You will always be remembered Pascual Gamboa (Santa Barbara)
Date: 2010-09-24, 4:00PM PDT
Reply To This Post
There have been quite a few write ups these past 10 days all speaking in high regard about Pascual Gamboa and how we all felt about him. I was probably just ten or eleven when I first met Pasqual. Going every Saturday to his restaurant on Carrillo for my mom's standard order of his Chili Verde burritos.. I have lived here in Santa Barbara most of my life but I did leave for about ten years. An there is one visit in particular that every one seams to be remembering. You see Pascuals was were you went when you came back home. If it was Fiesta's and Bob Burton was in Florida you might here Bob was here last night. Maybe Jerry Palacios was in from the Navy and his brother Mike was with him. You might run into Pancho and Virginia and every one knew when her cousin Michael arrived with his million dollar smile and new Fiesta shirts. My friend Hank would be at the door and wonder woman would be working. Randy Equihua might be there talking about how I could never make the Kool aide when I lived with them. I might drag my brother and Tim Lopez in or say high to Barbara. So what drew us all to this establishment. It was the man Pasqual himself and how every one was treated. I might not walk in that door for six months or a year but when I did arrive it was always just special.
Oh about that one visit everyone seems to be talking about happen with me and Julie sitting in booth six. If you read the Independent story from yesterdays edition it almost get's the story right. The most amazing part about when Pascual went into the restaurant on the horse for fiesta was missed by almost everyone. You see as the story in the independent says Pascual was sitting tall in the saddle and all of a sudden the horse started bucking as they were turning him around. Steve Cordero's dad was a booth or two away, I had to dive to my right. Richard Avila's cousin was holding Julies arm so tight that when Julie stood up on the seat in the booth she pulled her right up with her. Tables were busted and it seamed to take a bit for the horse to be calmed. That's when I noticed that the person guiding Pascual and the horse had the reins in his hands. Pascual was puro Charro staying on that horse showing no fear until it was over with no reins! 68 year old Charro, it was awesome. Any how of course Pascual felt bad and kept coming over to us in our booth. If I recall it was 3 beers, 3 shots and he sang 3 songs to the ladies. On my way back to Galt that Sunday we stopped in Kettlemen city. In the gift shop at Harris Ranch was the leather horse, it sits in my living room to this day a reminder of that Fiesta. I love you Pasqual, you will never be forgotten rest in piece, I will always remember the fun (the ones 1 can remember)I had with you and your Crew. Thanks Lucky!
To Pascuals Family my thoughts and prayers, I am sure you have been hearing memory after memory from all his friends.
* Location: Santa Barbara
* it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 1971978486
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
There is nothing funny about the Quaids sitiuation in Santa Barbara
So just last Friday I was out having dinner with a friend from out of town. I mentioned to him that my work is much harder now since it requires greater research than when I first started. My earlier postings were more of an observation type and actually quite easy to compose. Once I understood the law or procedures as they applied to a given situation I could apply that knowledge to other cases with similar components. An guess what that is exactly what I am about to do in regards to the recent actor Randy Quaid's arrest. Now I did go on line to review public comments on a local news agency’s internet web page to take a pulse on how people felt. To be honest everyone just seemed to be making fun of the Quiads and no one had the same concerns as me. This of course is not the first time my views are different than the general public but here goes anyway,
http://www.edhat.com/site/tidbit.cfm?nid=39362
“Randy Quaid was handcuffed without incident, but deputies where forced to restrain Evi Quaid who physically resisted arrest. Randall Rudy Quaid (DOB 10/1/50) and Evegenia Helena Quaid (8/2/63) were booked into the Santa Barbara County Jail after 9pm Saturday (9/18/10) for felony residential burglary (459PC) and misdemeanor entering a non-commercial building without consent (602.5 PC). Evi Quaid was also booked for misdemeanor resisting arrest (148PC). Bail is set at $50,000 each.”
The above story estimated damage to be 5,000 dollars while the Santa Barbara News press claimed the damage to be 10,000 dollars. So lets move forward to what is now being claimed in the Santa Barbara News press, It seems the Quaid's are possibly scheduled for Santa Barbara Superior Court October 18th after both bailed out early Sunday morning. Except there are a few problems with that story. It seems that the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office as of Monday afternoon did not have an investigation report from the arresting law enforcement agency and there for had not decided that charges could even be filed. The story also went on to claim how the arrest now appeared to be misdemeanors and not felonies. How can the Quaid's even have a future October 18th court appointment when no charges have been filed? We know there has been no arraignment of the Quaid's since charges have not been filed. It makes no sense if you are aware of court procedures following an arrest. No arraignment but you have a future maybe court appearance. Oh thats right if you review a portion of my blog below regarding the Quaid's appearance last December there felony appearance's than were going to be “VOLUNTARY”.
