11/20/2012 3:08:00 PM LETTER: One rule for city, another for others
While I paid my city utility bill this month, I took a few minutes to read the enclosed bulletin.
I'm really glad the city is so pleased to announce the final completion of the parking lot on N. Main Street. Especially with the assurance that no general fund monies were used.
I'm a bit puzzled though that it doesn't appear to be finished. Some edges are still rough dirt and not tied or blended in with pre-existing structure.
Where are the Code required trees based on the number of parking spaces? Where is the irrigated landscaping that is required of everyone else installing or improving a similar project?
Now, look next door at the Parks Department yard. Why is the landscaping non-existent or totally unmaintained. Why is there clutter and junk everywhere. Maybe, the rules only apply to everyone else.
Looks like someone ought to clean their own house. I think we have elected officials and professional managers who possibly may not be paying attention to their responsibilities and treating the community fairly or equally.
I realize that opinions are like a certain body part everyone has. Now you've seen mine.
- Bob Pratt, Blythe
Reader Comments
Posted: Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Article comment by:
EL PICA BUYAS
@George.C. You put a name here. So what good is a name with out the the whole truth. So what other things have you left out? I guess half truths do not constitute a lie. Just that all of the facts did not come out. Maybe the wrong questions are being asked? So why should you be exempt from all rules and regulations? Other than the facts that you put out.
Posted: Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Article comment by:
George C.
Bob, I share the same frustrations with the process of government but as I said it makes for good internet commentary no real names, no real facts.
The transit parcel you are referring to is approximately 1/3 of the new parking lot paved by a grant through City CDBG and Capital transit funds not CIF (References: Blythe City Council Agenda March 27, 2012 page 26 and Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Board of Directors Agenda April 4, 2012 page 8).
With that information it does matter who owns the piece of property in question and what the hell is going on, am I right?
The requirement for completion on the tie in that you originally stated are valid. What I want to make clear is that it is the responsibility jointly with Transit to join our parcel to the parking lot which is addressed in our New Facility Project that is currently under review through the City Building Department like everyone else goes through.
So I respect your opinion Bob but must say the facts are not painted correctly and become unfair. I’m glad that Councilman and Transit Board member Patel reached out to you as I wish you would reach out to me so I can address your concerns directly with the facts and plans as they sit in public record.
It is my opinion that if this parking lot or the Transit property is that pressing to you that together with Councilman Patel and all the stakeholders of this project we can collectively address the issue based on facts and solutions.
If you are available, I can be reached by phone 922-1140 or in person at the former Parks Department building from 8am to 4pm both on Tuesday and Wednesday 11/27 & 28 or leave your number and I will call you back.
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012
Article comment by:
Walt Sleptke
Bob, look what the city did to the late Alan Bebout when they said his property was cluttered and an eyesore. I wonder if George C. had anything to do with that fiasco? Does anybody know whatever happened to all the vehicles they confiscated from Alan's property?
Posted: Monday, November 26, 2012
Article comment by:
Bob Pratt
Let me respond to some of the comments to my letter. First, the funds were reportedly from a grant from the CIF and one or two other sources. City Hall should provide those answers. Second, George C., after a little research, is the area Manager for the Palo Verde Transit Agency. Third, who cares who the actual property owner is. It should still be required to comply with regulations. PVTA is show in County records as the owner of 415 N. Main (Parks Dept. Yard) but, is operated by the City of Blythe. No indication is made of PVTA having an interest in the parking lot under construction. "George C", I am concerned that such a project might be totally completedlegally and cheaper in the future. I quote, "So if it takes a while longer to complete our new facility project by following the rules and it saves money to do all the work together than I’m sorry." Your concern is obvious and you must be proud to be worthy of such entitlements. Fourth, who cares how things are done in other areas. The "good old boy" factor is alive and well in Blythe. Especially at and within City Hall. Finally. Thank you Councilman Sam Patel for your concern and interest. Your personal phone call to discuss the matter is greatly appreciated. I am sure you will, as promised, follow up in the interest of the citizens.
Posted: Friday, November 23, 2012
Article comment by:
jacque vidaurri
@ Bob Pratt That was a very good letter with very legitimate concerns. Thank you! Wow! Did anyone understand that double -talk response he got back from the very (deleted)? First thing that came to mind was Pinocchio>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Site Administrator's note: A portion of this comment has been removed because it violated our Terms of use Agreement. Personal attacks are not tolerated, and are a direct violation of these Terms of Use.
Posted: Friday, November 23, 2012
Article comment by:
Court Jester
I would still like to get an answer to why the "city" took Allen Bebouts vintage autos and left the junk behind when the sole purpose was to clean up the property? George? Anyone?
