Wednesday, August 25, 2010

SBCERS True Pension fund Value! The Fund has a Billion Dollars positive surplus and not 1 billion dollars in unfunded future liability!

Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement System (SBCERS)

Pension Fund History as reported by Larry “Magic” Mendoza

This report will create ethical and legal issues that our Santa Barbara County Law Enforcement and District Attorney must address. We must hold all responsible parties

Accountable. Our Elected Officials both past and present have failed to occupy there positions with the Honor and Duty required to best serve the Public and her needs.

Year ,Rate        New          Start fund,   Investment      Fund Value Funded Ratio   Surplus +/-
        of return. Contributions                    return

1988 8.16% 18,200,000 xxxxxxx 1.9% 290,000,000 225,000,000 77% 65,000,000

1989 8.16% 19.210,000 242,200,000 17.6% 313,664,000 284,630,000 90.7% 29,034,000

1990 8.16% 19,990,000 304,620,000 10.8% 339,258,000 328,989,600 97% 10,268,400

1991 8.16% 20,987,000 348,979,600 9.7% 366,941.000 382,830,600 104% (15,889,000)

1992 8.16% 22,787,000 405.617,600 18.5% 396,883,000 480,656,600 121% (83,773,300)

1993 8.16% 24,055,000 504,711,600 13.2% 429,269,000 571,334,600 133% (142,065,000)

1994 8.16% 25,344,000 596,678,600 (0.7%) 464,297,000 592,501,900 127% (128,204,900)

1995 8.16% 26,798,000 619,299,900 17.7% 502,184,000 728,915,900 145% (226,731,900)

1996 8.16% 31,022,000 759,217,900 15.6% 543,162,000 877,648,900 161% (334,486,900)

1997 8.16% 35,783,000 908,670,900 19.9% 587,484,000 1,089,496,400 185% ((502,012,400)

1998 8.16% 36,692,000 1,126,188,000 18.9% 635,423,000 1,339,037,000 210% (700,614.000)

1999 8.16% 37,407,000 1,376,444,000 10.5% 687,273,000 1,520,970,000 221% (833,697,000)

2000 8.16% 37,510,000 1,558,480,000 6.7% 743,354,000 1,662,282,000 223% ((918,928,000)

2001 8.16% 37,793,000 1,700,075,000 (2.9%)* 804,011,000 1,650,775,000 205% (846,764.000)

2002 8.16% 39,121,000 1,689,896,000 (5.4%) 869,618,000 1,588,642,000 182% (719,024,000)

2003 8.16% 40,830,000 1,629,472,000 4.6% 940,578,000 1,704,438,000 181,% (763,860,000)

2004 8.16% 50,296,000 1,750,734,000 16.1% 1,017,329,000 2,032,602,000 191% (1,015,273,000)

2005 8.16% 57,195,000 2,089,797,000 9.9% 1,100,343,000 2,229,686,000 202% (1,129,343,000)

2006 8.16% 64,111,000 2,293,797,000 10.8% 1,190,131,000 2,541,527,000 213% (1,351,396,000)

2007 8.16% 79,247,000 2,620,774,000 17.2% 1,287,246,000 3,071,547,000 238% (1,784,301,000)

2008 8.16% 79,510,000 3,151,057,000 (143,200,000)* 1,392,285,000 3,007,857,000 216% (1,615,572,000)

2009 8.16% 75,876,000 3,083,733,000 (388,000,000)* 1,505,895,000 2,695,733,000 179% (1,790,116,500)

2010 8.16% 1,628,776,000

2011 8.16%

* other interest rates can be found in data history for this year.

** Based on SBCERS reports the max fund loss I could apply to 20072008 is 143 Million..

*** Based on SBCERS reports the max fund loss I could apply for year ending 2008/2009 is 388 Million Dollars.

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Santa Barbara City Administrator Hires Ventura Investigators for Police Chiefs alleged Civil Rights Crimes vs.Scoles Case

>Why has a whole year passed and our Santa Barbara City Council not cleared the Police Chief of there own allegations?