Now please keep in mind this is the Quaid's fourth non appearance and a felony warrant had finally been issued. “Right now technically they’re Fugitives AGAIN” said Senior Deputy District Attorney Lee Carter. Now even if I tried I could not make Judge Anderson sound any dumber than he did in the quotes in the paper today.” Although the original three or four appearances were going to be voluntary we ended up with no appearances” Said Judge Anderson.
http://santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com/2009/12/santa-barbara-superor-court-corruption.html.
People there is no such thing as a Voluntary Felony appearance, all persons charged with a felony must be present in person at every required court appearance that is the law!
Since I am reviewing the Court lets see what else has been piling up on my desk waiting to be reviewed. That recent 'Gang case with 4 defendants that ended up with a hung jury had a secret. For some reason I have yet to figure out there was actually two trials going on at the same time against Mr. Mize and only 1 case against the other 3 defendants. What I don't understand is why the media, the Judge, and more importantly the Santa Barbara District attorneys office did not make this public knowledge from the outset. Maybe I missed the story but I could have sworn I wrote a recap from the outset of that trial and I missed there being two trials in one. I just find this odd because now it appears the other 3 defendants no longer wish to have there trials mixed with Mr. Mize's and have filed a motion to separate themselves from him. But two trials at once was ok.
Now because of the huge media attention a 14 year old being being charged for murder in Ventura has received they have actually drawn there jury from Santa Barbara to assure that the defendant receives a fair trial. I wonder if the three defendants from above would like a jury from outside of Santa Barbara as well? What about the Henry’s beach preliminary hearing and all that alleged “Gang” activity that started the whole indecent? As it turns out the victim and a friend actually started the confrontation that resulted in the first fight by cornering Mr. Gallegos. The military trained victim was able to take down the alleged “Gang' member and I guess beat him in a fair fight. The defeated “ Gang' member than got up and shook hands with the victim. How in the world was this person first arrested for the murder based on that account? You see Josh Lynn you take your medicine and than act like a man and congratulate or acknowledge the victor with class and dignity. Josh you could learn something from this alleged Gang member. I understand the person was later killed by a cowardly act and my prayers go out to his family and friends but the confrontation was over cigarette butts on the ground! The second person to be arrested for the murder has never been identified and yet held over for trial, thank you Judge Brian Hill. If they made a mistake in the first arrest how can we be sure there is not two mistakes?
Now mind you in order for Judge Hill to be part of this preliminary hearing for a defendant not yet bound over for trial he had to push two murder trails back. The Lyons double murder and the trail for the coward that murdered my friends daughter have both been pushed back. Even though both trials had already been set for July since last April.
What about the recent marijuana dispensary preliminary hearing. Well as it turns out the Santa Barbara district attorney's office won the preliminary hearing but has decided to wait for the people of California to vote on Marijuana in November before deciding what to do. Only problem is that the D.A. must file a felony information (new charges) in Superior Trial court within 15 days after the conclusion of the preliminary hearing as we learned in the Ricardo Juarez case. Wait there is more wrong with the Marijuana case. It seems that assistant Santa Barbara District Attorney Brian Cota admitted in the recent media story I read. That if 3 of the 4 co defendants were to take the stand in a trial they would be found not guilty. So why charge them in the first place? Now this was only a preliminary hearing but why did the main defendant take the stand in a case that may not ever hit a court room after the November election? Any defense attorney worth his salt would never have allowed that.
Yes we could all sit back and make fun of the Quaid's and there new situation. Or we could could begin to realize that every law and procedure matter. The fact that no one has come forward to agree or challenge my findings in regards to the SBCERS pension fund has me flustered. When are we going to get off of being stuck on stupid? There is nothing funny about any of it.
So when does Judge Hill rule on the Lyons whisper tape? After all he allowed the Juarez whisper tape.
When does public defender Karen Adkins missing 60 page motion filed 12/07 alleging misconduct by Judge Hill and the District Attorneys office turn up? I have checked the court house files and the motion has gone missing. When do alleged gang defendants have pre-sentencing probation reports put in there case files as required by law?
By the way in the nun scammer case that is coming up. Was Judge Anderson allowed to give testimony? The alleged couple or victims in the nun scammer could not agree if the were victims or not. The wife came forward and claimed not to be a victim. Judge Anderson than gave testimony by way of public statement and said” The wife would say anything to clear her friend' . Did Judge Anderson have to be sworn in to make that statement?
In all my court case's as well as most personal issues these last 5 years I took every shitty deal or offer put before me. Only to have that rubbed in my face and the terms altered. Nothing about any of this is funny.
http://www.edhat.com/site/tidbit.cfm?nid=39362
“Randy Quaid was handcuffed without incident, but deputies where forced to restrain Evi Quaid who physically resisted arrest. Randall Rudy Quaid (DOB 10/1/50) and Evegenia Helena Quaid (8/2/63) were booked into the Santa Barbara County Jail after 9pm Saturday (9/18/10) for felony residential burglary (459PC) and misdemeanor entering a non-commercial building without consent (602.5 PC). Evi Quaid was also booked for misdemeanor resisting arrest (148PC). Bail is set at $50,000 each.”
