The Patterson IrriTator

Well, we’ve certainly had quite a splash in recent days with the news that a mystery company, coined “Project X” by the city, has plans to develop a one million square foot distribution center at the West Ridge Business Park (owned by Ken and Larry Buehner).   Of course, there’s lots of speculation regarding who this mystery company is and why things are being keep so tightly under wraps about their intentions.  And while the initial reaction to a new business that could bring 1,500 jobs to our area may be positive, there are no shortage of questions that need to be answered.

A special meeting was hastily scheduled on January 11  and was then just as quickly cancelled.  News accounts seem to conflict in terms of the manner in which this new development will occur.   As of today, it remains unclear when the mystery company will be unveiled and what exactly the city is planning to give away to lure this big fish.

A lot of speculation is circulating around the mystery company being Amazon, given the deal they cut with Gov. Brown to establish a major presense in the state in exchange for deferring a measure to tax online sales.  But there are many other possibilities.  One includes a Walmart distribution center, which makes a lot of sense when you consider the recent groundbreaking for the SuperWalmart and the fact that Walmart has been searching for a distribution center location in the Valley.  Also consider that on the same night that the Council approved the SuperWalmart at a special meeting, they came back for a one-item “regular” meeting at which they approved what was known as the Patterson Logistics Center, a proposed development which includes the Patterson Airport.  There were plenty of questions at the time regarding the environmental review (such as it was) conducted for that project, but it was nonetheless approved by the Council with no fanfare.

As to the questions about this project, these are just for starters.  First, it was reported that the city would receive no tax revenues for the development.  Why is that exactly?  Is that because it would involve Amazon or another internet-based service that is currently exempt from sales taxes?   There are also conflicting reports about whether, or the extent to which, the city is providing incentives to lure this huge project.   The agenda for the cancelled special meeting indicated that the Council would be considering various incentives, but subsequent media reports said that there would be no incentives provided.  Then, in Modesto Bee reported that the company is seeking “credit” for $1.7 million in improvements to Park Center Drive.   Does that mean that the mystery company and the landowners (i.e., the Buehners) are expecting the city to pick up the bill for the road improvements?  Or does it mean they’ll be for the improvements in lieu of development impact fees that they would otherwise pay to the city?   Either way, this could be a pretty huge giveaway.

The other unspoken and/or unclarified issues involve the impacts that this type of business will have on our community.  A distribution center of this size will generate a huge number of truck (and possibly train) trips in our city, with the related impacts on our air quality, our traffic congestion and on the condition of the roads themselves.  There’s been no environmental assessment of a specific project of this magnitude, and yet the city is reporting that the company wants to begin construction immediately and be operational by this fall.   And let’s not forget that Councilwoman Smith and the other seeming proponents of the Project X distribution facility have been fighting West Park tooth and nail, basing most of their arguments on the traffic and environmental impacts that West Park would have on our city.   So apparently it’s ok to create gridlock in our own city limits but not if it’s coming from a project south of town.

Another question involves why this has been kept quiet for so long.  Clearly, a project of this magnitude didn’t just materialize overnight.  When the Irrigator first reported the story earlier this week, they indicated that the company could close escrow as early as today.   It’s obvious that something’s been in the works for a long time for the project to be this close to closing escrow.

Clearly, there will be much more to come on this breaking story, and the Irritator team will do our best to keep track of developments and piece together the story behind the story.   Stay tuned Patterson.

We at the Irritator have been relatively quiet recently, but that doesn’t mean we haven’t been closely following what’s been happening in our fair town.   But we are now back and ready to put a spotlight on the latest dramas happening in Patterson.

But before we do, we must pay homage to one of our most prominent contributors, Ida Perez.  We lost our beloved Ida in late December after a tragic auto accident in Newman.   She will not only be dearly missed on a personal level, but we at the Irritator will dearly miss her perspective on the direction of our community.  Ida was a quiet, gentle soul who didn’t seek the limelight, but she cared greatly about her community and she wasn’t afraid to make her opinions known.  Ida was, and will continue to be, an inspiration to the Irritator team, and to many, many others who had the privilege to know her.   We will most certainly miss you Ida.

Having said that, stay tuned for more Irritator reports on the latest, greatest, and not-so-greatest that our fair city has to offer.

Thank you for opening me up to a new world.

We’ll have that cup of coffee someday, you’ll be missed deeply.

Zeta

Recently, someone on the Irrigator commented that we might as well go ahead and rename our fair city ”Buehnerville.”   While that may be a bit of an exaggeration, the most recent news involving Patterson’s famous brothers highlights a lot of what is wrong with the Patterson of today.

In case you missed it, the Irrigator recently reported that the Mayor and City Manager, accompanied by several area realtors,  recently conducted a fact-finding trip through some of the blighted portions of town (click here to view the article).  The purpose of the excursion was to more closely examine the extent to which our city’s low-income housing is fallen into disrepair.  They spoke to numerous residents who’ve been enduring unspeakable living conditions, citing everything from pest and mold infestations to dodging drug needles in makeshift playgrounds.   Residents meekly complained to the city representatives and the paper about the state of their homes for fear of retribution.