Santa Barbara City Administrator Hires Ventura Investigators for Police Chiefs alleged Civil Rights Crimes vs.Scoles Case

City Hires Ventura Investigators for Scoles Case

Mesa Resident Claims Police Chief Improperly Detained Him

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Santa Barbara City Administrator Jim Armstrong has hired a Ventura-based private investigation firm to look into allegations that Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez violated the civil rights of Mesa resident Wayne Scoles, whom the chief had arrested after a verbal altercation on the Mesa last June. Sanchez alleged that Scoles - a Mesa activist known for his intense passion and loud voice - had threatened the chief physically after making several racial slurs about Sanchez's ethnicity. Earlier this year, a Santa Barbara jury found Scoles not guilty on misdemeanor charges. He has since filed seven complaints with City Hall indicating his intention to sue on the grounds he was improperly detained and interrogated. Once such a complaint is filed, Armstrong explained, an internal investigation is automatic. Given that it involved the chief of police, he said, an outside entity was brought in.

Why is Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez gone silent? Why has Santa Barbara City Administrator James Armstrong not presented his findings of an Investigation concerning past actions by Mr. Sanchez? Gator Roll fact or fiction?

Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez has been very quiet as of late. Is he still waiting on the findings from an Investigation ordered May of 09 by our Santa Barbara City Administrator James Armstrong to conclude? Why has our Santa Barbara City Council both past and present allowed 15 months to pass in the Wayne Scoles incident with no reports issued by the Ventura investigation agency that has been hired to provide answers? I have personally emailed Mr. Armstrong in the past and have yet to receive any reply.

At the web page below you will find a copy of the "alleged" Gator Roll Indictment for your review.

Friday, August 20, 2010

California County's and there Pension Fund Data, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, Orange, San Diego, Sacramento,Alameda,Marin, San Joaquin, Ventura

I have tried to create a chart that allows a fair comparison of California County pension fund data for Period ending 6/30/00. Based on the data available our SBCERS pension fund showed 100% funded ratio with a value of 1.2 Billion dollars after a return on investments of 6.7% for the same year ending. Of course this does not reflect the 180 million dollars pulled of “excess returns” from the fund on 12/99. Since the only data that even brings up the removal of the 180 million dollars in “Excess Returns” is not available until 2006. In 2006 the ‘White Paper’ written by Santa Barbara County Auditor Robert Geis finally makes mention of the funds being removed from the pension fund six years earlier. I divided SBCERS members into the other county’s members and came up with a equalizing factor to create the comparison.


Comparison to Santa Barbara County Employees Retirement System A

SBCERS x multiplier to create an equal comparison B


Multiplied by comparison factor from column A


Current Pension Fund


And comparison to SBCERS after multiplier D

Difference between pension fund values

After multiplier applied E

Estimated funded ratio based on SBCERS known Data for 06/30/00 F

Funded Ratio Based on Other State Records


My comments

SBCERS Current Data 4500 Members 1.2Billion 100%

Los Angeles 1x 88,420 $30.3 Billion +6.7 Billion 128% 103.3% More Fraud than SBCERS here

SBCERS 19.66x4500= 88,470 $23.6 Billion -6.7Billion 100% 100%

Orange 1x 20,357 $4.8 Billion -600 Million 89% 97.9% 600 Million Less than comparison and it still meets its obligations.

SBCERS 4.523x4500= 20,353 $5.4 Billion +600 Million 100% 100%

San Diego 1x 16,910 $3.7 Billion -800 Million 92.5% 107.4% Again another fund able to meet obligations for less money

