universityneighborhood.net

The Death of Redevelopment

Posted by admin in Public Policy, Resoration Economy on May 2, 2012

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: THE DEATH OF REDEVELOPMENT : THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATE IN THE BLOODY AFTERMATH..

Thanks to Thirty Miles of Corruption for sharing the documentation related to the State’s reply to the City’s redevelopment loans.

No Comments

Press Enterprise Is A “NO” Surprise On Measure F: Sustainability Commission

Posted by admin in Public Policy on May 2, 2012

Regarding Press Enterprise Editorial 4-29-2012, Charter Measure F_A Sustainability Commission Added to City Charter:

Wasn’t it Gandhi who said, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win”. Fear of the unknown is no reason to avoid it. The past, no matter how successful it may have been, is no guarantee of the future. The overwhelming majority of my neighbors see Sustainability and Economic Development in the same context. If either is out of balance, quality of life and health are impacted.

A Sustainability Commission is an obvious and appropriate first step to take if we are to have either and live long and well enough to enjoy them.

Painting the issue as “trendy buzzwords” and “feel good symbolism” demonstrates a serious misrepresentation of the issues at hand and is a disservice to the the over 100 participants at the Green Action Summit, many of whom have been at work on this for 30 years or more. Sort of like the little old ladies who wanted to save the Santa Ana River. They laughed at them too.

No Comments

Some Back Story About Riverside’s Electric Rates

Posted by admin in Public Policy, Resoration Economy on May 2, 2012

New post on TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption

CITY OF RIVERSIDE: HIDDEN TAXES ON YOUR ELECTRIC UTILITY RATES!

by thirtymiles

If you think the City of Bell had serious taxation problems and mis-appropriation of funds, grab your socks!

Riverside levies hidden taxes on your utility bill. They are simply and stealthily included in the utility rates the city charges residential customers. Your minimum tax rate on electric utility services to your property is 11.5%. It expands upward from there depending on how much utility service you use each month that is subject to punitive tiered pricing.

Let us look at your bill for electricity and the city’s residential winter electric rate schedule. The first tier or the base metered rate for electric service is $0.1035 per kwh (this is the metered unit of measure for electric service). The base rate is charged to the consumption of each of the first 350 kwh of electric service each month. On a per kwh basis $0.0119 of the first tier rate per kwh is tax revenue paid to the general fund. That is a tax rate of 11.5%.

Should you exceed first tier usage as most homeowners do, then you are charged at the second tier price of $0.1646 per kwh from the 351^th thru the 750th kwh of service. The difference — of $0.0611 per kwh in the second tier electric rate — is an additional tax for using more electric service than the city thinks you should use. It is a punitive tax to economically force you the consumer to conserve electricity. You are being taxed even though you are using electricity for beneficial purposes and not wasting it. Looking at just the $0.0611 price difference per kwh of first tier and second tier prices/kwh the effective tax rate is 37%!

Should you use more than 750 kwh of electric service per month you are billed at the 3^rd tier rate of $0.1867 per kwh for those units consumed over 750 kwh. The third tier tax is $0.0951 per kwh. This is an effective tax rate of 51%!

Now, that’s a punitive tax!

To help put this into perspective with how our electricity is delivered to your property, please review the following facts:

