CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE'S RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ELSINORE MAGAZINE2 November 21, 2005

Grand Jury Findings #3

3. As of January 1, 2005, Lake Elsinore City Council did not have formal adopted and updated policies and procedures that pertain to the following:

- HWBP (Program terminated January 2005)

- Credit Cards use

- Cell phone use

- Travel Reimbursement

- City Vehicle Benefits

- Car Allowance

- Petty Cash Reimbursement

- Per Diem Rembursement

- Meal Reimbursement

The City's financial division accepted and approved significant discrepancies in the above programs.

City's Response: The City acknowledge this finding and points out that these deficiencies were also identified in the "Benefits Audit" initiated by the City Council. (See Employee Benefits and Reimbursments Audit for year ended June 30, 2004- Exhibit "E" .) ( EM2 readers must go to the office of the City Clerk at City Hall to review Employee Benefits and Reimbursement Audits. And Exhibit "E".)

The City has taken significant steps to update the City Council Policies and the City's Personnel Rules, both of which are under review. A Study Session to review updated policies has been set for September 29, 2005. A list of revised policies will be provided to the Grand Jury under separate cover. See also, Response to Recommendation No. 3. EM2: Response to Recommendation No. 3 will be printed at a later date under "Recommendations".

EM2's Response to the City's RESPONSE: The CITY, did hold a Study Session September 29, 2005, but the City Attorney was late in bringing to the Study Session the revised Policies and City's Personnel Rules. Therefore the citizens missed their opportunity to review the Policies and Personnel Rules before the Study Session convened on the 29th. At the close of the Study Session it was announced by Mayor Magee that other Study Sessions would be held but no other SS have been scheduled to EM2's knowledge. EM2 does not know if the Grand Jury ever received a City's revised copy.

It is both questionable and inconcievable that Councilpersons Genie Kelley, who has served the better of 9 years on the Council, Bob Schiffner, who has serverd the better of 7 years on the council, taking so lightly the spending of Public Funds/Taxdollars for NON PUBLIC BENEFIT. When the point about Resolution 88-1, in concept only, allowed for 6 executive manangement staff members, in the amount of $100 per month but some took lump sums as high as $1000 per reimbursments. SUBMITTING 4 to 5 CASH REIMBURSMENTS in one request which was brought to Kelley's attention. The COUNCIL woman verbally replied in a phone call to a citizen on July of 2004. In which she stated,"We Just decided to give it to them anyway"!!!

Although the two went along with the rest of the Council in voting to pay for The EMPLOYEES BENEFITS and REIMBURSEMENT AUDIT, their comments have always been favorable to the staff. The taking of Public Funds not AUTHORIZED by RESOLUTION 88-1. And no one has ever attempted to recover any of the misused public funds. It just died. And they are all happy ever after except the present City Treasurer, who is still attempting to recover at least some of the wrongfully spent money. He gets no help from the council. Even the Riverside County District Attorney and or DA, have not made any significant effort to recover any of the misused public funds.

EM2 also knows that the POLICIES and PROCEDURES that were already in place had been set down by law and are sufficient.City management nor the City Council have adhered to CITY POLICY. They all just wanted to take the money !!!! Apparently because they felt comfortable in getting away with stealing which amounts to a felony.

