a critical city election

 

Trumpized

Oxnard's Elected City Treasurer Phillip Molina
photo courtesy of Citizens Journal

 VS

Blogger's opinion: 

Sometimes it's hard to differentiate between Oxnard City Hall and the tactics being employed by Washington DC politicians today. Examples are muzzling, smearing, degrading, discrediting, distracting, and other wise harassing anyone who dares to disseminate information to the public - information the City wants to keep secret from the taxpayers.

So what’s next for our City Treasurer Phil Molina - the "#MeToo" gambit? The present harassment  of Molina by the City Manager could not take place without tacit, if not overt, Mayoral and City Council approval.

                                                  Phillip Molina’s complaint                                                                      

Why is your elected City Treasurer prevented from using his official city email?
Inbox
   
phillip molina

Mayor, Council members, Friend, and local newspaper:

Elected officials are sent emails using Bcc as directed by the City Attorney to avoid violating the Brown Act.

Many of you have asked me to continue to provide financial transparency to what Oxnard is doing. Others have simply said keep it up.  Quite of few of you are city managers, and city employees as well as members of the public.

Thank you for your support.

Now, you've also asked what started this food fight and what it the possible outcome.  Well it is a bit involved but to my knowledge these are the facts:
1. In 2018 the city claimed two women filed an harassment (not sexual) claim against me.  The two women I rarely spoke to and usually only to say Good Morning and Good Evening. So it was not surprise after months waiting, many staff including me being interrogated by a professional investigator, the city has produced nothing.  My Attorney submitted a formal request after waiting over 18 months for a conclusion, and the city Attorney, Stephen Fischer, has not even had the professional courtesy to respond, let alone provide any future date for a conclusion. This though the law requires to quick resolution to such complaints.
2. In July of this year (2019) I, like all city employees,  was required to attend a class on harassment. In that class it was brought to my attention that when a manager or supervisor is excluded from staff meetings, meetings that provide direction, education, support and information necessary to conduct business, that is automatically classified as harassment, and retaliation by Federal law. (see attached item) Because I had been ordered by the City Manager, Alexander Nguyen to stop coming to the SLT (Senior Leadership Training meetings) , and because I was the only manager directed to stop coming, I filed an harassment and retaliation complaint against the City Manager (see attached). Alexander and I  met during the time my complaint was active.
3. Shortly after filing my complaint in August 16th, the City HR Director sent me a response on September 10, 2019 stating my complaint was without merit.
4. On September 10th, yes the same day I received response to my complaint, the City informed me two other city women filed an harassment complaint (not sexual) against me. These two women I have met and spoke to less than 3 times in the years I have been with the city.
5. I wrote an email to the City Attorney asking for his legal opinion on why I am not allowed to agendize the list of checks the city issues every week as required by State law. (see attached.)
6. Because I sent emails, which you have been offered, that included the women who filed the last complaint, my official City email address was terminated. But those same 2 women continue to send me emails, memos and notes.
7. I am ordered to not communicate with either woman who filed the complaint against me, yet I continue to receive communication from the women.

Now anyone reading this email knows that the City has control on who can send and receive specific emails.  The city has stopped my private emails from going to certain city staff. So the clear and simple question is, if the City did not want me to keep the 2 women informed about business they needed to know, the city could have put a rejected tag on each of these two women's email address to reject my city email. Instead the City Manager chose to terminate my 'official city email.

This is retaliation, suppression of free speech, and an attempt to put absolute control over what your elected City Treasurer can provide to you.

Respectfully,
Phillip Molina
Your Elected City Treasurer,
Working for the public to keep your city liquid assets safe, secure and earning interest for the City.

lady justice for Molina

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Andrew Covner <acovner@normandowler.com>
Date: Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 12:14 PM
Subject: Complaint Investigation
To: Steve Naveau <steve.naveau@oxnard.org>
Cc: Phil Molina <molinpc@gmail.com>, <aescareno@aalrr.com>

Mr. Naveau,

On January 11, 2019, Mr. Molina was interviewed by attorney Abraham Escareno of Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo, hired by the City of Oxnard to investigate harassment complaints allegedly made by City employees.  See attached.  To date, neither Mr. Molina or this office has been informed of the outcome or status of the investigation.  Please confirm in writing that the investigation has been completed and the matter has been closed based on insufficient evidence to support a finding of harassment by Mr. Molina.  If the matter is still pending, please provide an update.