A municipal electric utility provides property owners with the “service” of transporting the power to your property via government-owned infrastructure. The electricity is virtually worthless at the point of generation or acquisition. It is the city’s infrastructure of power transmission lines that imparts value to electricity. If they could not deliver it to your property you would not buy it and they could not give it away!
On average it costs the city $0.0500 to generate or acquire power and transport electricity to its residential customers.
Some power is purchased on long-term contracts and may cost as little as $o.o4 per kwh delivered to you. To be fair, other sources of electricity cost more. So in the end it all averages out to a range of $0.04-$0.06.
What the city has done to you is this: it has stopped putting ballot measures forward for a vote to approve electric bonds. Basically, it has improperly hidden the tremendous cost of borrowing money (and the burden to pay it back for thirty years) in your electric rates, fees and charges.
By law the cost of borrowed money used to build infrastructure must be approved in an election as a property assessment tax or a special tax. In this way you would be able to see the level of debt, the cost to you, the years left on each contract to continue paying and have the voter knowledge to understand what this means to you.
Since 2007 the City Council has approved instruments of borrowing that were created specifically to evade state constitutional restrictions that restrict the amount of borrowing or require voter approval. The city discloses that it knows how and why the contracts were created (specifically to avoid complying with the state constitution) but, since no one in Riverside has filed a lawsuit to stop the practice, it will continue to offer these contractual forms of debt at will. This results in electric rate schemes that have ever increasing hidden taxes in them; however the cost of debt to build infrastructure is not an annual variable operating cost to be included in the rate calculation. It is a fixed cost that should be collected via other means on your bill or property tax. It should not be included in the rate structure. The rate should always be determined from the variable costs of operating the infrastructure.
A vote to approve a constitutional form of municipal bond requires the city to account for the cost of debt service separately from the annual cost of operating the utility. In this way they cannot hide the cost of debt service in the rate calculation and charge you $0.1035 and up for each kwh.
A municipal utility is not allowed to make money. It is a government-owned monopoly and may not charge more than the actual cost of providing the service to you at your property. Municipal utilities are budgeted to break even. They have reserve funds in case of a bad year and the city can always make a loan or spend tax revenue to cover an annual loss.
In recent times the city has taken no steps to reduce costs of operating the utilities. They have taken every opportunity to expand the cost to residential consumers and buried it in the utility rate structure.
The electric utility has a huge fixed annual cost (mostly debt payments) averaged over the calculated electric rates and total annual production. It must sell all of its planned annual production to recoup the funds needed to pay the debt service. If you are forced to conserve electricity via tiered pricing, the city has to automatically raise the price. It is “Catch-22″ Math! The more you conserve the more it will cost you. Also,the city makes more money by transferring more utility (hidden tax) revenues to the general fund with every rate increase. This meets the definition of a special tax in the constitution! You have a constitutional right to vote yes or no on a special tax measure (remember the library special tax).
The city wants you to think it is running a business. A municipal utility provides services to the ownership of property. It is a government-owned and operated monopoly. You have to contract with the city for electric service to your property and pay the hidden tax rate of up to 57%!

Now that is some profit margin! Where is your money going? Can you live on 350 kwh of electric service per month!!

The city by approving 50% increases in electric rates over the last six years and instituting punitive tiered pricing, is forcing you to conserve electricity (remember in October 2006, city council approved electricity rate hikes to fund the “$1.5 billion Renaissance”) but, you don’t need more electricity. Most if not all of the $650 million dollars spent for electric infrastructure improvements has been for future growth of the city population, housing, downtown office space and re-development. It was never planned to help you but, you will pay and pay and pay. This burden of hidden taxation falls most harshly on fixed income (retirees) and low income families in the city. The city would prefer you to move to Mo-Val.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND ~~MEZZSPELLED~~, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ~~ONE~~ TWO STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND ~~PROSSIBLY~~ POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! WE REALIZE IT’S TOUGH, SO HANG IN THERE.. COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

thirtymiles | May 1, 2012 at 11:21 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/p1y4ps-1mX

No Comments

Extreme Makeover: School Edition

Posted by admin in Uncategorized on April 17, 2012

Over 3,000 Comcast employees, along with family members, students, and parents will descend on 14 California schools impacted by recent budget cuts on Saturday. Volunteers will provide much needed “makeovers” to schools who have suffered from lack of funding by spending the day planting shrubs, repainting walls, building picnic tables, repairing fences, weeding flower beds, power washing buildings and equipment and landscaping.

Their efforts are part of National Comcast Cares Day, in which 55,000 employees across the nation step up to provide much needed services, making it the largest corporate volunteer effort in the country. Comcast Cares day also coincides with Global Youth Service day this year.

