees this quick response in our area except for Rancho Cucamonga that’s because their council cares about their cities impression from the main vein of commerce on their north end.
  • My conversations with Mrs. Robertson are not hostile in nature and if I am the one upset she gives me the feeling she is there to find a solution to the issue not push my buttons.

People will tell you she isn’t good because of the whole outsourcing our police issue back in the 90’s. News flash no one is letting that happen & talk to any of the council member there now and tell me you don’t hear that issue is in the back of their minds? Even the councilman running against her ALWAYS reminds me how much of our budget the Police and Fire consume each year. It’s not what you say it’s how you say it that speaks to the true meaning.

Now to the three cities I first referred to.

Why these three cities you ask? Because they all have some big problems facing their cities and they are making horrible decisions on how to respond to issues plaguing their communities. Let’s break them down one by one and ill explain:

Colton a small city with big city problems. Their budget ran out of control so bad they began to gut their city workers starting with cutting their police force by a third!!!! Colton in my estimation & by the looks of their stats on www.crimemapping.com is rife with crime and no real way to combat it. With no more RDA like other cities how will they continue to attract businesses to their city to support a strong tax base. To top it all off their chief of police retired and their mayor passed away, the city hired a new chief and replaced their mayor with his widow which was a choice that was without controversy.

San Bernardino, where do I start????? Bankruptcy, Childish City Government, Poor Spending Practices or Crime and murders and homicides soaring through the roof, paying millions of dollars to attract business in a city that isn’t safe, a era of public safety that provides poor, poor service yet gets upset when the community. (A) Questions them and (B) asks them to help with their pensions so that the city can climb out of a hole. A hole created by runaway mayor and council by negotiating for an endorsement in the next campaign instead of doing a good job for the community. The article below is from the SB Sun Newspaper and shows one of these big babies in council asking the corrupt city attorney to investigate a citizen for telling him that if he voted to not allow the city to vote on San Bernardino Being a Charter City, he would begin a recall campaign against him???????? Well if this is the case call the police lock me up and throw away the key. I have been ridding Rialto’s Council and Mayor for months over their decision to outsource our water operations and create a bad financial deal. I told them you vote for this deal at your own political fate. I meant what I said, and I said what I meant.

Attorney says he threatened councilman with recall; DA investigating

Ryan Hagen, Staff Writersbsun.com

Posted: 08/07/2012 09:49:14 PM PDT

Special Section: San Bernardino

SAN BERNARDINO – Attorney Tim Prince told Councilman Chas Kelley he would pursue a recall if and only if Kelley voted against putting charter repeal on November’s ballot, Prince said Tuesday.

“I expressly told him, I don’t expect you to personally support repeal of the charter. What I do expect and demand of you is that you give the people the right to vote,” Prince said. “Despite all the errors he’s made, despite driving us into bankruptcy, he could have just let the people have their say.”

The District Attorney’s Office received a complaint Tuesday and is investigating, said spokesman Chris Lee.

Kelley said he considered the threat to be an attempted bribe.

“Someone was trying to coerce my vote, and that’s inappropriate, unacceptable, and I made that quite clear yesterday,” he said on Tuesday.

California penal code defines a bribe as “anything of value or advantage” given or promised with a “corrupt intent to influence.”

That probably wouldn’t apply to a threat to do something that is legal, said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School.

“It’s certainly a threat, but is it chargeable? I’m not sure,” she said. “It’s along the lines of, ‘I’m not going to vote for Jerry Brown unless he pursues pension reform.”‘

Prince gave Kelley a notice of intention to circulate a recall petition just before discussion began on whether to add a ballot measure to repeal the city’s charter.

Kelley, whom Prince said was a swing vote, joined a 4-3 decision not to put charter repeal on the ballot.

The notice says Kelley deserves to be recalled for three reasons: an investigation into Verdemont Community Center, which Kelley “spearheaded and supervised”; advocating higher pay and other benefits for union members – who contributed heavily to his campaigns – despite warnings that the city was headed toward bankruptcy; and “dismissing his constituents by denying us the right to vote on repealing the city charter.”

The Grand Jury’s 2011-12 report criticized the construction of the Verdemont center for not having a certificate of occupancy, initial building permits or proper inspections and for construction that didn’t meet required standards.

The report also found city staff “had a general lack of understanding of the building requirements,” but doesn’t mention Kelley or other elected officials.

Kelley said he agreed with the Grand Jury’s recommendations, but the errors were made by city staff whom he said hadn’t built a community center since the 1980 s.