SBCERS 3.76x4500= 16,910 $4.5 Billion +800 Million 100% 100%

San Bernardino 1x 15,529 $3.6 Billion -500 Million 88% 108.7% again

SBCERS 3.45x4500= 15,525 $4.1 Billion +500 Million 100% 100%

Sacramento 1x 10,547 $3.3 Billion +500 Million 118% 110.1% again

SBCERS 2.344x4500= 10,548 $2.8 Billion -500Million 100% 100%

Alameda 1x 9,859 $3.8 Billion +1.2 Billion 146% 108.5% Fraud here

SBCERS 2.19x4500= 9,855 $ 2.6 Billion -1.2 Billion 100% 100%

Contra Costa 1x 8,475 $2.5 Billion +250 Million 111% 80.5% Fraud here

SBCERS 1.88x4500= 8,460 $2.25Billion -250 Million 100% 100%

Kern 1x 6,853 $1.4 Billion -400 Million 78% 100.1% More for less

SBCERS 1.52x4500= 6840 $1.8 Billion +400 Million 100% 100%

Ventura 1x 6,840 $2.1 Billion +300 Million 116% 122.5% 22% better than SBCERS

SBCERS 1.52x4500= 6,840 $1.8 Billion -300 Million 100% 100%

Fresno 1x 5,899 $1.3 Billion -257 Million 83% 106.4% More for less

SBCERS 1.31x4500= 5,895 $1.57 Billion +257 Million 100% 100%

San Joaquin 1x 4,835 $1.3 Billion +10 Million 100% 107.7 More for less

SBCERS 1.075x4500= 4,837 $1.29 Billion -10 Million 100% 100%

San Mateo 1x 4,400 $1.2 Billion +30 Million 102.5% 98.4%

SBCERS .977x4500= 4,397 $1.17 Billion -30 Million 100% 100….5

Stanislaus 1x 4,281 $900 Million -214 Million 79% 104.6% wow

SBCERS .951x4500= 4,280 $1.14 Billion +214 Million 100% 100%

Sonoma 1x 4,236 $928 Million -202 Million 82% 98.6% More for less

SBCERS .941x4500= 4,234 $1.13 Billion +202 Million 100% 100%

Marin 1x 2,885 $955 Million +208 Million 128% 101.1% Fraud here

SBCERS .641x4500= 2,885 $769 Million -208 Million 100% 100%

Friday, August 13, 2010

SBCERS Corruption, fraud and altered charts by our Santa Barbara Grand Jury. Double click on any picture you wish to enlarge.

Figure 1How can 1 tell that 180 million dollars was removed from the fund on 06/99? In fact sine NONE of the Audits document the removal of funds how can we ever learn of the total value of funds removed over the funds life time? As we can all see it was a commonly practiced abuse by our elected officials?

The 1st chart confirms my previous posting that the SBCERS Pension Fund was fully funded in year ending 07. The area between the two values reflects what we are lead to believe is unfunded liability!

Chart II Why is the green Actuarial value so much lower in this chart than in chart I from the grand jury’s report? Chart II also shows 4 years of no growth yet the green mark does not seem to reflect the funds poor performance. Regardless of who’s chart you use they are simply being used as props to cheat all of us and strain the services that the funds should be used on.
How can one tell if this reflects pension fund market value or smoothing value in regards to funding ratio? An once again we already know that the fund reached 100% funded ratio in 07.

This picture Chart 1 was taken from the 08 Grand Jury report and is perpetrating fraud to our county residents. Compare this chart to chart II that I provided last week. They are supposedly representing the same time frame and value, but are they? If you review these two charts closely you will see that in chart I the fund value drops below the first value marked 1.00 however chart II has a higher value starting point. Either way in both charts they show a pension fund that s value has dropped below 1998 in 2003. We do know from the Santa Barbara County Auditors ‘White Paper” Robert Geis explains how the pension fund had a 180 million dollar surplus removed in 12/99.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

SBCERS Pension Fund Charts and Graphs for your Review, Excess Funds removed from 1980-1999 and who can say how much? To view any Picture simply double click on it and a full view will appear.

20 year Investment Return History for SBCERS 7.6%
The Chart here reflects a fully funded pension fund when all three lines meet as they did in 07/07
History of abuse and the illegal removing of Funds from the SBCERS Pension Fund. To view any chart simply double click on it. 

Saturday, August 7, 2010

Goldman Sachs Gubernatorial Election 2010 and ties to both the past( California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger) and the future (Whitman and Poizner) Hell Goldman Sachs Funds have lots to share if you look into who Invest in them as General Partners.‏

