John Lloyd Has A Different Park….

October 30, 2012



Continuing our quest to provide insight and context to the ongoing parks  issues in the City of Wildomar, which is typified by an annual, expensive election effort that once again needlessly divides our community.

Rather than being honest and upfront, Wildomar City councilmember Bridgette Moore, and her perpetual surrogate, John Lloyd, continue to “piggyback” their hidden agenda for a park and recreation system onto a narrow park tax assessment measure that creates its own natural opposition, which opposition has prevailed in the recent past.

While searching the Internet on the issue, I found this comment by John Lloyd, in the September 15, 2006 issue of the Fallbrook Bonsall Village News:

Following the passage of LMD 2006-1, the original $28 per year assessment which was eventually overturned by the  Appeals Court, John Lloyd, Chairman of the Wildomar Parks Formation Committee (“WPFC”), made the following statement in paragraph 4:

“While this is the end of the road for the creation of a park district in Wildomar, it is just the beginning for building a park and recreation system that will enhance our lives and that we can all enjoy.”

However, with the incorporation of the City of Wildomar in 2008, the question of a “park and recreation system,” any formal deliberations and discussions must ultimately occur publicly in the City Council chambers, as a part of a formal agenda.

Sadly, that formal deliberation process has never occurred in Wildomar. A study session on the entire issue of parks and a park and recreation system would provide a healthy and robust debate for Wildomar.

I’m sure it would include farm animals in the Council Chambers, once again.

Unfortunately, Moore and Lloyd have probably made the political calculation that support for a park and recreation system does not exist in Wildomar, so they remain stuck in this uncertain political arena of stealthily-written ballot measures which, if successful at the ballot, would satisfy their wants and needs for a basic park and recreation system, “that like a seed would grow.”

However, they fail to recognize the residual anger and political resentment that remains in Wildomar over the excesses of the Ortega Trails Park and Recreation District which provides a significant cadre of “no” voters to Measure D (last year’s version), and Measure Z (this year’s version), despite the efforts of a Blue Ribbon Committee or the Oakland-based consulting firm, Lew Edwards Group.

If measures Z fails to secure passage on November 06, 2012 (a 66 2/3% threshold for passage is intentionally daunting), we would encourage those who wish to promote a “park and recreation system” for Wildomar to first promote an open and honest discussion within the parameters of a properly agendized City Council meeting.

Comments can be made to

Thee internet is an amazing repository of memorable statements.


Is John Lloyd Hearing Voices In His Head…

October 28, 2012




Measure Z promoter, John Lloyd, has posted another blog on the Lake Elsinore/Wildomar Patch  alleging that phantom statements by phantom “people” are creating confusing questions about the latest version of a parks tax measure.

Rather than trying to copy  his words for commentary, I would prefer that you, dear reader, read his blog for your own context, as follows:

Now that you have read his blog, let’s discuss and have our adult conversation.

1) While  opponents to Measure Z have openly compared the “per acre” cost of Measure Z, if it were to pass on November 06, 2012, to the “per acre” cost of parks in neighboring cities, with one “outlier” comparison to Central Park in New York City, the opponents are being no less quasi-informational than the Measure Z proponents.

As you can see from John Lloyd’s current blog, attempts to reduce the cost of the parcel tax to $2 per month, while dismissing the cumulative $350,000 to be collected for parks is an old salesman’s pitch.

For factual reference, the last budget to maintain all three parks was $210,200 (2010-2011 city budget), which is approximately $140,000 less than the amount to be collected by Measure Z, if  approved by voters, to maintain Wildomar’s 3 parks. So far, no one at the city, elected or staff, has explained the need for the excess amount. It could be bureaucratic greed, the old “fudge factor,” or something else entirely.

2) Comparing  Wildomar’s irrigation requirements to the State of Mississippi?  Voices? What Voices?

3)”I’m told by people that the City of Wildomar will probably try to spend the Measure Z funds on things other than parks.”