Schools that will be “made over” this week include Washington Elementary in Alameda, Livermore Valley Charter School, Arboga Elementary in Marysville, Our Lady of Mercy in Merced, Modesto’s Garrison Elementary, Britton Middle School in Morgan Hill, Olinda Elementary in Richmond, Ethel I. Baker Elementary in Sacramento, Rancho Cielo School in Salinas, Thurgood Marshall High School in San Francisco, San Geronimo’s Lagunitas School, Toyon Elementary of San Jose, Fesler Junior High of Santa Maria, and Madrone Elementary in Santa Rosa.

Curt Henninger, Regional Senior Vice President for Comcast California, said, “Comcast Cares Day is part of our ongoing commitment to education and to improving the quality of life in the neighborhoods where we live and work.”

Comcast Corporation is one of the largest entertainment and communications companies in the United States. In addition to Comcast Cares national day of service, employees volunteer their time year-round to a variety of projects and organizations.

Posted at 05:10 PM in Education reform, Events and Speeches, People: The Network, Public Education, The Great Recession | Permalink

Technorati Tags: Alameda, Arboga Elementary, Britton Middle School, budget cuts, Comcast, Comcast Cares Day, Curt Henninger, Ethel I. Baker Elementary, Fesler Junior High, Garrison Elementary, Global Youth Service Day, Lagunitas School, Livermore, Livermore Valley Charter School, Madrone Elementary, Marysville, Merced, Modesto, Morgan Hill, Olinda Elementary, Our Lady of Mercy, Rancho Cielo School, Richmond, Sacramento, Salinas, San Francisco, San Geronimo, San Jose, Santa Maria, Santa Rosa, Thurgood Marshall High School, Toyon Elementary, Washington Elementary

No Comments

City Of Riverside: Demise Of Redevelopment – What A Mess!!

Posted by admin in Public Policy on April 17, 2012

From TMC: Thirty Miles of Corruption

With the end of California Redevelopment December 29, 2011, cities are scrambling to grab assets and minimize their losses. As one reads in the news, Governor Brown stole our money and we are left with a mess. I don’t know about other cities, but I can tell you that Riverside created their own mess.

Riverside has a long history of borrowing monies from our own local utility funds, they are the cash cows for cities. When the Hudson regime was crowned by Mayor Loveridge, Ed Adkinson, Frank Schivaone, Dom Betro, etc. this borrowing became exponential.

The sewer, electric and water fund operate as an enterprise fund, essentially they are set up to make a profit. This profit is supposed to be used for maintenance, repairs, and operations, in the case of the sewer fund no new construction is allowed. The profit is saved for a rainy day and used to maintain our infrastructure. Well here comes FRED (Frank and Ed), Mayor Loveridge and a city manager willing to take our city into the deep dark hallows of debt. The borrowing frenzy began, funding pet projects, redevelopment activities, and favored developers was on.

The parking fund was born and we immediately borrowed 5 million from the sewer fund. This was the birth of the parking meters. One million dollars of the sewer fund went to the parking meters and the other four million went to fund the Taj Mahal, Orange Street parking garage. Well, this was easy, no one noticed, so let’s see what else we can spend sewer monies on.

We have a developer who would like to build some luxury townhouse/condos (Raincross Promenade). Sewer fund monies again, the victim of greed and mismanagement. The city spent approximately 15 million dollars to assemble properties, demolitions, relocation, etc. Sewer fund 0, developer 15 million. There is a catch here.

The city charter states that we can make inter-fund (between electric, water and sewer) loans, no mention of inter-agency (redevelopment is a separate legal agency) loans. Fast forward 2010. Over 21 million dollars was loaned out of the sewer fund to the City of Riverside Redevelopment Agency. One loan did not even have a contract in place so that the sewer fund would be able to be paid back. Who would have known that the first thing Governor Brown would do when taking office would be to end redevelopment. Oops.