Posted: Friday, November 23, 2012
Article comment by:
to U 2 Can Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Why are you asking Bob where did the money come from why don't you ask city hall and have them tell us
Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012
Article comment by:
EL PICA BUYAS
Why bother asking these people for accountability of their action or there lack of actions. When all they give you is excuse after excuse. It's do as I say not what I do. But they would be more that happy to put a fine on your property for not cleaning up your yard of trash and weeds or not planting grass. When These entities will flaunt their indiscretions for all to see and then give a lame excuse for not following the law. So if Mr. George,C is the manger of so property and it does not belong to the City of Blythe. Then he should also be fine like the rest of the citizens of Blythe. It's like any other business that does not follow the law. That they would get in trouble with the City of Blythe. Nuff said clean up your mess like a good citizen, Mr. George,C.
Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012
Article comment by:
@ George C.
That's a wonderful answer George C. So now explain to us why, if the project still has to clear all of these hurdles to get landscaping, did your puppet master brag in his monthly propaganda piece that the project was complete when it wasn't?
Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012
Article comment by:
How Dare You Bob Pratt!!!
Mr. Pratt, how dare you respond to the Great Leader — the one whose portrait hangs from the mantle of George C’s living room fireplace — in an independent press that allows commoners an opinion. Why do you think the Great Leader’s propaganda can only be accessed through a newsletter stuffed into our water bill, or a website with no feedback allowed, or a pre-recorded radio show that no one can call in and ask questions of him? It’s because the Great Leader answers to no one, especially someone of your caste.
Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012
Article comment by:
Excuses Excuses
Well Bob Pratt, now you know the reason why. The Blythe City Excuse Factory Spokesperson has explained it all to us followed by his attack dogs.
@ George C!!!! "Brilliant Explanation" best describes your reply! You set the record STRAIGHT (deleted) George, can you hear that, your telephone is ringing. hahaha
Site Administrator's note: A portion of this comment has been removed because it violated our Terms of use Agreement. Personal attacks are not tolerated, and are a direct violation of these Terms of Use.
Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Article comment by:
George C.
Bob, I appreciate your criticism but as always misinformation or just plain lack of knowing all the facts prevail here online.
If you’re looking for someone to blame well I guess you can point most of the anonymous fingers at me. The Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency owns the Parks building lot, not the City of Blythe, and also owns part of the parking lot that has been mentioned.
As for the parking lot, it is being tied into our planned new facility project that addresses the issues with landscaping and overall aesthetics with the existing area.
As for the Parks property, plans are currently in review through the City Planning Department so until there is approval PVVTA will not change, add or delete any part of the project that may delay this process. We too must follow the rules.
With that said, we only do minor maintenance of the property due to specific issues with the existing lot. It is my sole decision to mitigate any expenses that are not needed especially for a public building that will be torn down and redeveloped.
As for clutter and junk, I would be more than happy to give anyone a tour of our facility at any time to find this stuff.
Bob, you are looking for accountability and I’m trying to provide that as an Agency who must deal with the same rules as everyone else. To characterize that I do not pay attention to my responsibilities may work for internet commentary but my job is to manage our projects mindful to all aspects of public trust, foremost financial.
So if it takes a while longer to complete our new facility project by following the rules and it saves money to do all the work together than I’m sorry. I hope you and anyone else who is interested would take the time to stop by and I can go over this with you or we can take a tour of our proposed plan, 922-1140
Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Article comment by:
Steve Palermo
Bob, it's not just Blythe that builds infrastructure in this manner. Water, power, gas, sewer, telephone and cable use the same formula. If it's a CIP (Capital improvements program) then the particular entity puts as little money as possible into the project. If it is part of an expansion by either Government grants, sales of bonds or paid for by developers and other businesses, then it will be of better quality since it's not the entity's dime. This is why cities LOVE new housing tracts, they get to extend existing utilities and upgrade to newer equipment without having to budget for the upgrades. The cost is passed along to those who buy the properties. Pay-Go has replaced austerity and investment as a vehicle to build infrastructure.
Copyright 2013 Western News&Info, Inc.® Palo Verde Valley Times is the information source for Blythe, California, Quartzsite, Arizona and surrounding area communities. Original content may not be reprinted or distributed without the written permission of Western News&Info, Inc.® Palo Verde Valley Times Online is a service of WNI. By using the Site, pvvt.com ®, you agree to abide and be bound by the site's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which prohibit commercial use of any information on the site. Click Here to email your questions or comments to the Webmaster. Palo Verde Valley Times Online is a proud publication of Western News&Info Inc.® All Rights Reserved.