“I don’t micromanage or make the day-to-day decisions,” he said. “Every step of the way on this project was approved by the mayor and council.”

Prince said he had no regrets and was moving forward with petitions to remove Kelley from office and put charter repeal on a later ballot.

Several council members, including those who said charter repeal should be on the ballot, said Prince’s actions were unacceptable.

Read more: http://www.sbsun.com/ci_21259787/attorney-says-he-threatened-councilman-recall-da-investigating#ixzz22yZgyYvv

FULLERTON was most recently in the national spotlight over the Thomas Kelly case where a man died because after his encounter with some of their officers. Fullerton had a massive recall election, removed bad officers and the Chief of police. They made big changes to their use of force policy and used a PR campaign to show the community they were serious about changing the publics face of their department. So now the city council has asked the Orange County Sherriff to put together a total cost estimate to take over police services. Even though they split the vote to stall this venture this is one of those issues once the cat is out of the bag there is no going back, and this is an issue that is full of contriversary.

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

Advertisment

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

FULLERTON, Calif. (KABC) — The Fullerton City Council was expected vote Tuesday on whether to begin a process that would eliminate the city’s police department and have the Orange County Sheriff’s Department take over.

The city council, which recently welcomed three new members after a recall, says the issue is one of money. Two council members said operating the police department costs tens of millions of dollars, so allowing the county sheriff to take over would save the city a lot of money, especially in management expenses. The Orange County Sheriff’s Department already provides services to other cities in north Orange County, the most recent of which is Yorba Linda.

However, there is speculation that the move is in response to the death of Kelly Thomas, a mentally ill homeless man who died after a violent confrontation with police last July. Many of the council members who support dismantling the police force have been sharp critics of the department.

Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Whitaker maintains cost is the true concern.

“Had the Kelly Thomas incident not occurred, I believe it would still be our responsibility to be looking at these costs,” he said.

With the city’s expenditures increasing by 9 percent and revenue only increasing by 1 to 2 percent over the coming years, it makes financial sense to cut the department. Should the police department be cut, about 95 percent of Fullerton’s cops would still be able to serve the public as sheriff’s deputies.

Whitaker says now that three former council members have been recalled, it will be a lot easier for the city to look at the budget more objectively.

“The city is shouldering many lawsuits at the moment, including that one from [father of Kelly Thomas] Ron Thomas. And there was an earlier settlement of $1 million to Kelly’s birth mom,” said Whitaker.

Fullerton police officials say they will abide by whatever the city council decides, but they also say public safety is more than just about dollars and cents.

Some Fullerton residents like Scott Darrah are for the idea of allowing the sheriff’s department to take over.

“As long as they get the corrupt people out and get the right people in and do the right job, that’s really all that matters, as long as we feel safe,” he said.

Others are not so keen on the idea.

“They’re doing a pretty good job, I mean they realized they did a mistake and they got rid of the people, so I think we need to keep the police, I mean it’d be ridiculous,” said Susan Montoya.

The president of the Fullerton Police Officers’ Association said he thinks the move is purely motivated by politics. He also said the entire department took a pay cut last year, and he hopes the city will honor a contract it has with the department that lasts through 2015.

Fullerton’s police department, which is about 100 years old and is one of the oldest in the nation, has undergone major changes in the past year. The police chief retired, three officers quit and two officers have been charged in Thomas’ death.

A cost analysis of the department’s dismantling would take about four months

.

The Cloak of Secrecy – Rialto’s Water Deal

I have sat down with both Ed Scott and Deborah Robertson.

One thing that is the same with both candidates running for mayor of Rialto is both are scrambling to try and show you they are pealing the back the cloak slowly.

Ed Scott wants you to come sit down with him and listen to his side of the story and take it as gospel. He doesn’t like it when you try and fact check his statements and hear about it from the horses mouth. Let me prove this point so that Ed doesn’t threaten to sue me again.

When he was discussing my conversation with Butch Ariza the GM of West Valley Water District. Ed Scott eluded to the fact that Mr. Ariza didn’t have direct answers on some topics not because he had yet to come across that issue but because he didn’t know me and was holding information back.

What I find funny is my father-in-law and Mr. Ariza both are members of the local HOG (Harley Owners Group), My Neighborhood Watch Group butts up to West Valleys back yard and I have worked with his staff on eliminating graffiti in the wash area along Cactus Ave.