You know a new friend of mine just told me something the other day in regards to my recent blog. The subject was about how Governor Schwarzenegger was a limited partner in several Goldman Sachs equity funds. In these times of Wall Street and Financial crimes to find an elected State official who carries such a huge responsibility to you and I makes this an alarming discovery. I hope you review how his budget actions and hold out may not be in California’s best interest in regards to our already shattered economy and the credit default certificates still outstanding on California Go bonds. Let us not forget Goldman Sachs is still making money going and coming but more alarming than that. They have far too much access to policy makers as the articles below will elaborate on. So what about these California Go bonds? They are not in the type of demand that was expected even with Goldman Sachs often times involved in the sales of them. Goldman Sachs also has continued in the practice of selling an investment to clients while still betting the performance will come up short. This sounds like a repeat performance that ended up as what we now call the “Wall Street Bail Out”. Than one has to wonder if the possible short performance and budget hold out is just more of the continued abuse by our elected officials. When one really stops to think about it , we see irresponsible acts as common place these days. Now on most days that would be the bad news but these are very demanding times we live in. What does it say about two additional hopeful’s running for the same office of Governor and that also have Goldman Sachs equity fund ties? Just stop and think about what’s at stake here. Pension funds being robbed going and coming and Governor Schwarzenegger claiming to be holding the budget hostage to reform. I almost forgot; getting back to comment my friend Antonio shared the other day. “ It is really hard to hide from the truth”.

Truth about California’s Gubernatorial Election 2010

May 20, 2010

The current poster-child for such “market making” corporations has been Goldman Sachs, and for considerably good reason. In California, the news is no different: all three leading candidates in the race do business with G-Sachs; they are, Meg Whitman (R), Scott Poizner (D), and Jerry Brown (D). We’ll begin with the multi-billionaire CEO, Meg Whitman.

Poizner borrowed $500,000 to finance his 2004 state assembly race with the help of Goldman Sachs, and state financial records detail his history of investments with the firm. “Attacking a candidate for flimsy ties to a private company is exactly what you would expect from a desperate liberal – and I guess that includes Steve Poisner, too,” said Whitman’s spokesman, Bounds.

Please read below in regards to California and CDS


March 29,2010

Mr. Lloyd C. Blankfein Chairman of the Board and CEO Goldman, Sachs & Co. 85 Broad Street, 30th Floor New York, NY 10004

Dear Mr. Blankfein:
I write to request information about your firm's market activities related to credit default swaps on municipal bonds in general, and State of California general obligation (GO) bonds specifically. The State never has defaulted on a debt service payment in its history. Small wonder. The State's GO bonds are backed by the full faith and credit, and taxing power, of the eighth largest economy on the planet. Under the state Constitution, debt service has second call on General Fund revenues, right behind schools. To provide a picture of this protection's strength, consider: Your firm is fully aware of all this, because it sells California GO bonds. Frequently, your firm manages those bond sales.

Could Goldman Sachs Do to California What It Did to Greece?

Recent reports that financial legerdemain engineered by Goldman Sachs helped destabilize the Greek economy ought to make Californians nervous. It’s time to ask if Goldman could do to us what it appears to have done to the Greeks and, indirectly, to the rest of Europe

In February, major news organizations reported that the Federal Reserve Board is investigating the role that Goldman – a major recipient of federal bailout funds during our own financial meltdown – played in the Greek debt crisis. The firm used complex financial instruments called “derivatives” to help the Greek government hide the fact that it was in debt up to its eyeballs and getting in deeper.

That, in turn, allowed Greece’s participation in the Euro, Europe’s common currency, under what may have been false pretenses. “One deal created by Goldman Sachs helped obscure billions in debt from budget overseers in Brussels,” the New York Times reported. The deal, “hidden from public view … helped Athens to meet Europe’s deficit rules while continuing to spend beyond its means.”

There are reasons to be nervous about California’s entanglement with Goldman, which has been a major participant in bond sales to finance our state’s ballooning deficit.

For example, the Los Angeles Times reported in November 2008 that Goldman had urged some of its biggest clients to place investment bets against the very California bonds that it had helped sell. Such actions could increase investors’ fears about the state’s credit, officials told the paper, thereby driving up the interest rate the state must pay to sell the bonds, increasing the cost to taxpayers.

More recently, Bloomberg News reported that a $4.5 billion state bond offering, handled by Goldman, Citigroup, and JPMorgan Chase, fizzled last October, bringing in less money and costing the state more in interest than anticipated. The state had chosen to fore go competitive bids in giving the deal to the trio of companies – which, according to Bloomberg, “made 12.4 million on the deal, contributing to record bonuses in the securities industry a year after getting a total of $80 billion in a federal bailout.”