Thank you.

Andrew H. Covner, Esq.



Bloggers note - to date this request had not been responded  to, the question is WHY? perhaps related to Phil"s coming reelection?

"separating the wheat from the chaff"

gun control

     My position on gun control.

 But first lets cut through the political hype and hysteria.

Fact: there were 39,773 reported gun deaths in 2018.
Fact: 14,611 of those were deaths by gun violence.
Fact: 992 were death by police shootings.
Fact: 23,854 of those were suicides by gun. Nearly two-thirds of all gun deaths in the U.S. are suicides
Fact: number of mass shootings (as defined by FBI) - shootings 323, dead 387  and 1274 injured.
Fact: rifles account for about 4% of all gun deaths in 2018.
Fact: there are already two  existing federal background check laws on the books, the Brady act (Pub.L. 103–159, 107 Stat. 1536,  enacted  OCT. 22,  1968  and PUBLIC  LAW 90-618 - November 30, 1993)
November 30, 1993)
As a rational for licensing guns, references are made and compared to motor vehicle licensing, hardly a “poster boy” for gun control Safety.  so lets take a look.
Fact: estimates of traffic deaths in the U.S. topped 40,000 last year. 4.5 million people were seriously injured. Licensing vehicles hasn’t  stopped the carnage on our highways and licensing guns will not stop gun violence, but it will provide a convenient tax base for the politicians to exploit when they need more funds to squander.
Licensing guns could also be perceived as a precursor to gun confiscation, (which has already surfaced) playing right into the NRA’s narrative.

More deaths from licensed vehicles then unlicensed guns

Yes - ban all assault weapons and assault weapon magazines - ban all other magazines over 8-10 round capacity - instigate a voluntary buyback program for assault weapons with a FAIR market values for gun purchases. Estimated number assault weapons in private hands - 10 million or more, average value of an assault weapon in good condition - $500 to $600. The government would need to appropriate over 5 billion dollars for the buyback program.

Yes to background checks with emphasis on persons association with hate and anti-government groups as defined by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
We already have background check laws, they only need to be expanded to include gun shows and etc.

Yes to “red flag” legislation  provided (I want to be quite clear on this) the legislation contains strong language to protect against individual and governmental abuse of the law. Very easy to use the law as a tool of revenge or intimidation.

In reality, the most affective action to take would be to form a task force similar to the one currently used to protect our country against  foreign terrorist, to closely monitor activities of all hate and anti-government groups as well as “lone wolfs” threats.

I hope I’ve not lest the impression that I’m anti-gun control, nothing could be further from the truth. I believe that something must be done to address and curb the slaughter, but it must be done in a sane and sensible manner  and peoples rights must be respected in the process.

If not handled in an sensible and judicious manner, by congress, this issue has the potential to turn millions of law abiding gun owners into instant criminals. 

"separating the wheat from the chaff"

a teeny weeny change

Can a minuscule event in our world’s environment have massive future consequences?

According to the UK Independent, some 9,000 years ago the earth shifted its tilt ever so slightly, from 24.14 degrees off vertical to its present 23.45 degrees, just a 0.69 degree difference.

The results of that tiny little shift in the earth’s tilt resulted in the birth of the Sahara desert, covering some  3.5 million square miles. Prior to the shift the region was a vibrant and lush grasslands.

So yes, small incremental changes can and do have large impacts on our environment.

When you hear that the oceans warmed a fraction, the average global temperate rose a tiny bit, or the oceans’ CO2 levels climbed a bit, be aware that there will be impacts looming in our future.

Do not let yourself be fooled or conned by the nay sayers.
It’s said with some truth that “you are either part of the solution or you are part of the problem.” Please be part of the solution.

What the region must have look like 9,000 years ago.