I have found West Valley Water to be easy to deal with and I was wondering why they were overlooked in the first place as the person to run our water system since they already work in Rialto. From what I heard they wanted nothing to do with what amounts to a 30 million dollar payoff to the city council.

Ed Scott also doesn’t like my questions for Table Rock the company brokering the deal and handling the negotiations. He said “Do you know how hard it is to be in the middle of negotiations and have some random person calling asking questions that’s not even connected to the deal”. I’m sorry I thought as a rate payer I had the right to know what was going on with this deal?

Question: Do you think you should know more about this deal?

On thing that bothers me and no one can give me an answer is why if American Water really is out of the deal and Table Rock now has control or Rialto Water Services why doesn’t the SEC the Federal Securities Exchange Commission only has American Water listed as a subsidiary of Rialto Water Services:

Rialto Water Services, Inc.   Corporation   Delaware   100% held through American Water (USA)   General partner of Rialto Water Services, L.P. Percentage will fall below 50% if transaction completed as a concession. 
Rialto Water Services, L.P.   Limited Partnership   Delaware   100% held through American Water (USA) and Rialto Water Services, Inc.   Rialto concession bid. Percentage will fall below 50% if transaction completed as a concession.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1410636/000119312511047938/dex211.htm

All of my meetings were not a total loss; I have been told I can have a copy of the entire water concession agreement. My hope is that I can download it to a zip drive and save myself the hassle and cost of printing.

So here we are again more questions than answers. Let’s keep telling those council members that they must show us their cards and involve the public.

This Home Looks Worse In Person

image

It makes me sick to know that one of our long time goverment officials lives in a home with a front yard like this.

image

Having broken down rusted cars that look like they belong in an old junk yard shoved up against tall over grown bushes shoved up against the front of the house. This neighborhood is nice with clean homes with attractive lanscapes. This homowner needs to attend and seriously take advantage of volenteer Thompsons home tips 101.

Would you like to live across from this house.

Rialto should be a level playing field where no person no matter their standing or position should be above the laws, rules or ordnances.

Yet time and time again People like Ed Scott, Ed Palmer and Jimmy Gutierrez break laws, rules and ordinances and either escape any penalty or skate by with a slap on the wrist.

Ed Scott – Barks at city staff and residents, appears to break city ordinances 18.72.010, 9.26.030. Updated picture of this residence and violations coming tomorrow night 7-18-12.

Ed Palmer – Apparently Mr. Palmer doesnt even live in the CITY OF RIALTO he lives in the county area as accused by the main opposer of the Lytle Creek Development. It looked true as Ed Palmer excused himself during the argument over whether the project should even happen.

Jimmy Gutierrez – Has been arrested for drunk driving and allowed to plead NO CONTEST and still remain the City Attorney for both Rialto and Chino. Reports are coming in that Mr Gutierrez makes $50,000 a month from the city of Rialto alone, and that he still charges for a slew of other things he does as our attorney. I wonder how much he charged the city to tell council to not allow the residents to vote on the water issue.

Volunteer Thompson with Rialto PD has taught over and over again about the broken window issue, meaning if your home looks horrible and un kept the rest of the neighborhood will follow suit. As well as attract crime and unpleasant people I know from resent experience if you’re looking to buy a home you will avoid the areas at look like no one cares.

This is clearly a violation, it’s just like Ed Palmer living in the county area and not in the CITY LIMITS yet he still is on city council. Ed Palmer, Ed Scott both must excuse themselves every time an issue comes up in downtown cause they own half of it. Both need to be ousted.

Councils Final Word on Petition Signatures

Hello everyone and good morning.

I am sorry I missed this meeting & that this council refuses to listen to the community. It seems that the only people they listen to are people who live outside of the city of Rialto as they did last night in reference to the Lytle Creek Development Project.

But that isn’t what were speaking on in this post, now its over the signatures collected in protest to the council’s decision to outsource our water to embattled American Water company.

The city attorney Jimmy Gutierrez (Mr I get DUI’s) he didn’t like the way the signatures were gathered and told the city clerk who informed council that they would not be putting the issue on the Ballot in November. It will never go before the people.

(The petitions, gathered by the Utility Workers Union of America, did not include a copy of the concession agreement, Rialto City Attorney Jimmy Gutierrez said in an interview.) From SBSUN.com

This council and Mayor do not care what you think or say unless forced to listen (IE the outsourcing the PD issue).

What is the disconnect with this council and listening to the residents. Ed Scott barks at residents from the dias like a junk yard dog (someone running for Mayor) Ed palmer just ignores you altogether, but at least Councilwoman Robertson will return a call as she did last night when I first got word of this horrible decision with the promise of another meeting in the next 2 weeks lets see if it happens.