COUNCILMAN ROBERT SCHIFFNER MAY HAVE INCRIMINATED HIMSELF

ELSINORE MAGAZINE2

November 13, 2005

Elected Councilman Robert Bob Schiffner may have incriminated himself. Comments, he made to a news reporter in a news story posted in the Californian Newspaper November 13,2005. Comments: "Weber is given to many opportunities to voice his opinion at City Council meetings............." "Weber SKEWS things and brings up issues that have already been addressed." What are Mr Schiffner alluding to, that the Treasurer should SHUT UP! and cover up the issues, forbade honesty on the issues, that he and Council have refused to RESOLVE? EM2 THINKS NOT!!!!!!! The Treasurer is too honest to deceive the public, as Schiffner and some Council would have him do. And, is doing exactly what the voters elected him to do. Mr. Weber is an elected official, the voters are his boss, not the Council. Though they would love to fire him but they have no power to do so. EM2 says; Get, the job done right Schiffner and Council or you will hear from Weber. And rightfully so! The voters are not dissapointed in the Treasurer, matter of fact they are MARVELLING at the great job he is doing. Informing the public with the truth. A job no other TREASURER was allowed by past and some present Council to do. Mainly Schiffner and Kelley!!!???. The job SCHIFFNER AND OTHER COUNCILPERSONS HAVE SKEWD/ SWEPT UNDER THE RUG FOR SO LONG. That is where Mr. Schiffner wants it to stay. TOUGH!!!! SCHIFFNER THE TRUTH IS THE LIGHT AND MUST BE SPOKEN AT ALL COST. IF YOU HAVE LEFT TOOLS LAYING AROUND FOR A LAW SUIT TO HAPPEN SO BE IT!!!!!!! That's not the Treasurer's fault!. Its, time to let the dogs out. He just did. As the story goes. The voters are dissapointed in you, Schiffner and Council for not doing your job you were elected to do. That is why EM2 SUSPECTS THAT YOU MAY HAVE INCRIMINATED YOURSELF BY YOUR COMMENTS! A POSSIBLE COVER UP.

EM2 professes that lawsuits are not created because someone makes a comment. Its because the conditions for a lawsuit already exists. EM2 says pay the piper. Serves you all right.

It was you and some Councilpersons, who mislead the PUBLIC in thinking that the baseball stadium DEBT was some $16,000.000 less, than reported and your City Attorney never did anything to correct it either. She and her firm are in it also. The discovery that a fence was not yet installed at the State Park area, WHERE 5 YOUNG SOULS LOST THERE LIVES. Were found by the treasurer Mr. Weber.

It was Mr. Weber who had to pull eye tooth to get an independent AUDITOR, after he did his homework and learned that residents in at least a portion of Summerhill, of Lake Elsinore were paying taxes for projects slated to be built in other parts of the city. It appears everything was being done to stall the INDEPENDENT AUDIT as long as possible. but Mr. Weber kept his patience. You are worrying about a law suit? SOMEONE SHOULD GO TO JAIL ON THIS ONE. Stealing money from Paul to pay Peter. At residents expense? Not Peter Weber. And you want The TREASURER to shut up. SAY IT LOUDER Mr. Weber let the whole world pickup on this one because a similar problem exist throughtout. Citizens are not the voice for Weber but rather, support Mr. Weber's voice. Thanks Mr. Schiffner for the credit you give to citizens. But Mr Weber is his own person. No one does his homework or write speeches for him. He does it all, as well as hold down more than a full time job to support his wonderful loving family. And on top of that EM2 has seen first hand what a wonderful father he is. Superb and masterful. He is just honored to have people of like mind behind him. Mr. Schiffner you and Council MAYBE SANDWICHED IN with no way out. It is highly unlikely that the treasurer will allow anyone out unless the peoples business are done RIGHT. And rightfully so!

The CITIZENS, do know what they are talking about! What the Californian Newspaper printed are true and the CITIZENS well, knows almost everything about it. Except what is yet to be brought to the SURFACE. Apparently you are also a liar. Some advice, do not get yourself in a bigger pickle jar than you may already be in. Obviously you and company also have something that is ROTTEN to hide. Let the Treasurer do the job he needs to do. You should tell Matt Pressey the FINANCE Director, EXECUTIVE OFFICES, stop playing with the figures unless he will also INCIRMINATE himself. Mr. Weber will not ALLOW playing with figures to SLIDE. Mathematic Figures, is like a hobby for Mr. Weber. Matter of fact its his career.

EM2 Apologize, for being so long winded. There is just so much to say. A page can seem to never hold it all.