"separating the wheat from the chaff"

Night-time party-time on Violet Way. aka Red Light Lane

In the summer of 2015, I sent an e-mail to the Oxnard City Council and the City Manager requesting city help in curbing the night time problems we were experiencing on Violet Way, a neighborhood street.  On an almost nightly basis, trash that included fast food containers, beer wine and whiskey bottles, broken as well as whole, urine in the gutters as well as used condoms in the street. We needed increased patrols to mitigate the issue.

To this date the city has never responded to that e-mail.
As the partying continued into 2016, I sent the following e-mail, which contained graphic photos.


May 16, 2016
700 W. Violet Wy.
Attachments 5/16/16
to TImothy, Carmen, bryan.macdonald, dorina.padilla, bert.perello, Greg, chief, bcc: Phillip, bcc: Bert

The attached photo 003 shows some of the trash left by late night party-ers on 700 W. Violet Wy.

003

Attached photo 002 shows dark spots on the pavement caused by the above urinating on the street (several locations).

002

The yellow liquid puddles in 008 is not beer but urine collected in the gutter.

008

To cap it all off, me004 - me006 is the used condom left behind in the street.

004

This is not an isolated incident  but  is a frequent ongoing problem.
Bio-hazardous material is turning the street into an open sewer, a serious  health risk for the children and adults alike that frequent the area.

Broken glass in the grass on the north side is also a hazard to children, adults and pets.

Eugene D Hubbard

The only response I got was from one council member,- who wrote,,,
it “unfortunately happens in many areas of the City,” Read into that response what you want.  He then turned the entire matter over to the OPD.

So much for honesty and integrity in our city government.

Quick response from the OPD, an officer called to meet on the problem. We discussed several viable options, he said that he would get right on it and knew how to get things done, that in itself should have been a red flag.

On June 9th he sent the following email

“Mr. Hubbard,

“Thank you for contacting me. I have personally been visiting the area in an attempt to identify the subjects who are hanging out on the street. I have also requested that the beat officers frequent the area. So far, I have not come into any contact with occupied parked vehicle. Have you noticed any vehicles lately?
I will continue the extra patrols and attempt to identify individuals involved in this conduct.”
Respectfully -------

Well, that turned out to be an  untruth, as during the time period that the alleged “patrols” were taking place, there had been a very large motor home, with people living in it, parked on Violet Way. 24/7 for almost 30 days, impossible to miss, as Violet Way is only about 700-800 feet long.

City ordinances forbid motor homes to be parked on city streets except to load and unload. If there had been patrols, the motor home would have been warned or cited, which never happened. Finally, a neighbor collared the motor home owners and they moved. But no thanks to the OPD.

Weary of the now apparent  charade, I sent the following email,  knowing  full well that the officer was going to have to now “fish or cut bait.”

7/19/16
---- You say that you are working on a plan so, let’s get specific:

1- specifically - what is the plan that you are working on?- details please.
2- how far along are you on that plan using a scale of 1 to 10?
3- who else is working on the plan or  helping to facilitate an end result?
4- what is your estimated timeline to completion?

Waiting your early reply,

I expected no answer, got no answer and of course, never heard from him again, or for that matter, any other city official.

It’s now September, 2018, and it’s still the same, trash, glass bottles, some broken, urinating  in the street, etc.  Looks like the City of Oxnard is not going to do anything to alleviate the problem.

Violet Way, thanks to the City, is turning into a blighted area, but that is another blog post.

  The city’s typical response is what some call, “Oxnardian,” their tactic (MO) is, in some manner to kick the proverbial can down the road and keep it out of public eye, long enough that it will eventually fade away into the sunset of distant memory. Another tactic the city is famous for is to form a “committee” to “study” the issue and report back, the “committee”, of course, never meets and never reports back, an effective sham.

"separating the wheat from the chaff"

judgement day

The judge rules against the City of Oxnard.

On May 23, 2018 Superior Court Judge Rocky Baio ruled that  Oxnard‘s “Measure M to be a valid exercise of the will of the citizens of Oxnard as expressed through the initiative process.” ----
Measure M if you remember, rolled back the draconian 87% sewer rate increase, it passed by a 72% vote margin. (see anatomy of a recall)
The judge in his written decision---
“the people reserve to themselves the powers of initiative and referendum.' (Cal. Const., art. IV, § 1.) Accordingly, the initiative power must be  liberally construed to promote the democratic process. (Raven v. Deukmejian, supra, 52 Ca1.3d at p. 341.) Indeed, it is our solemn duty to jealously guard the precious initiative power”---

                                                           the Ventura County court house

The judge in his ruling upheld the rights of a majority vote, Measure M stands. The judge also validated the Oxnard citizens right to use the California initiative process.
Those two decisions clearly illustrates that the Oxnard City Council and staff deliberately set out to deny our civil rights, a blatant violation of their own oath of office.