The above story estimated damage to be 5,000 dollars while the Santa Barbara News press claimed the damage to be 10,000 dollars. So lets move forward to what is now being claimed in the Santa Barbara News press, It seems the Quaid's are possibly scheduled for Santa Barbara Superior Court October 18th after both bailed out early Sunday morning. Except there are a few problems with that story. It seems that the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office as of Monday afternoon did not have an investigation report from the arresting law enforcement agency and there for had not decided that charges could even be filed. The story also went on to claim how the arrest now appeared to be misdemeanors and not felonies. How can the Quaid's even have a future October 18th court appointment when no charges have been filed? We know there has been no arraignment of the Quaid's since charges have not been filed. It makes no sense if you are aware of court procedures following an arrest. No arraignment but you have a future maybe court appearance. Oh thats right if you review a portion of my blog below regarding the Quaid's appearance last December there felony appearance's than were going to be “VOLUNTARY”.
Now please keep in mind this is the Quaid's fourth non appearance and a felony warrant had finally been issued. “Right now technically they’re Fugitives AGAIN” said Senior Deputy District Attorney Lee Carter. Now even if I tried I could not make Judge Anderson sound any dumber than he did in the quotes in the paper today.” Although the original three or four appearances were going to be voluntary we ended up with no appearances” Said Judge Anderson.
http://santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com/2009/12/santa-barbara-superor-court-corruption.html.
People there is no such thing as a Voluntary Felony appearance, all persons charged with a felony must be present in person at every required court appearance that is the law!
Since I am reviewing the Court lets see what else has been piling up on my desk waiting to be reviewed. That recent 'Gang case with 4 defendants that ended up with a hung jury had a secret. For some reason I have yet to figure out there was actually two trials going on at the same time against Mr. Mize and only 1 case against the other 3 defendants. What I don't understand is why the media, the Judge, and more importantly the Santa Barbara District attorneys office did not make this public knowledge from the outset. Maybe I missed the story but I could have sworn I wrote a recap from the outset of that trial and I missed there being two trials in one. I just find this odd because now it appears the other 3 defendants no longer wish to have there trials mixed with Mr. Mize's and have filed a motion to separate themselves from him. But two trials at once was ok.
Now because of the huge media attention a 14 year old being being charged for murder in Ventura has received they have actually drawn there jury from Santa Barbara to assure that the defendant receives a fair trial. I wonder if the three defendants from above would like a jury from outside of Santa Barbara as well? What about the Henry’s beach preliminary hearing and all that alleged “Gang” activity that started the whole indecent? As it turns out the victim and a friend actually started the confrontation that resulted in the first fight by cornering Mr. Gallegos. The military trained victim was able to take down the alleged “Gang' member and I guess beat him in a fair fight. The defeated “ Gang' member than got up and shook hands with the victim. How in the world was this person first arrested for the murder based on that account? You see Josh Lynn you take your medicine and than act like a man and congratulate or acknowledge the victor with class and dignity. Josh you could learn something from this alleged Gang member. I understand the person was later killed by a cowardly act and my prayers go out to his family and friends but the confrontation was over cigarette butts on the ground! The second person to be arrested for the murder has never been identified and yet held over for trial, thank you Judge Brian Hill. If they made a mistake in the first arrest how can we be sure there is not two mistakes?
Now mind you in order for Judge Hill to be part of this preliminary hearing for a defendant not yet bound over for trial he had to push two murder trails back. The Lyons double murder and the trail for the coward that murdered my friends daughter have both been pushed back. Even though both trials had already been set for July since last April.
What about the recent marijuana dispensary preliminary hearing. Well as it turns out the Santa Barbara district attorney's office won the preliminary hearing but has decided to wait for the people of California to vote on Marijuana in November before deciding what to do. Only problem is that the D.A. must file a felony information (new charges) in Superior Trial court within 15 days after the conclusion of the preliminary hearing as we learned in the Ricardo Juarez case. Wait there is more wrong with the Marijuana case. It seems that assistant Santa Barbara District Attorney Brian Cota admitted in the recent media story I read. That if 3 of the 4 co defendants were to take the stand in a trial they would be found not guilty. So why charge them in the first place? Now this was only a preliminary hearing but why did the main defendant take the stand in a case that may not ever hit a court room after the November election? Any defense attorney worth his salt would never have allowed that.
Yes we could all sit back and make fun of the Quaid's and there new situation. Or we could could begin to realize that every law and procedure matter. The fact that no one has come forward to agree or challenge my findings in regards to the SBCERS pension fund has me flustered. When are we going to get off of being stuck on stupid? There is nothing funny about any of it.
So when does Judge Hill rule on the Lyons whisper tape? After all he allowed the Juarez whisper tape.
When does public defender Karen Adkins missing 60 page motion filed 12/07 alleging misconduct by Judge Hill and the District Attorneys office turn up? I have checked the court house files and the motion has gone missing. When do alleged gang defendants have pre-sentencing probation reports put in there case files as required by law?