It was then “revealed” that some of these lovely homes were managed by Westside Properties, the business owned Ken and Larry Buehner.  No comment from Larry, who’s now had his latest conflict of interest splashed out in the paper.  Kenny’s only comments involved denials of his tenants’ complaints and a shifting of the blame to his tenants having trouble keeping up with their rent.  If you’ve ever had the pleasure of renting from a less than reputable landlord, then you’ve probably heard this line:  “What are you talking about?  I do everything I can to maintain my property.  The only time I ever get complaints is from tenants who aren’t keeping up with their rent.”

Of course, to those of us who have lived in town for a long time, this is not news.   Many of us have either lived in, or known people who have lived in, these rental properties and have been aware of the horrible conditions that a number of them are in.   What is news is that there were several area realtors who took part in these site visits because of their increasing concern that blighted properties such as these are not only creating public safety issues but also making it increasingly difficult to sell homes or attract new residents and/or businesses.  Not to the mention the impact these blighted rental units have on their neighbors’ home values.

But the big question is what, if anything, the city will do to make sure landlords like the Buehners provide adequate housing to their tenants.  The city has been conveniently asleep at the switch on these properties for years, and now one of the landlords sits on our City Council.   Our city manager mentioned in the article that part of the plan to address the issue could involve finding “financial incentives” for landlords to rehabilitate their deteriorating properties.   But where is the hammer from the city in the form of code violation fines?   Why should landlords who provide substandard (to be charitable) housing be rewarded with grant money when they haven’t even been cited properly by the city for their many health, safety and other code violations?

To be fair, not all of the properties visiting by the city contingent were Buehner properties, and there are other landlords dropping the ball in terms how their properties are maintained (or in this case, not maintained).  But it will certainly be very interesting to see how the city addresses this issue moving forward, and whether the city applies both a carrot and stick in a fair, equitable manner for all of our city’s property owners.    And of course, it will be most interesting to see how Councilman Buehner handles all of this once it reaches the council (assuming some sort of plan ever does).  Will he do the right thing, disclose his financial interests in these questionable properties, and decline to take any grant money secured by the city?  Or will he vote to stick his hand in the cookie jar and seek to profit from his dilapidated rental properties?   Only time will tell…

Former Mayor Becky Campo took another hit this week when one of her former contract employees was convicted of tax fraud.   Apparently, Becky’s employee defrauded multiple clients who were using Patterson Financial to file their tax returns.   Specifically, she was convicted of diverting clients’ tax refunds into a personal account and then providing the clients with a reduced portion of their refunds than they were supposed to get.    She is now facing sentencing in October, where she could get as much as 20 years in Federal prison and a $250,000 fine.

Becky claimed that she let the woman go once she learned of the scheme, but the former employee indicated that she left the company on her own and that Becky had to know what was happening.

There have been strong indications that the FBI has been conducting some kind of ongoing investigation around town.   Could this be the first salvo in a larger investigation which includes Patterson Financial, our former mayor and perhaps others?   In the weeks following the release of the Grand Jury report, which, among other things, found that Mayor Campo failed to prove her residency in the city during her last two-plus years as mayor, this is a tough time for Becky indeed.   There well may be other shoes about to drop, and the City should tread very carefully as it considers its response to the Grand Jury report, particularly as it relates to our former mayor.   This is very likely not the final chapter on this subject.

For more information, click here for the Patterson Irrigator article.  Click here for the Modesto Bee article.

REMINDER:  TONIGHT IS THE FIRST CITY COUNCIL MEETING SINCE RELEASE OF THE GRAND JURY REPORT.  SHOW UP AT 7:00 p.m. TO MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD ON THE REPORT’S FINDINGS!!

Following is part 2 of our analysis of the recently released Grand Jury report regarding the Slate’s various activities.  In this edition, we will be focusing on our “favorite” Councilmember Annette Smith.  Many have known for years that Mrs. Smith has an issue with her temper and close ties to many of Patterson’s power players, and the Grand Jury report confirmed both.

They found:

1. Annette was a tenant of John Ramos, both with her Kudos printing business and personally via a space at one of Ramos’ storage facilities.  Not only did the Grand Jury find that she never publically disclosed this relationship or recuse herself from Ramos-related matters before the Council, it also found that some of her fees to Ramos were written off.
2. Along with Campo and Farinha, Annette played an instrumental role in the terminations of Cleve Morris and Rod Simpson.
3. She acted on her own in an effort to stop the DP Health District move, and she participated in the illegal vote to give Ramos $27,000 without any documentation of his legal expenses.
4. She failed to comply with state law by taking ethics training every 2 years as she was required.
5. Along with Campo, she pressured Rod Simpson to hire Dominic as an assistant planner prior to his appointment to the City Council.
6. She inappropriately berated fellow council members and constituents in public, something many of us have either seen or been subjected to ourselves.