                                                                   Oxnard city hall

So what’s next? On June 5th  the council went into closed session to weigh their options which bodes no good for the Oxnard taxpayers AKA “the cash cows.”
Although it’s not been ruled as of yet, the city might have to pay back the overage garnered from the rate increase, that has been estimated to be at around 5.5 million dollars. Knowing full well that the city could lose and have to reimburse the rate payers, the city spent the money as fast as it came in instead of putting into a reserve fund until the matter was settled, that of course would have been prudent action to take.
So where is the money to come from should that decision go against the city?
Adding to the city’s woes, during the discovery phase of the lawsuit it was revealed  that the city has been siphoning money from the utility user fees and putting it into the general fund. Those fees, by law (prop 218), are meant to be used for operating, maintained and upgrade expenses. That violation has been going on for over 10 years and amounts to about 7 million a year. Because of the statute of libations only 3 years can be included in the pending lawsuit now in the hands of the courts. The city may have to return 22 million to the utility enterprise funds, that and the rate increase amounts to 27.5 million that could required to be reimbursed, where is that money going to come from?

                                                            Oxnard wastewater plant

Your wallet of course because the city does not have the funds, they spent it as fast as it came in.

The Mayor is now putting out feelers to gauge the reaction to a proposal that would sell the utility enterprises to private interests. An obvious ploy to absolve himself of any reonability for the mess.

"Separating the wheat from the chaff"

Anatomy of a recall

Anatomy of a recall

It had been brewing for years--the mismanagement of  city finances and policies by elected and appointed Oxnard city officials.

It came to head when the city council voted to increase sewer rates by a staggering 87 percent.

Furious citizens, led by Aaron Starr of Moving Oxnard Forward (MOF),  launched an initiative process to roll back the rate hikes. The necessary paper work was filed on March 8, 2016, with the Oxnard City Clerk’s office, who then had 15 days to produce a “title and summery.” This is mandatory before starting to gather signatures. It should be noted here that the signatures needed to be gathered by a May 20, 2016, deadline to make the November 8th  ballot.

But in a secret closed door session, the City Council voted to block the initiative process from getting on the November ballot. No “title and summary” was forthcoming, despite California laws to the contrary.

This violated our rights for “redress of our grievances,” which is guaranteed under the first amendment of the US Constitution, and, of course, the California Constitution, granting us the right to the imitative process.

The City Council also violated their own sworn oath of office which reads in part --- “I, ____________name_______________, solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California.” So much for their sworn pledge, and it speaks volumes about their ethics.

On March 23, 2016, the city filed a lawsuit against Starr with the dual purpose of not only stopping the initiative, but also of draining Starr and MOF of their funds to fight a legal battle in the courts.


Starr filed their intent on March 8th and the “title and summary” was due on or before March 23, but by April 5, 2016, the necessary paper work was not forthcoming. A counter lawsuit was filed in Superior Court to force the city to produce the “title and summary,” and Judge Rocky Baio, on April 15, ordered the city to release the paper work.
When April 18  rolled around and no paper work was available, Starr prepared a contempt action against the city.

Calculating that there was inadequate time left to collect all the necessary signatures needed, and that they had stalled long enough, the city finally released the paper work on April 20th.

Remember that there was a May 20 deadline to get the initiative on the ballot. But the city miscalculated. After 10 days of printing and organizing , Starr’s group hit the streets. In just 16 days, needing 1430 signatures, they collected 3,947--two days before the May 20 deadline.


Measure M  passed by 72%, Almost 3 in 4 voted to roll back the rate increases.

Now, in a blatant attack on the underlying principal of our democratic process, the city wants the judge to invalidate Measure M, the will of the people. At this time that decision is still in the hands of the courts.