By the way in the nun scammer case that is coming up. Was Judge Anderson allowed to give testimony? The alleged couple or victims in the nun scammer could not agree if the were victims or not. The wife came forward and claimed not to be a victim. Judge Anderson than gave testimony by way of public statement and said” The wife would say anything to clear her friend' . Did Judge Anderson have to be sworn in to make that statement?
In all my court case's as well as most personal issues these last 5 years I took every shitty deal or offer put before me. Only to have that rubbed in my face and the terms altered. Nothing about any of this is funny.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Dear J. Wolf, J. Gray, D. Farr, J. Centeno, S. Carbajal our Santa Barbara County Board of supervisors, Please explain the use of excess returns that have been pulled from the SBCERS Pension fund!
From: sb_magic@hotmail.com
To: jcenteno@co.santa-barbara.ca.us; supervisorcarbajal@sbcbos1.org; jwolf@sbcbos2.org; doreenfarr@gmail.com; jgray@co.santa-barbara.ca.us
Subject: Pension fund challenges, over funded not under funded
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:59:03 -0700
I wonder who pulled this quote from my blog?
J Gray you must do more than make a comment in a meeting!
http://www.independent.com/news/2010/jun/17/light-end-budget-tunnel/
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Article Tool
Share ArticleFourth District Supervisor Joni Gray blasted the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors majority Friday as the quintet conducted their final deliberations on what to cut for the 2010-2011 fiscal year’s $833-million budget they were finalizing to go into effect July 1
I am wondering if you have seen my blog and pension fund concerns?
Please review my SBCERS data sheets and math charts as I see it.
http://magicinsantabarbara.wordpress.com/
Well as you can see there is a ton on my mind but I ma here today to explain why both past and present Santa Barbara elected officials such as the Board of Supervisors and County Controller Robert Gies must be criminally charged for fraud and misuse of public funds. Very quickly here in 1989 the County of Santa Barbara reported that SBCERS pension fund had a future obligation of 290 Million dollars with a value at that time of only 225 Million dollars thus only 77% funded. I was able to retrieve these figures from the Municipals bond market on Wall street. It turns out when there is a bond offer the City or County which makes the offer must give a current view of there Finances and future obligations. Now on this same bond document there was another choice I could have used. In there reporting investment returns they also had 345 Million future obligations and a 305 Million dollar value. I chose to use the lower of the 2 values for my example. Now all I had to do was the following.
1- start at 225 Million and come forward with the investment return factor.
2- Before multiplying by the return of a given year I also add the contributions
3- Example 1989 I had 222 Million plus 14 million in new contributions from employees and employers. So I went 225+14 = 239 million dollars x investment return factor of 10.5 =
4- I did this for every year and came current and my findings are located at both my word-press blog and at @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com
My results are startling and it boggles the mind to think our current Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors would have us believe there is a current unfunded future liability of 1 billion dollars. When in fact when you bring my totals to 2009/2010 multiply by 10.5 return on investments you get a fully funded pension fund of 3 BILLION Dollars, WOW where did the math go wrong. What does it say when you look at the 2009 SBCERS pension fund audit and in that audit it contains this. That over a given period the Santa Barbara County Tax Payer is charged for 350 Million dollars in amortized pension fund payments to the unfunded future liability. How ever if you follow those amortized payments you find that the Board of supervisors really only makes payments of only 200 Million dollars and do you know why? You see they charge the amortized payment at an interest rate of 8’16% yet there is no need for such a calculation and do you know why? Because the fund automatically will pull up or down the amortization payment based on the future funds performance. So there would be no need for an intereat rate to be used ever
Well my computer is broken so I am at the library. I must wrap this up for today but please remember that the SBCERS pension fund has claimed a hard number lose for the last two years and there for is not entitled to use my math to increase there losses after the fact. I will have to write a much better posting describing the amortization payment issue but another 150 million in fraud uncover by “Magic” no by common sense.
225 million fund value followed by 850 Million in new contributions for 20 years. Multiply this by a average return on investments for that 20 year period of 7.6 (yes I have also seen 6.7) and there is no possible way we have an unfunded pension plan.
This is posted @ www.criminalcourtcorruption.blogspot,com
I look forward to hearing back from you.
Regards
Larry Mendoza
To my Santa Barbara Craigslist Critic
To Magic's Critic (I am here for the good fight)
Date: 2010-09-19, 5:50PM PDT
Well it seams I have struck a nerve with someone who wishes to correct me and challenge my intelligence here on the Santa Barbara Craigslsit. So lets clear that up first. I am here to state as fact “ I am dumber than a rock”, hands down no questions asked! Now I hope that clears that up for my most recent critic to climb out for under a rock. So lets do a quick review of just a few of my concerns and hope my critic can reply in a honest manor.
1- Are the police currently not under a contract which can last for up to 1 year with the City of Santa Barbara?
2- If I am not mistaken the Santa Barbara police have also hired some type of firm to review the city budget for mistakes, fraud or misrepresentation of Tax Payers funds?
3- Have I not been a team player regardless of the illegal and past criminal acts against me by a select few Santa Barbara police officers and already shown the P.O.A. how to find a discrepancy in how much funds have been allocated? The Bond market financial VS the City Budget!
4- One day I was sent to City Hall and Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez had a big smile for me when I got there, is he smiling anymore?
5- Is it not true one of the main reasons for the actions above against City administrator J. Armstrong on the budget is because he is the Supervisor in charge of Cam Sanchez?
6- An is it not fact Mr. Armstrong in his duties as the BOSS of Santa Barbara Police Chief had to use CITY FUNDS to investigate Cam Sanchez for possible Civil Rights violations over 16 months ago by a firm out of Ventura? Funds that are no longer available in a budget that could be used by the Santa Barbara Police department?
Mr. Critic I have a question for you. Why did the Santa Barbara Independent decide to use a picture of Ricardo Juarez for the recent Issue cover while reviewing “ Gator Roll? It is almost comical that they decided to review the media hoax “ Gator Roll” in the first place. Mr. Juarez is the 14 year boy that was framed for murder by a select few in the offices of Santa Barbara's D,A., Police, Public defender, and even a Superior Court Judge by the name of Brian Hill. I have issues with the picture they used for several reasons.
1- He has never been charged with a R.I.C.O. Crime.
2- In the photo he is clearly handcuffed and wearing gloves. These gloves would be used in the trial as having blood evidence on them. So when he was handcuffed was that missed by the officer?
3- In order to make all Mexican youth look a like for the make shift line up that day, Mr. Juarez had to remove the shirt from the picture. Is that not misrepresenting the facts?
4- If the had used the picture that his tennis shoes appear in they are clean and white. I only bring this up because like the gloves they will later some how “Magically” have blood evidence on them as well.
To frame a 14 year old boy to prove your worth in order to obtain your share of budget allocations is a crime all unto itself. That effort was in part needed because of the crimes by our Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in there illegal actions behind the SBCERS Pension fund. I have unclosed a 2 Billion dollar problem that I will not let go away. Instead of a 1 Billion dollar unfunded future liability I find the SBCERS Pension has been allocated enough funds in past County Budgets to actually have over a 1 Billion dollar surplus.
So Mr. Critic in closing this last thought was shared to me by a dedicated Law Enforcement Office and he said “ with out the extra benefit of the Pension why would I want to do this Job”? He went on to explain he leaves his home wife and kids every day so that he can be challenged and forced to fight with 20 year old? Who will do the Job when we lie to the very people entrusted with enforcing the Law? Maybe my critic is smarter than I ?
PostingID: 1962919282
1- Are the police currently not under a contract which can last for up to 1 year with the City of Santa Barbara?
2- If I am not mistaken the Santa Barbara police have also hired some type of firm to review the city budget for mistakes, fraud or misrepresentation of Tax Payers funds?
3- Have I not been a team player regardless of the illegal and past criminal acts against me by a select few Santa Barbara police officers and already shown the P.O.A. how to find a discrepancy in how much funds have been allocated? The Bond market financial VS the City Budget!
4- One day I was sent to City Hall and Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez had a big smile for me when I got there, is he smiling anymore?
5- Is it not true one of the main reasons for the actions above against City administrator J. Armstrong on the budget is because he is the Supervisor in charge of Cam Sanchez?
6- An is it not fact Mr. Armstrong in his duties as the BOSS of Santa Barbara Police Chief had to use CITY FUNDS to investigate Cam Sanchez for possible Civil Rights violations over 16 months ago by a firm out of Ventura? Funds that are no longer available in a budget that could be used by the Santa Barbara Police department?
Mr. Critic I have a question for you. Why did the Santa Barbara Independent decide to use a picture of Ricardo Juarez for the recent Issue cover while reviewing “ Gator Roll? It is almost comical that they decided to review the media hoax “ Gator Roll” in the first place. Mr. Juarez is the 14 year boy that was framed for murder by a select few in the offices of Santa Barbara's D,A., Police, Public defender, and even a Superior Court Judge by the name of Brian Hill. I have issues with the picture they used for several reasons.
1- He has never been charged with a R.I.C.O. Crime.
2- In the photo he is clearly handcuffed and wearing gloves. These gloves would be used in the trial as having blood evidence on them. So when he was handcuffed was that missed by the officer?
3- In order to make all Mexican youth look a like for the make shift line up that day, Mr. Juarez had to remove the shirt from the picture. Is that not misrepresenting the facts?
4- If the had used the picture that his tennis shoes appear in they are clean and white. I only bring this up because like the gloves they will later some how “Magically” have blood evidence on them as well.
To frame a 14 year old boy to prove your worth in order to obtain your share of budget allocations is a crime all unto itself. That effort was in part needed because of the crimes by our Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in there illegal actions behind the SBCERS Pension fund. I have unclosed a 2 Billion dollar problem that I will not let go away. Instead of a 1 Billion dollar unfunded future liability I find the SBCERS Pension has been allocated enough funds in past County Budgets to actually have over a 1 Billion dollar surplus.
So Mr. Critic in closing this last thought was shared to me by a dedicated Law Enforcement Office and he said “ with out the extra benefit of the Pension why would I want to do this Job”? He went on to explain he leaves his home wife and kids every day so that he can be challenged and forced to fight with 20 year old? Who will do the Job when we lie to the very people entrusted with enforcing the Law? Maybe my critic is smarter than I ?
- Location: I am here for the good fight
- it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
Sunday, September 12, 2010
From the Santa Barbara Bank & Trust to SBCERS Pension fund, just some new thoughts!
Just a couple of quick thoughts that I will expand on as later this week. While glancing at a Los Angeles times business story yesterday it reminded me that there was something still bothering about the Santa Barbara Bank & Trust take over here in Santa Barbara. So I went through my old news papers until I found it. When the news broke in April of this year it read that the Ford fund from Texas was to receive 91% interest in SBBT for there investment. There had already been a 180 million dollar investment from our Government in T.A.R.P. funds and for that they would receive 7% interest in SBBT. In other words the Bank and Mr. Ford would not be responsible to the American public a full repayment of 180 Million dollars, oh no. Based on the selling price the American public received just under 39 Million in Value for there 180 Million invested, Than we as investors a second time (as the general public) must regain interest buy common shares and raise the stock price. Than at the inflated stock price with no further investment from the Ford group they pay off our debt(T.A.R.P.) with money raised from us the public again. It is all part of the Wall Street and no one seems to get it. How Stuck om Stupid are we? The scam cannot work with out our money AGAIN! I will get back to this and the tie in to Black Rock Inc. later.
Is it me or did the Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors announce they canceled last weeks meeting to the Public than held the meeting any way?
If I recall correctly and I usually do the SBCERS Pension Fund has had past ties to the Ford fund, does that seem odd? I will investigate and tell you more later.
I have a busy few weeks coming up with my Blog and updating my findings. In closing I have yet to receive 1 challenge that my math or there findings are flawed. The SBCERS Pension fund after taking in last years Investment performance and using my calculations should have a present fund value of close to 3 BILLION Dollars and that creates a boat load of serious problems for current elected officials here in Santa Barbara. You see because of the over 1 BILLION dollar surplus my research shows our current Board of Supervisors no longer need to risk the whole fund to stay on target. In fact a 5% investment return factor could now be used and this would eliminate the need for any risky future Investments, THINK ABOUT THAT!
Is it me or did the Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors announce they canceled last weeks meeting to the Public than held the meeting any way?
If I recall correctly and I usually do the SBCERS Pension Fund has had past ties to the Ford fund, does that seem odd? I will investigate and tell you more later.
I have a busy few weeks coming up with my Blog and updating my findings. In closing I have yet to receive 1 challenge that my math or there findings are flawed. The SBCERS Pension fund after taking in last years Investment performance and using my calculations should have a present fund value of close to 3 BILLION Dollars and that creates a boat load of serious problems for current elected officials here in Santa Barbara. You see because of the over 1 BILLION dollar surplus my research shows our current Board of Supervisors no longer need to risk the whole fund to stay on target. In fact a 5% investment return factor could now be used and this would eliminate the need for any risky future Investments, THINK ABOUT THAT!
Thursday, September 9, 2010
SBCERS Pension fund math exposing corruption and abuse by Santa Barbara County Elected Officials? Bell Ca. North
Well folks it has been a couple of weeks and there is a ton on my mind. We have Judge Brian Hill putting off trials so he could do the Hendry’s Beach preliminary hearing. Imagine a Judge putting off the Lyons murder trial so he can keep himself in the press, pure moron. We have another case where the defendant hired or changed her attorney and the reward she received from a Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge for practicing her Constitutional rites was an unjust additional two year prison sentence. We have a very bias review of Gator Roll in the Santa Barbara Independent by writer Chris Meagher. He wrote a piece with out reviewing the case files. You see if he had he would have noticed case’s that included Ruben Mize and co-defendants with out any documentation in the Superior Court Files. In some case’s people were went to prison without there Superior Court file containing a police report, a probable cause sheet filled out, a felony commitment criminal minute or and this is most important. A pre-sentencing probation report, but that is not why I am here today. By the way 2500 presentencing reports a year at the cost to the defendant upwards of 1000.00 that is quite a bit of income for probation. Yet only 600 adults on probation, B.S. the numbers do not add up. It has been my observation 5 to 1 receives probation over prison here in our local courts,somebody needs to review the math. Oh I almost forgot in the Gator Roll review the writer states that in the year 2009 ‘Gang” charges are down., I wonder why Josh Lynn missed all that during his losing campaign for Santa Barbara District Attorney? Surely he was not trying to miss lead the public in his bias actions against our Latino, Hispanic or Mexican youth. Any way you break it down you always leave out the term American Youth.
Well as you can see there is a ton on my mind but I ma here today to explain why both past and present Santa Barbara elected officials such as the Board of Supervisors and County Controller Robert Gies must be criminally charged for fraud and misuse of public funds. Very quickly here in 1989 the County of Santa Barbara reported that SBCERS pension fund had a future obligation of 290 Million dollars with a value at that time of only 225 Million dollars thus only 77% funded. I was able to retrieve these figures from the Municipals bond market on Wall street. It turns out when there is a bond offer the City or County which makes the offer must give a current view of there Finances and future obligations. Now on this same bond document there was another choice I could have used. In there reporting investment returns they also had 345 Million future obligations and a 305 Million dollar value. I chose to use the lower of the 2 values for my example. Now all I had to do was the following.
1- start at 225 Million and come forward with the investment return factor.
2- Before multiplying by the return of a given year I also add the contributions
3- Example 1989 I had 222 Million plus 14 million in new contributions from employees and employers. So I went 225+14 = 239 million dollars x investment return factor of 10.5 =
4- I did this for every year and came current and my findings are located at both my word-press blog and at @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com
My results are startling and it boggles the mind to think our current Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors would have us believe there is a current unfunded future liability of 1 billion dollars. When in fact when you bring my totals to 2009/2010 multiply by 10.5 return on investments you get a fully funded pension fund of 3 BILLION Dollars, WOW where did the math go wrong. What does it say when you look at the 2009 SBCERS pension fund audit and in that audit it contains this. That over a given period the Santa Barbara County Tax Payer is charged for 350 Million dollars in amortized pension fund payments to the unfunded future liability. How ever if you follow those amortized payments you find that the Board of supervisors really only makes payments of only 200 Million dollars and do you know why? You see they charge the amortized payment at an interest rate of 8’16% yet there is no need for such a calculation and do you know why? Because the fund automatically will pull up or down the amortization payment based on the future funds performance. So there would be no need for an intereat rate to be used ever
Well my computer is broken so I am at the library. I must wrap this up for today but please remember that the SBCERS pension fund has claimed a hard number lose for the last two years and there for is not entitled to use my math to increase there losses after the fact. I will have to write a much better posting describing the amortization payment issue but another 150 million in fraud uncover by “Magic” no by common sense.
225 million fund value followed by 850 Million in new contributions for 20 years. Multiply this by a average return on investments for that 20 year period of 7.6 (yes I have also seen 6.7) and there is no possible way we have an unfunded pension plan.
Well as you can see there is a ton on my mind but I ma here today to explain why both past and present Santa Barbara elected officials such as the Board of Supervisors and County Controller Robert Gies must be criminally charged for fraud and misuse of public funds. Very quickly here in 1989 the County of Santa Barbara reported that SBCERS pension fund had a future obligation of 290 Million dollars with a value at that time of only 225 Million dollars thus only 77% funded. I was able to retrieve these figures from the Municipals bond market on Wall street. It turns out when there is a bond offer the City or County which makes the offer must give a current view of there Finances and future obligations. Now on this same bond document there was another choice I could have used. In there reporting investment returns they also had 345 Million future obligations and a 305 Million dollar value. I chose to use the lower of the 2 values for my example. Now all I had to do was the following.
1- start at 225 Million and come forward with the investment return factor.
2- Before multiplying by the return of a given year I also add the contributions
3- Example 1989 I had 222 Million plus 14 million in new contributions from employees and employers. So I went 225+14 = 239 million dollars x investment return factor of 10.5 =
4- I did this for every year and came current and my findings are located at both my word-press blog and at @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com
My results are startling and it boggles the mind to think our current Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors would have us believe there is a current unfunded future liability of 1 billion dollars. When in fact when you bring my totals to 2009/2010 multiply by 10.5 return on investments you get a fully funded pension fund of 3 BILLION Dollars, WOW where did the math go wrong. What does it say when you look at the 2009 SBCERS pension fund audit and in that audit it contains this. That over a given period the Santa Barbara County Tax Payer is charged for 350 Million dollars in amortized pension fund payments to the unfunded future liability. How ever if you follow those amortized payments you find that the Board of supervisors really only makes payments of only 200 Million dollars and do you know why? You see they charge the amortized payment at an interest rate of 8’16% yet there is no need for such a calculation and do you know why? Because the fund automatically will pull up or down the amortization payment based on the future funds performance. So there would be no need for an intereat rate to be used ever
Well my computer is broken so I am at the library. I must wrap this up for today but please remember that the SBCERS pension fund has claimed a hard number lose for the last two years and there for is not entitled to use my math to increase there losses after the fact. I will have to write a much better posting describing the amortization payment issue but another 150 million in fraud uncover by “Magic” no by common sense.