IT APPEAR THAT THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AND COUNCIL MAYBE USING CONTROLLING TACTICS

ELSINORE MAGAZINE2

November 10, 2005

EM2 are pondering over the in actions of the City of Lake Elsinore and City Council. In many cases where disciplinary action has been warranted for the longest time and nothing/no action has been taken. Yet the City council on Tuesday night in closed session took strong disciplinary actions aganist City clerk Fredrick Ray. Although it is not clear what the charges aganist Mr. Ray were. A suspension of two weeks as reprimand appear to be extremely harsh especially in view of the fact that no known disciplinary action was taken when staff member Pat Kilroy laid a hand on elected official Peter Weber. ASSUALT and BATTERY? Then, City Manager Robert Bob Brady elbows, Supervisor Bob Busters representative Dave Stahovich in the head. Both filed complaints at the sheriff Department, Yet the City nor the City council took any disciplinary action aganist either of them. Not even a letter of REPRIMAND!!!!!

No matter what the charges aganist Mr. Ray would be. One thing we know is that Mr. Ray strongly follow policy and procedures. More than EM2 can say about Kilroy, Brady and some of the other staff members, if the truth were ever told. Matter of fact Mr Bob Brady was promoted to City Manager OVER MORE COMPETENT APPLICANTS, after that fact along with his unethical behavior. The UNETHICAL and TIME BOMB WAITING TO EXPLODE!!!! BEHAVIOR along with his bias attitude. And a very, very close relationship he has with a staff member, which mixing apples and oranges does not blend well, when a boss fiddle diddle with his secretary while taken a bias attitude towards other staff members. Does anyone expect the staff members to respect that kind of behavior? I think not!!!!. That is why the controlling tactic question is eminent. Mr. Ray is known for his strong follow the procedures/policies. many of us has experienced how he make sure that documents are accurate and correct. He even kicked documents back to the City attorney that was not correct before he would have the Mayor sign or putting his Clerks signa on the docs. and rightfully so!!!!! All documents must be accurate!!!!! Some had to wait to review documents because of the incompetence of the City Attorney. Em2 is wondering??? if the Attorney charged the taxpayers extra for her screw up? BEWARE Mr. City Treasurer!!!!! Did the Attorney get a

reprimand and suspenion? For making the public and the staff wait before they could proceed with the business necessary?????

Did any of the 14 employees get a reprimand or suspension or were made to pay back the Health & Wellness unathorized, PUBLIC FUNDS. EM2 THINK NOT!!!! In doing so, taken Funds, wrongfully/unathorized, aganist Resolution 88-1 which clearly states 6 upper management would get $100 per month ONLY as necessary with approval receipts. But, more than 6 taken the unauthorized PUBLIC FUNDS and more than $100 per month, into the hundered/thousands. And in many cases no receipts. Councilpersons Kelley and Schiffner said it was just find. Should enough electorate get smart they would set up a post and in one day would have enough signatures to RECALL. They has also said, other PUBLIC MONIES SPENT were OK. One should ask what's in it for them??????

The big corker is when City Attorney Babs Liable, after an independent auditor found an over payment of some $ 90 thousand plus on the

Williams Landscape Contractor billings. Some way some how Babs first convinced the independent auditor to come down from $90 thousand to $ 16, thousand. Then for some unclear reason Babs Liable went into closed session in violation of the Ralph M.Brown Act and brought the figures down to $328.00 then made a determination that the $328.00 was not enough to ask for a return. Has the IRS let anyone off the hook for any amount of taxpayers money?

Now then EM2 has DETERMINED that a CONTROLLING TACTIC and JEALOUSY may exist.

Lets analyse: Mr. Ray is known to be PROCEDURAL. He applied for the City Clerks position, went through the interview and was accepted and confirmed by the City Council for the position Oct. 11, 2005. All was well with the City Clerks position. On or about Oct. 22, 2005 for some very strange unclear reason, all hell broke lose. Suddenly complaints for what ever began. And has turned out to be one big suspicious mess. Are there certain staff members who would be JEALOUS of the fact that Mr. Ray was confirmed for the position? Would certain management and councilpersons even though they all voted approval to hire Mr. Ray as City Clerk was not really in favor of him holding the position? Perhaps already aware of and knowing that an ochestration was soon to come in an effort to have him dismissed. Em2 is having a very hard time believing that all of a sudden,coincidently, that Mr. Ray stepped out of bounds. Something smells like bad eggs. It is somewhat as mysterious as the appointment for how the city managers selection went down. S-t-r-a-n-g-e!!!!! Could it be through intimidation of the worse kind someone would like it best if Mr. Ray become incompetent and all Babs will have to do is sign off contracts inaccurately as she has done in the past.

In view of the information from various good sources that an attempt and an effort to have Mr. Ray dismissed from the onset of his employment appears eminent. Sources have it that during the probation period of Mr. Ray's employment, a petition was circulated by a staff member very very closely connected to the City Manager and another employe who no longer works for the city and moved out of state. Who's, names that are known to EM2 but EM2 will not reveal at this time. And a continued effort has been made for his dissmissal, sources citing racist. The question of racist is on the rise among other citizens also. In view of the timing on how and when the episodes went down. Maybe its time for the FBI to stick its head in City Hall. One thing we know for sure that corruption does exist at City Hall. And the INCOMPETENT COUNCIL WILL DO NOTHING RIGHTFULLY ABOUT IT. They just go after destroying

goodness!!!!! and EXCUSE THEMSELVES FROM DOING ANYTHING about wrong doing i.e. influence an auditor to write no evidence of illegal taken of PUBLIC FUNDS aganist the State Constitution Article XVI Section 6. SOMETHING NEED TO BE RESTORED!!!!!.

Was anyone held liable for the five souls who lost thier lives due to the city's negligence? EM2 think not. Why is Fredrick Ray the first to be discipline by the City? Over all the corruption that has happened at City Hall in the past?

Has Lisa gibbinit up to Brady been reprimanded for constantly being late to work at taxpayers expense another Constitution violation? As, booster club trouble maker has she been suspended? If the answers to those questions are No. She should be fired!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

EM2 WARNS Mr. Ray need to take care in noticing who the ochestrated trouble makers are. It may not be the end of trying to get rid of you. The door of EVIL IS OPEN in WALKS Mr. and MRS. DEVIL ATTEMPTING TO TRAP YOU.

CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ELSINORE MAGAZINE 2

November 4, 2005

Second of City's Response to GRAND JURY'S Findings

Finding # 2 Grand Jury Report

2) The Grand Jury referred to the California State Attorney General's opinion 02-711, dated October 23, 2002, to clarify purchases of third party meals by a City Administrator. The attorney representing the City of Lake Elsinore disagreed with the Attorney General's opinion and stated this law applied only

to the City Council members.

CITY'S RESPONSE: We direct the Grand jury to the opinion 02- 711 which did not involve an employee(i.e.., an " administrator") as suggested in the finding but rather involved elected officials. (See AG Opinion 02 -711- Exhibit "C" .) Accordingly, the City Attorney did not "disagree" with the Attorney General Opinion 02- 711; but rather she noted that the opinion was based on reimbursement for meal expenditures by elected officials. (See City Attorney Memorandum dated October 12, 2004- Exhibit "D") While the Attorney General's office had clear opportunity to specify that the opinion extended to non-elected employees (and to overule a conflicting prior opinion on the same subject) it choose not to. As a result, some commentators have indicated that the opinion may be limited to elected officials. Most commentators agree that the opinion is ambigious in many respects. (Em2 suggest to review Exhibits and memorandums noted bythe City go to City hall clerks office for review.

EM2's RESPONSE: While the State Attorney General's Opinion was the topic of elected officials in General Law and Charter Cities, reimbursements for General Law City Council members on purchasing meals for third parties is BREAKING THE LAW! The City Attorney missed a very important component in the State Attorney General's Opinion and The State Constitution. Turning first to page 3 (three) of the State Attorney Generals opinion, Paragraph 2, line 3 "This restriction avoids any possible application of the prohibition contained in article XVI, section 6, of the Constitution which states:" "The legislature shall have no power. . . to make any gift or authorize the making of any gift, of public money or thing of value to any individual, municipal or other corporation whatever.. . . " (See Albright v. City of South San Francisco (1975) 44 Cal. App.3d 866, 869-870; 61 Ops Cal. Atty. Gen.342, 344 (1978).)"

In view of the fact that legislatures include local agencies (i.e.) City Council Members the purchasing of THIRD PARTY MEALS WOULD BE A GIFT. The State Constitution appears to answer all applications of prohibition contained in Article XVI, section 6, "THE LEGISLATURE SHALL HAVE NO POWER." "No MAKING of GIFTS, or AUTHORIZE the MAKING of GIFTS of ANY PUBLIC MONEY or THING of VALUE to any INDIVIDUAL, MUNICIPAL or OTHER CORPORATION WHATEVER!!! This puts to rest the question of legality!! " No way, No how, No reason can any employee of any PUBLIC AGENCY PURCHASE MEALS for any THIRD PARTY using PUBLIC MONEY or anything of Value! THIS MEANS, No party's, No candy gifts to developers, No to ANY and ALL GIFTS or ANY FORM OF GIFT to include practices used by any CITY COUNCIL or STAFF MEMBER!!! The LAW IS THE LAW!!! misuse of any and all PUBLIC FUNDS is ILLEGAL!!!(Above stated opinion can be reviewed at city hall.)

Paragraph 2 CITY'S RESPONSE: In light of the lack of guidance provided by the Attorney General, the City Council is currently considering a revised meal reimbursement policy that will provide more definitive gudiance in an area that the Attorney General has thus far declined to provide. We also note that Attorney General opinions are advisory. Ultimately, we believe that officials elected by the community are in the best position to determinine the " business necessity " respecting meal reimbursments. In determining that ultimate policy prerogative, the City Council appreciates the Grand Jury's apparent position that City funds should not be used with respect to meals for private individuals doing business with the City. The Council will necessarily weigh that position with the positive communication and business development opportunities that often come from hosting events for private individuals.

EM2's RESPONSE: The City Council, Staff Members and the City Attorney need to realize that the State Constitution is a Law far bigger than their/ her opinion. EM2 believes that the State Attorney General gave MORE THAN adequate guidance and that the City Attorney should do better than use her lack of prudence on the State Attorney Generals opinion. It is clear to EM2 that the Constitution, Article XVI, section 6, clearly gives difinition to the fact that the City cannot give permission for any public money be used for any private individual or anyone doing bussiness with the City or otherwise!!! All under the violation of that Constitution should/shall be held liable to the full extent of the law. Cut... case closed.!!!!!!.

Paragraph 3 City's RESPONSE: As a practical matter, the City Council notes a significant drop in both City Council and staff credit card charges for meals and meal reimbursement requests in the last eight months. This decrease corresponds to the implementation of revised practices by the new City Manager.

EM2's RESPONSE; WHAT REVISED PRACTISES? We have not seen any policy changes because the POLICY of THIS CITY STATES,"City Credit Cards can only be used for city business ONLY!!! Some of the City Council Members, the City Manager and the City Attorney have totally disregarded their own policy and have followed selfish and self made practices that even the Riverside County Grand Jury has noted THREE TIMES!!! The reason for a decrease in this type of spending is due to the fact that the city credit cards have not been used illegally lately!!! But the statement above is a direct admission that public funds WERE being used illegally!!! Also the City Council has not done anything to revise meal reimbursement with any significance. As a practical matter it is business as usual with respect to their point of view.

The next EM2 article will be about : LE, City COUNCIL DID NOT HAVE FORMAL ADOPTED AND UPDATED POLICIES and Procedures.....Surf On By and Check it out.