It is time for the legislature to hold an investigatory hearing into the possible risks of California’s relationship with Goldman Sachs. Legislators should ask some basic questions: Just how much exposure does the state have to Goldman? Has the firm been transparent about any counsel it has provided to the state regarding finances?

At the same time, officials might ask why Goldman is happy to profit from our bond business while refusing to invest in California’s needs. In a February 2 meeting with the Greenlining Institute, the company claimed that it does not do business in California and therefore does not intend to invest in California in the foreseeable future – even as it is developing a major program of community development and investments in New York.

That seems an odd statement in light of the firm’s considerable California bond business. In fact, in 2008, about seven percent of Goldman’s global business could be attributed to California operations. In dollar terms, that means our state contributed about $2.1 billion to the company’s profits from 2006 through 2008.

All major banks doing business in California have substantial community reinvestment commitments aimed at low and moderate income communities. Bank of America, for example, has committed half a trillion dollars to Community Reinvestment Act programs in California over 10 years. Goldman, which managed to pay $11 billion in bonuses during the financial crisis year of 2008, has committed zero.

Something looks wrong here. It’s time for officials to ask some serious questions about California’s relationship with a firm whose track record can only be described as disturbing

What about Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s ties to Goldman Sachs, the same Investment funds as Meg Whitman?


Posted on 12 April 2010.

April 12, 2010



Sean Clegg

Dan Newman

(415) 981-9940


Whitman’s Goldman Investments Include Two “Distressed Opportunity” Vulture Funds

SAN FRANCISCO — Today Level the Playing Field 2010 called on corporate billionaire Meg Whitman and the Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. [NYSE: GS] to publicly disclose the investments and holdings for a list of 20 Goldman Sachs investment funds in which Meg Whitman is an investor or partner. According to a joint investigation by the Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR) and the San Francisco Chronicle published Sunday, Whitman’s extensive holdings with the banking giant include more than $1 million each in two Goldman Sachs “distressed opportunity” funds, or so-called “vulture funds,” which swoop in on flailing assets and recession-ravaged companies.

“Californians have a right to know whether Meg Whitman has been profiting on their misery, and we are asking Whitman and Goldman to publicly release all fund prospectuses and to fully detail the holdings of these vulture funds,” said Level the Playing Field campaign manager Sean Clegg. “If Whitman is going to offer her business experience as her chief qualification for the job of governor, she needs to be prepared to detail these investments and explain her record on vulture investing, derivatives trading, mortgaged-backed securities, lavish corporate bonuses, questionable insider stock deals, and huge public bailouts.”

According to the CIR-Chronicle report, Goldman Sachs has been a “major player in public finance in the state,” having advanced recent plans to privatize state services and acting as the underwriter of $78.9 billion in bonds since 2006, while holding more than $1.3 billion in state pension fund investments. The report details Whitman’s extensive ties to the firm as an investor, corporate director, recipient of insider stock deals and campaign contributions.

The report shows how after steering millions of dollars in eBay business to Goldman, Whitman received $475,000 in directors fees and was awarded insider access to Goldman-managed initial public offerings (IPOs) where Whitman netted an estimated $1.78 million overnight profit flipping stocks. The controversial practice, known as “spinning,” which has since been banned, prompted a congressional investigation into Whitman and others and a lawsuit by eBay shareholders, which Whitman settled. In her campaign for governor, Whitman has received $105,000 in donations from Goldman executives.

As a Goldman Sachs board member, Whitman was at the center the Wall Street practices that have been widely identified as leading agents of the economic crisis. During Whitman’s time as a director, Goldman invested $140 billion into mortgage-backed securities, which the firm later sold off, according to the CIR-Chronicle report, “essentially unloading the assets before the market plunged and (sending) the nation into economic crisis.” As a member of Goldman’s executive compensation committee, Whitman personally approved $79 million in bonuses to the firm’s top five executives.

“Whitman’s record at Goldman places her directly at the scene of the crime where the middle class got turned upside down, and where a handful of individuals, including Meg Whitman herself, made millions at public and shareholder expense,” said Level the Playing Field senior strategist Ace Smith. “Whitman needs to explain whether she sold California short and bet against the interests of America’s middle class.”