Long Story short you have no say in the American Water Deal and we all will suffer for the next 30 Years because this city will never be able to afford to leave this contract ever.

We all must attend, watch council meetings and also call these people and make them finally listen to the people.

—————————————————————————————————-

Advertisement

—————————————————–

City of Rialto approves water rate increases, denies petition

Posted:   06/27/2012 12:07:27 AM PDT

RIALTO – The Rialto City Council on Tuesday voted to end the contentious issue of a whooping rate increase by voting 4-1 for its approval.The issue, and a related agreement to outsource the city’s water and sewer operations to New Jersey-based American Water Works Co. Inc., have been a boiling point for many residents for over a year.

The council’s action will propel water and sewer rates 114.8 percent by 2016.

Because the city of Rialto hasn’t increased rates for years, many residents recognize that rates need to go up, but think the increase should be spread out over more years.

Only Councilman Joe Baca Jr. opposed the rate increase.

As part of the meeting, the council decided not to schedule a referendum during the Nov. 6 general election on that outsourcing agreement – even though the city was presented with more than enough valid signatures to make that happen.

The petitions, gathered by the Utility Workers Union of America, did not include a copy of the concession agreement, Rialto City Attorney Jimmy Gutierrez said in an interview.

Under a provision of the election code, which Gutierrez said was written to encompass city ordinances, a copy of the ordinance must accompany the petitions “so that people know what they are signing.”

In those situations where there are other documents, courts have ruled that they too must be included, he said.

“You got to give all the information to the public,” Gutierrez said.

With the petitions circulated by the union, a copy of the city council resolution on the concession agreement was the only document included, he said. “How’s the public going to know what it’s signing without a copy of the concession agreement,” he said.

When asked how a document spanning hundreds and hundreds of pages, as is the case of the concession agreement, could be part of a petition being passed from one person to the next, Gutierrez said, “yeah, but that’s what the law says.”

Later he said that at least a summary of the agreement should have been included along with the petitions.

Contacted late Tuesday night, Utility Workers spokesman Mark Brooks said that the union’s legal team would need to evaluate the city’s position.

The union submitted 6,379 signatures and of those, 1,545 were declared invalid during a certification process conducted by the county Elections Bureau. That left 4,834 valid signatures – well above the amount needed to put the issue before voters.

During the council meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Ed Scott said that work is underway with city staff to modify the concession agreement in a way that will be “to everybody’s liking.”

He provided no details.

After the vote, resident Frank Gonzalez said, “I don’t agree with the results (of the Proposition 218 vote) but the citizens had a chance…I would like to work with you, even though I don’t agree with you.”

City Council’s vote on the rate increase was delayed to await the results of a Proposition 218 protest vote where a majority of the ratepayers – plus one – must file a written objection to the action.

The final tally for the water rate increase protest vote was 4,345, where 5,701 were required to block it. The sewer rate increases were opposed by 6,883, where 10,387 were needed to block it, Gutierrez said.

Councilman Ed Palmer accused the union’s Prop 218 campaign of producing many invalid and fraudulent votes.

“Thank goodness the vote wasn’t close, because the union would have forced us to physically account for very vote, a process that would have cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars,” he said.

Palmer noted that his own signature was forged and sent into the city clerk’s office as a protest vote.

The Utility Workers union has several contract issues with American Water across the country and has opposed the company’s business expansion into Rialto.

Read more: http://www.sbsun.com/ci_20947976/city-rialto-approves-water-rate-increases-denies-petition#ixzz1z0aeFlVg

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

Graffiti Removal, How important is it to you?

When I first moved back to Rialto I noticed how much graffiti was all over the place it was like little LA.

We rented for one year then made the decision to purchase our first home in Rialto, the graffiti was out of control.

We banded together with Lt Burkholder, Lt Crispin & Cpl Muir to get the graffiti under control. I personally held GPC the graffiti removal contractor to a hard-line of removing the graffiti ASAP. I helped GPC & the city of Rialto over obstacles such as private property right of ways and businesses that were no longer cleaning graffiti on their back walls because of retaliation against their maintenance employees. Councilman Ed Palmer and I developed a way to get property owners and leasing companies to keep their leasing signs free of graffiti.

And things were looking better……………………….. Until Now!!!!!

