Sunday, August 28, 2011

Santa Barbara Prosecutor Cota you are exactly right it would take a MIRACLE to get through our local criminal courts!



The Denise D'Sant Angelo case like mine was not about guilt or innocence It is about the willingness of the D.A's office to use their position and abuse people through the courts.
Chris as a reporter you have such a huge responsibility one that I try to follow with my blog. Your recent Story about Denise D'Sant Angelo's sentencing hearing was a personal attack on a person helpless to defend herself of the alleged charges. She was stalked and abused by those who have sworn to defend the law. The charge was elder abuse some type of theft but Chris let me ask you this. Why was the Victims wife not included in the charges? I'll tell you why because she says it never happen and she had nothing stolen from her. Chris the couple disagreed about what went on and to me there is reasonable doubt. No matter what other evidence was produced the couple did not agree. That information came out during the preliminary hearing. Where the victims wife was not allowed to state her case by Judge Anderson, the media reported on this. 
   This was a Civil matter at best and I went through the same exact same thing. I was given a house and things got real bad between the person who gave me the house. I did not live in the house or have a key. It is a long story but we had a deal.  I was allowed in to scrub the toilets feed this person and pick him up every time he called. Or when I was called to do so( he abused alcohol). I am talking about a 5 year period of daily assistance. Rather than take his disagreements with me to Civil Court he had me  arrested and charged with 3 felonies just like Denise. Two of the charges were strike-able 422 terrorist threats.  Now how can you charge or prove a statement (threat) was made between two people during a private discussion?  Much less make them Felony charges and expect to get a conviction?  This is the D.A.'s blanket charge to abuse any one they so desire. The fact that I was facing 5 other false strike-able charges did not help matters.  You see Chris between an illegal  Divorce and a Civil suit for the house people who used to love me would do anything for money and I feel sorry for them! By the way I was never convicted of a single strike-able felony charge.
Chris as far as I am concerned you should be ashamed of your story in the Santa Barbara Independent @ Denise D’Sant Angelo Sentenced to 11 Years
http://www.independent.com/news/2011/aug/24/denise-dsant-angelo-sentenced-11-years/
The only part you and the prosecutor got right was "
Deputy District Attorney Brian Cota said D’Sant Angelo lost her case not because Allen wasn’t a good attorney, but because “he’s not a miracle worker.” Mr Cota you are exactly right it would take a MIRACLE to get through our local criminal courts and treated to a fair and just procedure. I am just not sure why you are bragging about it. 
The Independent story said that  she "ping-ponged back and forth between defense attorneys, and generally slowed down the judicial system". The same could be said for former Santa Barbara Police Detective Brian SawickiThe detective faces five misdemeanor charges — annoying or molesting a child under 18, indecent exposure, and resisting or delaying a peace officer, He was originally arrested way back in August of 2009. I am sure you are also aware that the general rule of thumb with all D.A. offices is that, in criminal misdemeanor cases should be completed within the first 90 days. The California Trial Courts actually keep records of how each California D.A.'s office rates under this category. Yet not a word from you or the Independent as to why this crime by a former Santa Barbara Law Enforcement is as you put it "DRAGGIN through the courts.. Denise D’Sant Angelo faced 12 felony counts in her second trial. Yet Karen Flores the SBPD civilian employee arrested for embezzling from the Police a 3 weeks ago is only being charged with one count of theft. For what may end up being 1.5 million dollars of PUBLIC FUNDS? The theft of PUBILC FUNDS are subject to different  laws so than I ask  how did she remove the funds? Was it through forgery or was a computer used creating additional charges? How did she cover up her criminal activity? How many years of theft  are we talking about? Is the Santa Barbara Distrcit Attorney's Office really serious when they charged her with 4 additional charges for tearing up 4 parking tickets, I bet that happens quite often in law enforcement. However stealing the funds from 40,000 parking infractions comes to one whole count of theft. Figure it out folks Karen Flores may face 3 years and Denise D'Stant Angelo was sentenced to serve 11 years in prison. True there was a family that may have suffered in the D'Sant Angelo trial while a whole City was abused by Karen Flore, makes me scratch my head and say hum.
I have attached some documents for when I bailed myself out of jail.  You would not believe the effort in our town to abuse people. One document shows the bail amount was for 50,000 Dollars. The other bail bond document shows that the bond filed against me was for 250,000 and not the 50k as ordered by the court and here is why. When law enforcement is harassing you, you can become so scared you are afraid to leave your house much less show up in court. And had I missed a court appearance while out on bail I would have been responsible for 250.000 because that was how the bond was filed. The paper work does not lie, we will get to the other attachments in the next posting.

THIS BOND SHOULD BE FOR 50,000 NOT 250,000 SEE NEXT PICTURE

BAIL WAS SET AT 50,000 AS THIS DOCUMENT SHOWS, SO WHY WAS THE ACTUAL BOND AMOUNT 250.000. THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO HARASS SOME ONE.





































S.B.C.C.C. The place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!

Saturday, August 27, 2011

These 3 attachments are all I need to prove fraud with the SBCERS pension fund. Simply follow my instructions and see for yourself


This is very simple people the data included in the 2009 County Employer Cost Chart does not match earlier reports from Santa Barbara County Officials. 

The 2009 chart gives funded ratios that drastically differs from those found on archived reports for 12/86 12/88 and 12/90. . 
The 2009 chart shows that on 12/31/86   our SBCERS pension was only  67.10% funded vs, the archived State Controllers Audit which shows a 102% funded pension. The 2009 shows that on 12/31/88 the SBCERS pension was 67.20% funded vs, the archived Controllers Audit for the same year shows a 91.00% funded Pension. 2009 for 12/31/90 shows 61.40% vs. the archived Controllers Audit shows 82.9% funded pension..
All I ask is that you please give me the time to do only one thing. Simply open the attachments ( employer history cost and the 90/91 file) and compare side by side the reported funded ratio levels. The SBCERS is the 4th county on the 90/91 attachment. It is that simple. Of course I have a million other things that my research has produced but I know you are extremely busy so I want to keep this as brief as possible. 
So who retroactively altered the pension values and funded ratios? I think the altering of funds values and funded ratio levels happen between 1995 and 1996.

I have done the math and these contradictions create a 2 billion dollar difference. Now the pension works as designed and there is no need for the county employees to be afraid of us exposing the corruption. Except that there is another group of people who believe that the practice of spiking their pension has created the mess we are  in. and that is not true. The 3rd attachment will show you how many years " excess returns" have been pulled from the pension. I think that chart will shock you as well. Well have a great weekend and you can call me anytime on my cell.

Thanks
Larry "Magic" Mendoza

Open this file and compare the data for the years
12/31/86
12/31/88
12/31/90
http://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/1990-911.pdf


To what is reported on the chart below. Click on each file or picture to and that will open up to it's own window if you are @ www.santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com 
2009 Santa Barbara County Employers Cosy history, This also contains altered SBCERS pension funded ratio data from 1986b through 2009 



























A History of Excess Funds that were Removed from the SBCERS Pension Fund! 
















http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pension_spiking

Pension spiking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pension spiking is the process whereby public sector employees grant themselves large raises or otherwise artificially inflate their compensation in the years immediately preceding retirement in order to receive larger pensions than they otherwise would be entitled to receive. This inflates the pension payments to the retirees and, upon retirement of the "spikee", transfers the burden of making payments from the employee's employer to a public pension fund. This practice is considered a significant contributor to the high cost of public sector pensions. Several states including Illinois have passed laws making it more difficult for employees to spike their pensions.[1]
Pension spiking is largely seen in public sector and is an example of the principal-agent problem. In the classic principal-agent problem, a principal hires an agent to work on his behalf. The agent then seeks to maximize his own well being within the confines of the engagement laid out by the principal. The agent, or bureaucrat in this instance, has superior information and is able to maximize his benefit at the cost of the principal. In other words, there is asymmetric information.
In the case of pension spiking the general public (the principal) elects officials to hire the bureaucrat who then hires the public servants, who are the ultimate agents of the general public. Thus, the principal is three steps removed from the bureaucrat. In the case of pension spiking, the public has allowed a pension system to be created which is based on the compensation in the last year of service and delegated the setting of this cost to the bureaucrat.[2] The bureaucrat, who will often himself or herself benefit from a spiked pension or the same laws permitting pension spiking, fails to stop the practice, a clear conflict of interest.

Here is what you have in the documents I gave you.
1- a 1986 California State Controllers Audit page that reviews the S.B.C.E.R.S. pension.
2- a 1995 California State Controllers Audit page that reviews the S.B.C.E.R.S. pension.
3- a 1996 California State Controllers Audit page that reviews the S.B.C.E.R.S. pension.
4- a 2009 Contribution rate paid to the pension 1986-2009 made for the S.B.C.E.R.S. Retirement Board.
5- Copies of letter from the State Controllers showing where my pension audit data came from.
6- Pension fund status taken from a 1992 Bond offering by Santa Barbara County found on Wall Street 
@  http://emma.msrb.org/

Find the official statement, continuing disclosures and trade price information for a specific bond, note or other 
municipal security (for best results, use CUSIP number). For more information on finding an official statement,


Peter you can also click on these files and follow the funded status year by year as reported to the State Controllers office.
 http://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/1987-88.pdf
http://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/1988-89.pdf
http://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/1990-911.pdf

I have parked all my pension audits on my blog with links to each file for that particular year/

http://santabarbaracriminalcourtcorruption.blogspot.com/2011/07/california-public-retirement-systems.html

California Public Retirement Systems Annual Audit Reports 2007-08 – 1997-98. Also Past Fund Values from 1996-97 – 1978-79 for 5 California County Pensions; Los Angeles(LACERA), Santa Barbara(SBCERS) Ventura(VCERA), Kern(KCERA), and Contra Costa(CCCERS) County

Please click on any  orange highlight and that PDF file will open for your review.

California Public Pension Funds Yearly Audits from the Office of the California State Controller. Pubic Pension Reports County by County and City by City @

http://www.sco.ca.gov/ard_locrep_retirement.html

California Public Retirement Systems Annual Reports


 1996-97  Fund Values for 5 California County Public Pensions; Los Angeles(LACERA), Santa Barbara(SBCERS) Ventura(VCERA), Kern(KCERA), and Contra Costa(CCCERS) County
1995-96
1994-95
1993-94 
1992-93
1991-92
1990-91
1989-90
1988-89
1987-88
1986-87
1985-86
1984-85
1983-84
1982-83
1981-82
1980-81
1979-80
1978-79


S.B.C.C.C. The place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

How to use Wall Street and the Bond Market to compare City or County Financial Data


Remember no one else is doing putting in this kind of effort to make sure everything balances. Because of that nobody will know how to defend or challenge your findings. I swear I see million dollar mistakes all the time when I review a subject and the public is slow to care. I think all that is about to change! Here is a perfect example of contradictions in data and cost for SBPD.

The 2012 Police Budget  has  Fiesta's expensed out at 450,000 for law enforcement coverage. Not the 180,000 in overtime reported below. Look at special events page 43 of the 2012 SBPD PDF budget  file. You see the public is never told the truth. The 2012 budget file is attached to this email for your review.


Fiesta Starts Today

Posted: Aug 03, 2011 6:04 AM
The big crowds mean overtime for the Santa Barbara Police Department. It has a special Fiesta budget and will spend about $180,000.00 in overtime for the celebration.
The department is getting help from law enforcement agencies across the county. 150 to 160 officers will be on patrol from now through Sunday.
How to use Wall Street and the Bond Market to compare City or County Financial Data

When a County or City creates a Municipal Bond they have to include their financial data such as Yearly Budgets and Pension Data. The neat thing about using the Bond market for research is that they have records that can go back over 25 years. Most County's and City's do not make financial data that old readily available to the public. Remember no one else is doing putting in this kind of effort to make sure everything balances. Because of that they will not now how to defend or challenge your findings. I swear I see million dollar mistakes all the time when I review a subject and the general public is slow to care. I think that all is about to change!


We start by going to the link below which will take us to the home page for EMMA

MUNI SEARCH
 
Enter Santa Barbara California  in the search box than go to the bottom of the page and accept the user terms. After you hit accept you may be brought back to the same page. Just reenter Santa Barbara California and hit on the arrow.


Accept

You will end up on anther page with tons of Santa Barbara bonds.

SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONCENT CITY REDEV PJ-SER B12/01/19851987 to 2007
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONCENTRAL CITY REDEV PJ-SER A07/25/20012002 to 2019
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONCENTRAL CITY REDEV PROJ-SER A12/18/20032004 to 2019
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONHSG-CENTRAL CITY REDEV PROJ-A09/30/20042005 to 2018
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONREF01/01/19911991 to 2007
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONREF-SR-SER A-CENT CITY REDEV PROJ12/01/19951996 to 2008
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONREF-SUB-SER B-CENT CITY REDEV PROJ12/01/19951996 to 2007
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATIONSUB-CENT CITY REDEV PROJ11/01/19871990 to 2007
SANTA BARBARA CALIF REDEV AGY TAX ALLOCATION02/01/19931994 to 2007


You can click on any of these and you might end up at a page with documentation like below




03/01/201151,975,000110.679CENTRAL CITY REDEV PROJ-SER A


CUSIP: 801311FV8 *

Dated Date: 12/18/2003
Maturity Date: 03/01/2011
Interest Rate: 5 % 
Principal Amount At Issuance: $1,975,000
Initial Offering Price: 110.679
View the official statement, which is the most complete source of information about the securities as of the time of initial issuance.

Official Statement

Be advised that these are large files that can take several minutes to download, depending on your connection speed and the level of traffic on EMMA. You should preview the cover, if available, before downloading to ensure that this is the correct document.
[Click to view; right click to save]
NOTE: Failure to review entire official statement together with all amendments may result in incomplete understanding of your security. Files can be viewed individually below but should not be read in isolation from one another.

Download Document

View Document Archive


Actually our search for Santa Barbara City Budget information starts on this page below.

 
CUSIP *Maturity DateInterest
Rate
(%)
Principal
Amount At
Issuance ($)
Initial Offering
Price (%)
Security Description *
07/01/20124865,000104.72ARPT PROJ
07/01/20134900,000105.2ARPT PROJ
07/01/20144935,000104.707ARPT PROJ
07/01/20155970,000109.667ARPT PROJ
07/01/201641,020,000103.545ARPT PROJ
07/01/201741,065,000102.563ARPT PROJ
07/01/201851,105,000108.962ARPT PROJ
07/01/201951,160,000108.298ARPT PROJ
07/01/202958,365,00099.246ARPT PROJ
07/01/2039524,270,00095.656ARPT PROJ
07/01/202041,220,00098.678ARPT PROJ
07/01/20214.251,265,00099.811ARPT PROJ
07/01/20224.3751,320,00099.85ARPT PROJ
07/01/20234.51,375,00099.894ARPT PROJ
07/01/202451,435,000102.945ARPT PROJ










http://emma.msrb.org/EA282378-EA1664-EA570479.pdf  Just go to this file which is 396 pages. Start looking at the Budget information around page 55. The data in this Bond offering is for 2009 and before.


Than go to this Santa Barbara City file and down load the 2009 CAFR Budget Report for 2009.

Start comparing financial data around page 30 with page 55 above. You will have to go back and forth until you find exact data matches. I have already found differences between the two.


I hope it helps !
Larry


2012 Santa Barbara Police PDF Budget file. @
http://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/021_sb-police-2012-budget.pdf

City of Santa Barbara 2012 CAFR @
http://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/2009_sb-city_cafr.pdf

2009 City of Santa Barbara Airport Bond offering  @
http://magicinsantabarbara.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/sb-airport-bond-2009.pdf


S.B.C.C.C. The place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!