Let’s take a look at John Lloyd’s previous blog, resorting to his own words to answer his own question.

On October 20, 2012, in a Patch blog titled, “Having parks in Wildomar starts with you,” Lloyd unambiguously states the following:

“Cost is not the issue, at the equivalent of one large soda at Jack in the Box per month, we can start a park and recreation system here in Wildomar, that like a seed will grow.”

The language of the ballot measure, which reads like a cafeteria menu, includes language which would probably provide justification for starting a “park and recreation system” in Wildomar, which is, in my opinion, their ultimate intention.

As a result, “cost” is clearly a reasonable issue as well as the “need” for starting a park and recreation system in Wildomar. (Perhaps a little more attention to roads and code enforcement might be a higher priority).

John Lloyd is more than a dedicated community activist on the issue. If you didn’t know, John Lloyd submitted his resume and applied for the City Manager position when the City of Wildomar first incorporated in 2008. John Lloyd appears to have had, and may still have,  aspirations for a permanent position with the City of Wildomar.

If not as City Manager, then perhaps  as Director of a newly created Parks and Recreation Department.

Further, as you recall, John was the Chairman of the Blue Ribbon Committee that originally proposed a $5.2 million Mello Roos bond issue, which later became known as Measure D, and which still failed to pass on June 07, 2011, even after the multimillion dollar bond issue was removed, but left the Mello Roos/Community Finance District infrastructure intact.

Despite the “cooing” of the City Council’s consultants, John Lloyd and Bridgette Moore will have to purge the voices in their heads if Measure Z fails to win passage on November 06, 2012, a distinct possibility.

The people of Wildomar are not as gullible and stupid as Bridgette Moore and John Lloyd suspect.

Comments can be made to

 If you’re going to have a park and rec system, you’re going to have to have a park and rec director, aren’t you?

Running On….

October 27, 2012


The SouthWest Riverside News Network provides the latest election coverage, focusing on the campaign of incumbent city councilmember  Bridgette Moore.

If you haven’t done so, please click on the following link for context:

As you can see, and despite her denial when I challenged her to her face at a City Council meeting, that putting Measure Z on the November 06, 2012 ballot was nothing more than an expensive campaign ploy for her re-election. As you can read, it remains her primary focus.

It’s a part of her “I’m trying” mentality.

Without the robust controversy over Measure Z, Bridgette would have little else to talk about as  justification for her re-election. It obscures the fact that her inept leadership is responsible for the current state of our parks in Wildomar. (i.e; Blue Ribbon Committee, failed Measure D.)

Two “Special Needs” egg hunts over the past four years are charming, but insignificant “accomplishments.”

She did once facilitate the promotion of a barnyard goat as “Mayor of the Day.” Now that’s something to be proud of!

Safe Routes to Schools might be considered a municipal accomplishment but Bridgette had little to do with the process, save for voting “aye” after a staff presentation (I don’t believe she’s ever voted “no” on anything presented by staff; She could have mailed her automatic “aye” to the council meeting).

You and I, dear reader, can also plausibly claim credit for the sidewalk grants simply by being “involved” as citizens of an incorporated city that becomes the default vehicle for receiving government grants.

On the other hand, Bridgette’s stated intention to  “keep fighting” for Vehicle License Fees will continue to cost Wildomar $36,000 per year for a Sacramento-based consultant firm wistfully chasing Sacramento dollars that were re-allocated to sheriff and police departments due to budget constraints on the state level.

Bridgette promises to “work smarter,” if re-elected.

Unfortunately for Wildomar, she has not demonstrated any capability for “working smart” during the last four years.

Comments can be made to

It might be okay to admire her; just don’t rehire her.

Elect “Anybody but Bridgette.”

Meeting With An Experienced….