225 million fund value followed by 850 Million in new contributions for 20 years. Multiply this by a average return on investments for that 20 year period of 7.6 (yes I have also seen 6.7) and there is no possible way we have an unfunded pension plan.
How much money has the SBCERS Pension fund recieved in County funds from 1937 to present?
So after reading that the SBCERS Pension fund has had over 850 Million dollars added to it since 1989 it raises other concerns. If 850 Million is equal to 20 years of Employee and Employer contributions and the fund had a value of 225 million in 1989. That is equal to almost 1.1 Billion dollars in 20 years with out any further investment returns added from 1989 to present. So we alleviate 20 years worth of investment returns with an average return of 7.6% and we have another huge problem. When any normal investor receives a audit or statement of his or her 401k for example it is true you will get a +or – in regards to fund performance and value but there is one key statistic missing on most pension fund audits that I have personally reviewed. THE HARD DOLLAR COST PAID INTO THE FUND REGARDLESS OF TYPE OR INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE. So if we have had an SBCERS pension fund since 1937 what is the total hard dollar cost or contributions into the SBCERS pension fund for the 52 years prior to my research starting in 1989. I mean in 50+ years this county has had to have at least put another 150 or 200 million dollars in contributions, don’t you think? If you recall on my blog page I have a chart that reflects the amount of times “Excess returns” have been pulled from the pension fund and this chart clearly shows a positive return on investments except for a handful of times all the way back to 1937 and before. The charts are available on my blog @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com and you can double click on any color chart and it will be blown up for your review.
You see since 1989 we are contributing at a rate that could almost fund 3 separate pension funds. Also in the Los Angeles times I read a story where only police or sheriffs and firefighters receive the highest rated pension plan. An in Los Angeles county nobody else not even criminal prosecutors from the District Attorneys office are allowed into that safety pension plan. So my question; is our local District Attorney, Probation or even the Public Defenders office misusing there pension fund opportunities and how can we be sure?
As for those under funded pension fund amortization payments I mentioned yesterday I have a question. After you remove 15 sheriff positions or 7 police positions and than claim a savings of 150 million dollars in payments not needed down the road, how are those funds redistributed and when was the public going to be made aware of those possible future savings? You see even if all I found was 150 Million dollars in miss appropriated funds my work would warrant an investigation and possible criminal charges.
Take the pension fund value at any point in a time line for example 1969 or 1989 as I did. Add all the following years’ contributions and investment returns to bring a true fund value. Now if and when that math is completed and you did the same for the fund obligation based on the same time line and required investment return needed to keep said fund solvent 8.16% for SBCERS, than and only than can you see the solvency and years that may have required special attention. Furthermore I have yet to find a single person who can tell a true fund value if no log of “Excess Returns” and the location of missing funds. I am just amazed that tax payers are penalized because they benefits they offer over performed.
Just think Sunday what would happen when the Red Skins beat the Cowboys by 2 touchdowns over the spread. The Redskins refuse to allow 2 touchdowns to there totals because they exceeded there needs and your bookie failed to pay your bet off. I know makes no sense to me and neither do the random pulling of funds from an obligation the County taxpayers are held liable for and not our elected officials. Criminal charges must be looked into here in Bell North or Santa Barbara County California.
You see since 1989 we are contributing at a rate that could almost fund 3 separate pension funds. Also in the Los Angeles times I read a story where only police or sheriffs and firefighters receive the highest rated pension plan. An in Los Angeles county nobody else not even criminal prosecutors from the District Attorneys office are allowed into that safety pension plan. So my question; is our local District Attorney, Probation or even the Public Defenders office misusing there pension fund opportunities and how can we be sure?
As for those under funded pension fund amortization payments I mentioned yesterday I have a question. After you remove 15 sheriff positions or 7 police positions and than claim a savings of 150 million dollars in payments not needed down the road, how are those funds redistributed and when was the public going to be made aware of those possible future savings? You see even if all I found was 150 Million dollars in miss appropriated funds my work would warrant an investigation and possible criminal charges.
Take the pension fund value at any point in a time line for example 1969 or 1989 as I did. Add all the following years’ contributions and investment returns to bring a true fund value. Now if and when that math is completed and you did the same for the fund obligation based on the same time line and required investment return needed to keep said fund solvent 8.16% for SBCERS, than and only than can you see the solvency and years that may have required special attention. Furthermore I have yet to find a single person who can tell a true fund value if no log of “Excess Returns” and the location of missing funds. I am just amazed that tax payers are penalized because they benefits they offer over performed.
Just think Sunday what would happen when the Red Skins beat the Cowboys by 2 touchdowns over the spread. The Redskins refuse to allow 2 touchdowns to there totals because they exceeded there needs and your bookie failed to pay your bet off. I know makes no sense to me and neither do the random pulling of funds from an obligation the County taxpayers are held liable for and not our elected officials. Criminal charges must be looked into here in Bell North or Santa Barbara County California.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