The city has decided to change contractors beginning last month May 2012 to save $3 a stop. Now everyone has heard the saying you get what you pay for, and we are getting just that cheaper service that has more excuses than results.

Larry De Corona the Owner of Superior Property Mainence ( http://www.4superior.com/ ) came out to the Area 1 Command Meeting stating that nothing will change but better faster services at a lower price. He tried to tell us his company can’t take care of our drainage Areas or Washes ( which is wrong ) and that they were brining in a new camera program, knowledgeable staff ect. None of his statements have shown to be true.

So I wonder why I have been calling and seeing graffiti up for days and days, poor painting, tags still showing through ect. Then I remembered something Mr. De Corona said at the meeting they are the largest graffiti removal program in LA County. Ah ha this is why who hasn’t driven around LA County and been blinded by graffiti.

Larry Decrona Owner & Managing partner in aquisition and Property Managment

Larry De Corona (pictured above) called me yesterday very upset that I am asking his company to remove the graffiti in a timely fashion. He said that they are working within the confines of the contract and that I couldn’t use his statements at the Area Command Meeting as gold. He told me that in April GPC billed the city $8K for the month of April, Superior billed the city $6K for May. This isn’t because they are so much cheaper it’s because they are slower to respond and GPC work some Saturdays in April Superior doesnt.

Mr. De Corona said something that speaks to where he is coming from a property management back ground that showed his lack of knowledge of this city or the War we wage her on Hoodlums. He said “Whats the difference if the graffiti stays up a few more days if it saves the city money”. Really did you just say that. Graffiti is a hoodlums way of saying he owns your neighborhood, street or city, and everyday it’s up there is another day to influence our teens, intimidate our communities and enrage community members.

I spoke with Tim Sullivan from public works and he told me that Superior is new and he is keeping close account of the complaints and looking at Superior’s response times and quality of work. We want to keep this from becoming a problem.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rid-Rialto-of-Graffitti/216882198324244 – We have a Facebook Page you can visit and post your problem areas with graffiti or just email them to rialtonw@aol.com and we will post for you.

Ferguson Park the Multi Million Dollar park that wont be stripped until the July Grand Opening was hit hard and it took Superior 3 days to remove this graffiti, so people’s questions on safety at our parks is still an issue and thanks to Superior the community is wondering if the new park is even worth visiting.

I have called the graffiti hotline numerous times to find MAJOR, MASSIVE tags up for days and even weeks.

The graffiti Hotline number is 909-820-2670 put this in your cell phone and call on every tag.

If you have questions, complaints or concerns please call 909-820-2602 and ask for Tim Sullivan.

Update on the American Water Petitions and Prop 218 Protest Letters

Dear friends and neighbors:

As you know, we are fighting the American Water privatization deal in Rialto in two different ways:  first, the petition we recently filed to require the City to place the American Water contract up for a vote of the people; and second, the Prop 218 process for Rialto property owners to block the rate hikes the City is trying to impose in order to pay for this misguided scheme.

I am writing to alert you to developments on both fronts.

Concerning the voter petition, the San Bernardino Sun reported today that the City has forwarded our petitions to the County of San Bernardino to certify whether we have submitted enough signatures from registered voters to qualify for the ballot.  The County says that process will take about two weeks.

We expect the County to confirm that we have submitted more than enough votes to place this critical decision before the voters of Rialto.  You can read the Sun’s article at the following link:

http://www.sbsun.com/ci_20648408/county-elections-staff-verifying-signatures-rialto-petition-vote

Concerning the Prop 218 process, we mailed protest cards today to all Rialto property owners.  These cards provide property owners with a convenient way to tell the City that the people of Rialto reject these unfair rate hikes.  We also included a postage-prepaid envelope to make it easy for impacted property owners to return the protest cards.

Under Proposition 218, if a majority of impacted property owners file protests with the City, the City cannot impose these rate hikes!

If you are property owner in Rialto – or a renter who is responsible for paying the water or sewer bill – we encourage you to return the protest card as soon as you receive it.  If you receive a mailing from SOS Rialto Water, please open it immediately; sign the enclosed protest card; and return it to us in the postage-prepaid envelope.

We will deliver every protest card we receive to the City Clerk’s office before the June 12 deadline.

Please remember – Rialto property owners can block these unfair rate hikes, but only if a sufficient number of protests are filed with the City by June 12.  Please return your protest card to SOS Rialto Water immediately.

Thank you again for your support in blocking these unfair rate hikes.

Sincerely,

Mark Brooks

SOS Rialto Water and Utility Workers Union of America

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries