Thursday, June 29, 2006

Issues Between City Manager and Councilmember

Lynwood, CA - Local newspaper reports issues between City Manager and a Councilmember.

Read story here.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

The fact is the Fernando was actually right about MArtinez. Martinez is a crook and a liar. But ofcourse because Leticia Maria Alfreddie and Ramon like him so it's okay. Bull shit, if you don't want to be micro managed find another job. Since when can't your boss tell you what to do. I wish I could tell my boss not to manage me, but that's not reality. fernando caught him using public funds to remodel his wife's office with out approval of the council. He also caught him lying to the council about not knowing his wife prior to marrying her. He also caught him falsly claiming 10 hours of work the day he got married. The point is Martinez doesn't like getting caught. Just like Leticia he wines and acts like a victim.

Anonymous said...

Fernando thank you for reinvicating yourself and for fighting for the people of Lynwood. Don't let outsiders come and "NOS MIREN LA CARA DE P.ENDEJOS"

Anonymous said...

Remodel his wife's office at home? Or3 the office in city hall?

Anonymous said...

At the office

Anonymous said...

THE POINT IS...HIS WIFE DOES NOT OWN AN OFFICE AT CITY HALL. THE REMODELING WAS DONE ON CITY OWNED PROPERTY AND IT LOOKS MUCH MORE PROFESSIONAL THAN IT DID IN THE PAST. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE MAN BEAUTIFYING CITY PROPERTY? STOP BEING SO PETTY AND LISTENING TO IDIOTS.

Anonymous said...

The point is that our council is raising fees for Mr MArtinez to continue over spending. Also the council never actually approved the budget for this remodeling project. That is where the fight between Fernando and him started.

Anonymous said...

I am tired of reading all this nonsense addressed at the City Manager – obviously, written by Pedroza’s sympathizers. Open your eyes and look at the facts:

- The City Manager prevented Pedroza from getting kickbacks from developers and contractors, and that is why Fernando is so angry and scared. The kickbacks that Pedroza was getting, and the City Manager stopped, were from developers for Plaza Mexico, Casa
Grande, Whispering Glen and Corona restaurant, street sweeping and tree trimming contractors, and that Mexican sculptor who wanted to sell his piece for the Senior Center to the City for $125K!

- The City Manager made Pedroza pay $1,800 that he owed the City from a few years ago, after being overpaid!

- Pedroza does not return the City’s per diem when he travel on the City’s dime, and returns early. He is afraid that the City Manager is watching him, and will turn him in to the FPPC and IRS.

- Pedroza constantly asks the City Attorney and Sheriff for help for his brother, a convict.

- Pedroza cussed at the City Manager last November, when he was in panic over his election – there are witnesses.

- Pedroza has verbally abused employees in the Public Works department. Investigation has been conducted, but the results have been ignored.

- Pedroza has said horrible things about African Americans in the past – he still believes them.

- There are pictures / videos of Pedroza’s trips to Mexico, with developers in their boats.

- Pedroza is a pedophile who is a shake down artist.

- His trips to Mexico were oftentimes not business bur pleasure – if you know what I mean, There are pictures to prove this. And does Pedroza pay child support for the illegitimate kids over there?

The list goes on and on…

Anonymous said...

I am back with facts on Pedroza – and these are just a tip of an iceberg! Read on…

- Pedroza said himself at a Council meeting that he cut the City’s budget in 2002-2003 as a Mayor. He thought that the City was in financial trouble. Turns out, this high school drop out did not know how to read the financial reports – and City Manager Lorry Hempe was not much help, either. (By the way, what are those two doing in her office behind a locked door all the time? Lorry was seeing leaving he office with her hair all messed up… Are they studying the financials together?)

- Pedroza’s past employment history of a “customer service” gofer qualifies him to collect kickbacks from people doing business for the City.

- Pedroza uses City staff to do political work for him – a legal “no-no”!

- Pedroza is scared – because the FBI has talked to the City Manager about him and Byrd.

- Pedroza believes that Lynwood is a little Mexico, and that he can take his “mordida” from everyone.

- Pedroza should get a full time job and earn money legitimately – and he may need to go back to school to learn a few basic words. It also would help for his fat slob to lose some weight, and get a decent car – so that he can stop being jealous of the City Manager!

Anonymous said...

Want further details on Pedroza/Byrd/(Hempe) gang? Here you go:

- Pedroza’s father-in-law pushes him to get an exclusive towing contract with the City – which he had until the City Manager opened it to competition! Pedroza also uses Byrd to get what he wants – so watch how those two vote on the towing contract! (And what kind of a strange connection is there between Lorry and Byrd - are those two messing around? Does Lorry want another illegitimate child?)

- Pedroza is trying to shift everyone’s attention from himself and his illegal actions to others. This is why he is after the City Manager, and that is why he has that the City Manager will sue the City. The fact is, Pedroza wants everyone to focus on the City Manager, and not notice Fernando’s illegal transactions.

- The problem with the city is not its employees – but a few officials, mainly Pedroza and Byrd. These two have their own interests, which are different from the City’s interests, and are illegal. Too bad the voters do not see it yet – but the City Manager will expose these two! The IRS is already after Pedroza, and FBI is watching Byrd and Pedroza.

- Pedroza and Byrd should remember that their sins may be paid by someone other than them – but those close to them!

Anonymous said...

This is some heavy stuff, keep it coming. I want to know more about these two!

Anonymous said...

Very interesting article about the Mexican Drug Cartels and southeast cities (including Lynwood). http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50703

Anonymous said...

Good article, why didn't Laura send it to everyone? Not newsworthy or is she biased?

Anonymous said...

It seems that Fernando despite who he is and what he has done in the past is the only member of council smart enough to see through the mess and nonsense that this City Manager has caused. Pedroza ids the only councilmember withthe balls to say that this City Manager must go. Right now Lynwood is the laughing stock of the southeast area cities and the Little man is only making it worse.

Aide Castro said...

I am sorry to inform you that last night your Lynwood City Council voted to increase water fees by 30%. After the first increase it will be followed by another 15%, then 5%, finishing with a final increase of 3%.

The vote was as follows:
Maria Santillan - Yes
Louis Byrd - Yes
Leticia Vasquez - Yes
Alfreddie Johnson - Yes
Fernando Pedroza - No

During public orals I gave all council members a copy of my water bill so that they were able to see in actual dollars how each individual household will be affected. On my bill I gave them an example of how much more I would have to pay. The example I gave was the following:

July bill $84.50 x 30% = $25.35
$25.35 + $84.50 = $109.85 new bill
$109.85 x 15% = $16.48
$16.48 + $109.85 = $126.33
$126.33 x 5% = $6.32
$6.32 + 126.33 = $132.65
$132.65 x 3% = $3.98
$3.98 + $132.65 = $136.63

$84.50 original bill divided by $136.63 final bill after increases gives you a total of 62% increase.

The reasons given by staff and council were that the increases were needed due to reserves being depleted, infrastructure repairs, and to produce revenue for quality of life services, and finally because the bond rating company used, recommended it.

I am not saying an increase is not needed. The metropolitan water district did increase their fees by 3%. However we only purchase 20% of our water from them. That means that 80% of the revenue generated for that percentage can stay in the department. We also need to take in consideration employees. They need a cost of living raise. The water department employees are certified through the state and they need training every so often. I also understand that their medical benefits probably have increased in cost. For that I will justify another 3%. The infrastructure also needs to be invested in, so I'll give them another 3% for that. We must be given an itemized explanation of what each project consist of and how much will it cost. No matter what they claim I'm willing to bet they will not be doing all these repairs immediately or all at once. Last 1% to pad the reserves. The point I am trying to make is that those are the only reasons our revenues can be used for.

Last night the City Manager allowed our Mayor Pro Tem to misinform the audience that these increases were needed for quality of life services and issues. The City Manager clearly knows that the revenues generated from increases on our water can only be used for the water department and nothing else. Yet our council last night voted to approve these increases under the impression that they will be able to allocate some of the revenue in other services. The fact is you can't. The City Manager also advised the council that we may loose our bond rating if these increases aren't done. Wrong, the bond rating company recommended an increase, but they never specified an amount. The key word is recommended. Their is a big difference between you must, and I recommend. As long as we comply with the original guidelines given at the time of application their is no reason to loose our rating. Goes right back to how the City Manager advised the council that we have 10 million in reserves so we don't need to do budget cuts. Yet he failed to mention to the council that although we do have those reserves, they are their to back up our bonds. That was simply a scare tactic in my opinion. The City Manager new that if the council voted against the increase his budget would fall apart. I would Like to know why the City Manager included in his budget the 30% increase? What would he have done if it didn't pass? Why was he so sure? I guess that would explain why he didn't care that the council was not properly informed. His only mission was to get it passed.

Time after time we are asked to pay for prior and new, council and staff mistakes. Mr Byrd made the comment that staff had set up a workshop for the community to voice their concerns and only 11 people showed up. He asked. What happen to the rest of the community? He said he took that as the residents were okay with the increases. Although we all know he's wrong to make this assumption, I really think he was trying to send a message to the community. He's basically saying to us organize and unite to make a difference. The same people that go and talk at every meeting don't make a difference. That tells me simply since the community isn't speaking up, I don't care, I'll just do what I want. Last night our council clearly said we don't care how our community will be affected.

I expected lots more people at council last night. I was disappointed that several people who claim to be leaders and aspire to sit on council were not their. But I was happy to see some new faces in the audience who did go and speak against the increases.

In reviewing the agenda, I also found item number 22 suspicious. It was called Utility Users Tax Matters. Several residents were under the impression council was considering to increase the tax. However in reading the resolution recommended for the item, it states the council is hiring legal representation regarding proposition 218 and other related matters. So I looked up Prop 218. This measure took affect back in 1996 to protect our tax dollars. In other words no taxation with out representation. Proposition 218:
Your right to vote on all local taxes
Proposition 218 gives you the right to vote on all local taxes, and requires taxpayer approval of assessments and property-related fees. Now bureaucrats can't find sneaky ways to raise revenues! Non profit organizations such as Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association go around different cities looking into complaints from residents. Learning all of this, I realized that I don't remember us, the voters ever voting in favor of this Utility Users Tax. All I know is it went from 3% to 6% to 10% were it is now. Back to my point. Is our council in trouble with Jarvis? Why do we need legal representation regarding Prop 218? I want to know what is council trying to hide from us. If I am correct the City of Lynwood would owe their residents lots of money. So as you can see their some sneaky stuff going on. We must keep our eyes open.

This is our city, therefore we must protect our financial interest. I am just one person and I need help from the community. Please write your elected officials and let them know we are not going to put up with the abuse any longer. Speak up people. I beg and implore that we stand up together against the injustice commited.

On a positive note I was very pleased with the new street sweeping contract. The routes were re done and they even included alley clean up. Along with the purchase of two natural powered machines. I also was very happy with the new weed abatment project. Every quarter city employees will be maintaining properties that have not been kept up by their owners. In turn to recoop the money they will be fining and adding liens to the properties to insure repayment. When a lien is on your property anytime you go to refinance or sell, escrow always insures payment of all liens to transfer clean titles. So good job on those two issues.

Although it might seem that I am picking on our City Manager, I would like to clarify that I don't think he's that bad. Like I said in the past he has great ideas. He just needs to be a little more carefull about what he's proposing and how our community is being affected by his recommendations. I feel it is his responsibility to make sure our council is well informed before making any decisions.

Thank You,
Aide Castro

2:10 PM, August 16, 2006

Anonymous said...

As I understand it the City Manager was told to do his job by Pedroza and that entailed having the City Manager carry out the items the City Council approved to be done. The City Manager is there to carry out the City Council's direction as it was the residents who voted in the City Council mebers to represent them and it is not the City Manager's job to set policy for the City or the city's agenda. Look how upset people get if the City Council tries to direct the city in some way but decides how that is to be done in a closed door meeting. The City Manager does not represent the residents, he wasn't voted into office by the residents and so any direction coming from him is something he decided to do in private and not put up for approval by the City Council in a public forum. The City Manager needs to find out that he is simply another employee who can be fired if one more councilperson wants him out. Both Byrd and Pedrosa are already sick of his Napolianic complex and his rudeness. When you add in the fact that this same City Manager has a past history of being accused of sexually harassing or abusing his employees in cities like Pasadena and Palm Beach Gardens, FL, no wonder the City Council Council worries about this little man who thinks he is something special and who flauts the City's rules by marrying one of his juniors, during working hours and while he has his own employees working on an anti nepotism rule for others in the city, besides himself and his bride. The other problem is an antinepotism rule has existed in Lynwood since around 1978 and the work he assigned to those who work for him was completely not needed. Are the above the actions of good manager? I don't think so.