Level the Playing Field 2010 called on Whitman and Goldman Sachs to provide full details on the holdings and investments of the following Whitman investment vehicles:





















California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s schedule C that is on file @

as it turns out he is a limited partner in several funds of Goldman Sachs!

SCHEDULE C - Form 700, 01101109 - 12/31109

Income & Business Positions

(Income Other than Loans, Gifts, and Travel Payments)

Name of Source

Acacia Partners, L.P.

Apollo Investment Fund IV

Dawntreader Fund II., L.P

Morgan Stanley Capital Partners IV L.P

Dimensional Fund Advisors, Inc.

Goldman Sachs Private Equity Partners 1II, L..P

Whitehall Street Real Estate Fund XllI, L.P

Goldman Sachs Capitol Partners 2000 L.P. Fair Value “ over 1 million Nature of Investment Limited Partner.

Goldman Sachs Private Equity Partner III Limited Partner up to 1 Million

Organized by a group of leading California Democrats concerned about the massive infusion of personal wealth into the governor’s race by billionaire and millionaire self-funders, Level the Playing Field’s mission is to ensure a fair fight in the November elections. According to Capitol Weekly, “No group has done more with less than Level the Playing Field 2010.”

Review the some of the California Go Bond holdings of Goldman Sachs and there funds.
















Money Market Funds of the Goldman Sachs Trust

71 South Wacker Drive

Chicago, Illinois 60606

I know many feel my review of what I went through in criminal and civil court is simply sour grapes over a divorce but no there is so much more at stake. I sat in the Court House basement while in custody waiting to appear before the courts and a Judge after being arrested for the first time in my life at 45. Now at the scene of the alleged crime I had no idea what the hell was going on but I never expected to be arrested much less charged with a strike-able felony as I was. So me being a person who believes in the ‘system’ and its fair and ethical applications (a cherry) really had no fear much could happen. I have never been more off base in my life!. So the bailiff pulls me from the holding cell at about 1030 am to be arraigned on my charges in department 8 in the criminal court division of Santa Barbara Superior Court. So as my name is called a piece of paper is handed to me that says at 8am that morning I had already appeared in department 8 for a short procedure and the results were on the document I had just been handed as fact. Now get this, not only was I being told I was some where I was not. That document I had just been handed came with 4 witness’s that could and would verify I was there. A Superior Court Commissioner, a representative from the District Attorneys office, a bailiff and a Deputy Clerk I mean hard to refute there integrity. So I asked the obvious question; why didn’t you hand me that document at 8am when I had magically appeared before all of you in this court room?

. In another instance 4 lawyers fought a civil court case over my home all with out me every being notified or even invited to attend the proceedings. Now very simply here folks I lost a house that never had an auction sale date. Than I allegedly sold the same house I lost 3 years later. Or another time I sat in jail for months on end with no charges and had to prove that with help from the Department of Justice.

Than there was the time I was rushed to the hospital by ambulance from the County care facility. Now in this case I know I was rushed to the hospital since I have the billing. I also have a hospital staffs telling me it never happen. I will be the first to admit that all I had mentioned to my son Vincent when he came to visit me was that my kidney area was hurting more and more every day and I said I’m not sure why?. As I was walking to work the other day I remembered I had my brother help me rent a hotel room with a heated pool after my release from the care facility. You see I was rushed to the hospital on 11/23 but I swam to help with the pain all the way until 12/15. That’s because the sissy’s that would over medicate me (a felony) and than hit ( another felony) me almost got away with it. Hector the next time we meet sissy it will be my turn. It’s been almost 5 years since than and I am still waiting for justice. The Care Facility Administrator and Detective Miller who is currently investigating a questionable death at the same facility have yet to respond to any of my recent correspondence.