By far, Annette’s activities received the most scrutiny from the Grand Jury, and they took the extraordinary step of urging her to resign, or if she refuses, for the community to consider recalling her.   The most significant offenses involved failure to disclose her relationship to Ramos and her unwillingness to take herself out of matters before the Council involving his various business dealings.   This not only taints the Council’s actions on the DP Health Center move, but also the Walmart vote, the Villages vote, and a variety of other issues that the Council has considered over the years.  It is for this reason that the Grand Jury concluded that her resignation or recall was the best course for the city.

While not one of the more serious offenses, the Grand Jury also called Annette out for her outrageous behavior and treatment of those who disagree with her, not only mentioning the infamous Savemart incident but also her childish rant at a recent city council meeting after the council reversed its initial decision to appoint Buehner without going through a candidate evaluation process.   What’s particularly striking about this latest incident is that she did it on a night when members of the Grand Jury were in attendance.  She had already been interviewed by the Grand Jury at that point and had to know they were there that night, and yet she still couldn’t restrain herself.

Even after the GJ report was released, Annette still couldn’t control her temper.   In the latest Irrigator article which included Annette and Becky’s attempts to lay blame for the report on Mayor Molina, Annette was actually quoted as calling our mayor a “Thug in a suit.”  She then went on to say he is “disloyal to the city” and “disloyal to his friends.” Very classy and statesmanlike indeed Annette.   Not to mention the fact that Annette just reconfirmed one of the Grand Jury’s findings regarding her treatment of fellow council colleagues and members of the public.

It didn’t take very long for Annette to make it known that she has no intention of resigning.   She’d rather continue putting the city through more unnecessary trauma and division rather than do the right thing and remove herself from Patterson politics.  So it will very likely be up to the citizens of Patterson to make sure she is removed from office once and for all, either by recalling her or by making sure she is not re-elected next year.  Given everything our residents have been put through, the sooner Annette can be taken out of office, the better off we will all be.

Stay tuned.  Next Grand Jury Breakdown – Dominic Farinha.

Well, it appears that a new community organization is helping to keep closer tabs on our City Council.   Last month, the Irrigator reported that Patterson Residents for Ethics, Safety and Service, or PRESS, was organized by a group of concerned residents who see what’s been happening with the city and want to give other folks different ways to get involved and be heard.

We checked out their site and it already has some very interesting features. One page tracks some of the Slate-related conflicts of interest. Another monitors which council members take part in various community events.  The site includes information residents can use to make public records requests and access other information to which they are entitled.  It also includes a much easier way to monitor council agendas by posting each item individually rather than the way agendas are currently bundled on the city’s web site.  It also looks like PRESS is working to get residents more engaged on public safety, an issue on the minds of many Pattersonites these days.

More residents need to get involved in efforts like these.   And from what we’re hearing around town, there are a number of residents who now regularly go to the PRESS site for information on the city.

Check out their site here

And the beat goes on with The Slate.   In one of their latest moves, they appointed Patterson’s newest Councilmember Larry Buehner, a nice man who also happens to be a walking conflict of interest, to serve on the city’s Budget Committee.  As the Patterson Irrigator reported last fall and again recently, Buehner’s businesses still owe the city more than $30,000 in obligations previously made to help finance the General Plan update.   And now he has been put in a p0sition to make direct recommendations for how the city will address its ongoing budget issues.

As was the case in his original appointment to fill Sam Cuellar’s vacancy, Buehner’s appointment to the Budget Committee in April had virtually no discussion among the Council before it was approved (in literally about 2 minutes).   According to the Irrigator, new City Manager Rod Butler was alerted prior to the meeting that the 2006 Grand Jury warned the city about appointing Councilmembers or members of the public with conflicts of interest to these types of committees.   Yet, the Council didn’t seem to care about what the previous Grand Jury said.  They also didn’t seem to care that the city has an adopted policy prohibiting such appointments if a real or perceived conflict exists.   Now that it has been confirmed by our previous City Attorney that the Grand Jury has an active investigation, it seems this Council has little regard for pushing the legal envelop.   Speaking of our previous City Attorney, it is possible that his recent Grand Jury disclosure is his attempt to smooth the path toward becoming our next City Attorney?   We certainly hope not.

We wanted to give our new city manager a chance to foster a new atmosphere of ethics and openness at City Hall.  He’s relatively new to town, doesn’t have a lot of history at his disposal and is probably trying to please his new bosses.  But he’s off to a rocky start after not sharing the information provided to him about the 2006 Grand Jury’s recommendations.  Butler is apparently putting together a map with the City Council’s various properties to avoid future conflicts.  He better get that map together quickly, and he better set up set up ethics training for this council right away.  Beyond that, it will be up to the people to keep holding the Slate to account for their actions, now and in the future.  Stay tuned.