AB 126 passed,the court upheld this ruling and now we must comply. What does that mean for the sewer monies and the monies from all of the enterprise funds, sewer included. Bye Bye. The ruling states that these loans are unenforceable, sewer fund 0, redevelopment agency and the State of California 21 million. When you hear city leaders complain that the State of California is taking our money, our city leaders should have had the ethical and intellectual understanding to have not made illegal loans in the first place. Taxpayers 0, Sewer fund 0, Renaissance 21 million.

Please view the article link.

http://www.pe.com/local-news/politics/jim-miller-headlines/20120330-redevelopment-shutdown-process-is-a-new-frontier.ece

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND ~~MEZZSPELLED~~, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND ~~PROSSIBLY~~ POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

No Comments

Perris Valley Line Goes To Court

Posted by admin in Environment, Transportation on April 14, 2012

It looks like our day in court has arrived. . . from the Press Enterprise

Richard Block, a Riverside Hills member, said concerns ranging from the tons of dirt that will be hauled away from the project to the squealing of train wheels are unresolved.

“The evidence presented in the environmental process clearly shows the project will have negative impacts,” Block said. “And they are either incompetent to them or ignoring them.”

He also said officials are grossly overestimating the line’s ridership, noting that the 4,300 daily riders estimated in the report would exceed the ridership of existing Metrolink service in Riverside County. Ridership along the entire 91 Line from Riverside to Union Station in Los Angeles was 5,161 in June, according to Metrolink.

Environmental Impact Report, Perris Valley Line

No Comments

Guerrilla Grafters Bring Forbidden Fruit Back To City Trees

Posted by admin in Gardening, Public Policy on April 12, 2012

Here is a problem begging for a solution. Let’s hope the fruit grafters and the city can come up with the perfect way to keep everyone fed, healthy and safe on the sidewalks!

Thanks to NPR’s food blog, The Salt.

Spring means cherry, pear and apple blossoms. But in many metropolitan areas, urban foresters ensure those flowering fruit trees don’t bear fruit to keep fallen fruit from being trampled into slippery sidewalk jelly.

But a group of fruit fans in the San Francisco Bay Area is secretly grafting fruit-bearing tree limbs onto those fruitless trees.

I visited the “crime scene” one recent day, but I can’t tell you where it is because I was with the “criminals.”

“If we say where it is, they could come after me,” says Tara Hui, a fruit tree grafter. She’s talking about city officials, who manage the trees and say it’s illegal to have fruit trees on sidewalks.

So let’s just say we’re in some Bay Area city in a working-class neighborhood, at a line of pear trees that bear no pears.

Hui and two assistants pull out a knife, reach into a plastic bag filled with twigs no bigger than your pinkie, and cut from a fruit bearing pear tree. She says it’s an Asian pear, and that she’s grafting it onto a flowering pear tree.

They whittle a wedge into one end of their twig, then cut a groove into a similar-sized twig on the city tree. They join the two, like tongue and groove carpenters. And when their grafted twig eventually grows into a branch.

“There will be a much better looking tree that actually will provide fruit for people that come by,” Hui says.

Hui’s motives to break the law are straightforward.

“We don’t have a supermarket and we have very few produce stores [here],” she says. “What better to alleviate scarcity of healthy produce in an impoverished area than to grow them yourself and to have it available for free.”

Carla Short, an urban forester for the San Francisco Department of Public Works who’s in charge of 103,000 public trees, has a different view of fruit trees.

“It gets very dangerous very quickly,” Short says. “I mean the minute that fruit gets crushed on the sidewalk, it is slippery. We certainly don’t want people to get injured.”

She says fruit isn’t forbidden everywhere, and the local government does encourage them in community gardens.

But that does put the city forester in an awkward position — advocating for publicly available fruit trees, but policing guerrilla grafters. Short says her team is looking for the guerrilla grafters but hasn’t found them yet.

And what will they do if they find them? First, try to reason with the grafters, she says.

Meanwhile, Hui imagines these same streets in the coming years.

“Just taking an evening stroll, and then you see a fruit and you reach over and now you’re nourished,” says Hui.

So far, officials have yet to discover which of the city’s decorative trees will become delicious trees because the grafts aren’t yet old enough to bear fruit.

No Comments