What about my experiences in Morgan Hill 5 years ago I had this person named Larry R. Vega who would follow me around. He had a friend named Oscar Flores but more on him at another time. We were at the Extended Stay studios and he is almost stalking me. I switch rooms and hotel floors and he always ends up in the room next to mine. What I do know about my experience in Morgan Hill is people wanted me out of the hotel due to there illegal activity’s not mine. For example if you looked into Larry R. Vega’s family they also lived in Morgan Hill making his stay at a hotel for 2 months out of place. He was a proper weight for his height, neat and well dressed. He wore casual business attire an seamed financially stable. I would imagine him more a hotel suite kind of guy and not a long term place like I had picked me being from out of town. His family business is in packaging and they do business in two border towns of Mexico, El Paso and Tijuana as well as Texas.

Monday, August 2, 2010

Pension Fraud, Wall Street Corruption, California Governor Schwarzenegger a limited partner with Goldman Sachs Funds!

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is a limited partner with (Goldman Sachs corruption and Fraud)

Date: 2010-08-02, 4:22PM PDT

How Stuck on Stupid are we?
If you recall I shared this quote in my last posting from a story in the Santa Barbara Independent regarding the state of affairs with county budget and pension fund issues.

Thursday, June 17, 2010
By Chris Meagher

“I’d like all of you to leave this hearing with three words,” Gray said, actually using four words to initially describe her cryptic message. “Bus, bridge, and Ponzi scheme.”

The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisor Mrs. Gray was referring to the accounting and performance by our elected officials here in Bell North Ca. in regards to the SBCERS Pension fund and a Ponzi scheme. Well after a very long and frustrating non stop weekend of review of about 400 pages of SBCERS Pension fund documents I realized something. I just needed to take a break and so I decided to follow my intuition and do some research on line. Now let me tell you all, THE GODS ARE SMILING ON MAGIC TODAY! You see by chance this weekend I reviewed California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s schedule c that is on file @

and it turns out he is a limited partner in several funds of Goldman Sachs!

SCHEDULE C - Form 700, 01101109 - 12/31109

Income & Business Positions

(Income Other than Loans, Gifts, and Travel Payments)

Name of Source

Acacia Partners, L.P.

Apollo Investment Fund IV

Dawntreader Fund II., L.P

Morgan Stanley Capital Partners IV L.P

Dimensional Fund Advisors, Inc.

Goldman Sachs Private Equity Partners 1II, L..P

Whitehall Street Real Estate Fund XllI, L.P

Goldman Sachs Capitol Partners 2000 L.P. Fair Value “ over 1 million Nature of Investment Limited Partner.

Goldman Sachs Private Equity Partner III Limited Partner up to 1 Million

Here we are all concerned about our Santa Barbara County Government and the actions or lack of taken by our elected officials. Than we hear all about what is being exposed in Bell Ca. by there elected officials. Yet when you stop and review the actions at a higher State level is it any wonder our local government is in the mess we are? When a California Governor can destroy the fifth largest economy in the world and than threaten to holding us hostage to his ethic’s enough is enough.

In the past I have produced on by blog @ documents and facts that showed our Government was aware of Enron and trouble to come. They even went so far as to have them on an F.B.I. watch at least 1 full year before there Wall Street melt down. Than later in another posting after a simple 20 minute review of recently filed S.E.C. documents in regards to KPMG, what did I announce to all of you? Exactly where the loop hole would still exist in the Wall Street Finance reform Bill. It lacked common sense and did nothing to protect us because of the off shore loop hole, review it for yourself. But nothing could have prepared me for what I just shared with you all today.

Recent headlines read;

California Budget: Schwarzenegger Could Leave Office Without Resolution

"If I don't get all of the things that we need in order to be fiscally responsible”
“Schwarzenegger threatens to leave office with out a budget”

Schwarzenegger has said the Legislature must curtail public pensions and change California's taxation and budgeting systems before he will sign the next budget, his last as governor. He leaves office in January.

"If I do not get all of the things that we need … I will not sign a budget, and it could actually drag out until the next governor gets into office,"

Now here is a man who sticks by his principals regardless of cost to those who have elected him. He calls for pension fund reform with one hand ad counts his riches with the other.


He than goes to bat for the State and request bail out money to help our economy, please read from the headlines below.

Governor Schwarzenegger Begs White House for Bail Out Money!

The beleaguered State asked the White House for TARP FUNDS, the request was denied.

Well he should have had his limited partners go to bat for us here in California. He wants us here in California to work for below California minimum wage, yet pays his partners millions in bonus with TARP bail out money