On Monday, October 13 at 9:30 a.m., community activists and concerned residences, led by Kim Carter, of Time for Change Foundation, will be holding a Press Conference on the steps of City Hall, to bring national attention to the back door politics of our new city leaders. This comes on the heels of yet another scandal like the City’s bankruptcy. Recently, during an open competitive process, a bid competition set up by the City for the purpose of community development, after receiving the highest score in that competition, the City Council final approval was placed on the agenda only to be pulled off, not once but twice! One would think that with a “Review Committee” and the published results of that competition showing the winner (pgs. 14-16) (pgs. 370-372) that the City would honor their commitment! But, NO! If you don’t like the winner, you can change the rules? The message this sends is “San Bernardino is not open for business!” Or is it only for a chosen few? Don’t enter the competition because it won’t work, a handshake won’t work, only back door politics work. Are we there again? Did we not just vote in a new regime to move our City in a new direction?
We are in a period of rebuilding our city. No entity will be willing to come to San Bernardino to invest if the City does not hold to the competition process. As all citizens are aware, we are supposed to be living in a free market society without the back door politics that plagued the City for the last 15 years and led to bankruptcy. This is not good for the citizens of our City or the future of our children, and we won’t stand for it. This is the scandalous politics that we said would be long gone. We voted in new people for an open, transparent and accountable City Council. We stood for change and the voters’ voices were heard; we have new leadership and a new Council, yet the same only dirty politics. They are letting all businesses know that we don’t have a new regime; we are reminded of the old antics. Has the new City Council been infiltrated or did we vote in new people who write rules and then change the game when they don’t like the result? We live in a democratic society, a free market society with open competition. When someone wins fair and square, there should be no rebuttals.
How can you ask people to vote for you during reelection time when you are sitting in the seat and not living up to the promises of openness, transparency and accountability? How can you ask the citizens to trust the City to vote yes on Q when we can’t trust the results of Q; when the City takes money from agreements and then reneges? If the City was truly moving forward, the transparency and accountability would be obvious. Instead, what we have here smells like a rat! According to Kim Carter: “I’m not a sore loser, because I was the winner. This is not about me, this is about the process which is supposed to be open and transparent…a healthy competition. Is any business safe to come here and enter a competition only to be awarded but not rewarded?” It’s obvious the game is rigged when the rules change once the winner has been declared. We are also seeing that the City is attempting to reward contracts following secretive RFPs which only has one person in the race. There is a motion on the City Council agenda for October 20th to award an out of town agency … a $200,000 contract … in which there was only one agency in the race. Hear me clearly … no competition = agency gets awarded contract … However, a healthy competition = winner gets shafted.
It is a rigged game when the rules change if the winner isn’t what … liked? the right color? the right gender?
the right political party? in the right family? As an African American entrepreneur, I have to wonder, is this discrimination or just the City changing the game when they don’t like the winner? The government is supposed to be open, transparent and accountable. Has there been some Brown Act violations? To not honor the process which is clearly laid out sends the wrong signal to people outside and inside San Bernardino. Where is the accountability? Where is the transparency? Where is this new leadership?