October 26, 2012



Last weekend  Sheryl and I had the opportunity to meet with Wildomar City Council candidate, Rich Cary, to confirm that he drinks coffee (and thereby confirming his career in the U.S. Navy), and to take the measure of a man who wants to represent the Citizens of Wildomar for the next four years.

Please click on the following article for more information:

First and foremost, he is an adult, not an adolescent.

Second, and equally compelling, his current employment in a management role on a major United States military base (Camp Pendleton) means that he could bring significant real-life experience to our City Council, if he were elected.

Third, and of a personal interest, is that Rich and I share memories of a tour of duty at the Naval Air Station on a remote island in the Western Aleutians, Adak, Alaska. However, our tours in Adak were separated by a decade.

While on Adak, Cary was the lay minister for the local congregation comprised of servicemen and their families.

Cary states that, in addition to his campaign signs posted around town, he has a network of support in the community for his candidacy and expects to make a good showing on November 06, 2012.

Of particular interest, is his opposition to raising  taxes, which should attract the interest of “anti-tax” voters in Wildomar.

 Comments can be made to

Mixed Messages About…..

October 25, 2012


One of the most prominent voices that can be heard about the issue of parks in Wildomar comes from long time Bridgette Moore surrogate, John Lloyd.

However, his pronouncements often take on the character of undeserved finality in the political fluidity of Wildomar politics.

In effect, Lloyd’s “take” on any current situation must be taken with a huge “grain of salt,” knowing that his messages will  likely be re-shuffled at the next fork in the road.

Consider, if you will, his latest “message” on the Lake Elsinore/Wildomar Patch, as follows:

In particular, note his statement, “The citizens of Wildomar need to decide if they want parks for the children and community or not.”

However, on June 08, 2011, speaking to the Wildomar City Council following the voters failure to pass Measure D on June 07, 2011, Lloyd’s comments were captured in the City Council minutes, as follows:

“What he feels is sad is that a vast majority of the City didn’t even vote, so you would have to assume that they could care less. He understands that as the City Council deliberates about what to do with the parks now, he understands that the Council should take into consideration that a huge majority of the City apparently does not want parks and we have to abide by that even though it is sad.”

What is sad, in my opinion, is the lack of political sophistication  on the part of Lloyd that conflates the rejection of a MelloRoos-based Park assessment measure with his angry conclusion that the “majority of the city apparently does not want parks.”

Further, as the Chair of the Blue Ribbon Committee (“BRC”), Lloyd’s hands are “unclean,” as he was apparently instrumental in leading the BRC astray with the Committee’s recommendation for a $5.2 million MelloRoos bond issue, from which the City Council eventually backed away from in the face of local citizen opposition.

So now, when Lloyd declares, once again, that the Citizens of Wildomar need to decide if they want parks, he apparently hopes that last year’s message from the Citizens of Wildomar is forgotten.

Apparently John Lloyd has forgotten his own words uttered on June 08, 2011.

Sometimes, reminders are important and useful.

Comments can be made to

A Rogue Government In…..

October 22, 2012



I recently doublechecked the Riverside County Grand Jury website to see if the City of Wildomar had ever formally responded to the Grand Jury’s Report for 2011-2012, issued to the public on April 23, 2012, and which required a formal response from the City of Wildomar by July 17, 2012.

Not surprisingly, the City of Wildomar has apparently taken a dismissive attitude toward the Grand Jury’s findings, declaring itself, by its actions or inactions, in this case, to be beyond the scrutiny of a duly-constituted Watchdog body, convened under the auspices of the Riverside County Superior Court.

If you haven’t done so already, please click on the following link to read the Grand Jury Report for yourself, as follows:

At the center of the investigation is the relationship between the City of Wildomar and Diamond W Events (“Diamond”).

If you’re not aware, Diamond is the corporation connected to Community Services Manager, Paula Willette, and which is the contractual vehicle through which Willette is paid for her services as a contract vendor, not an employee.

Entity Number: C3113350
Date Filed: 10/21/2009
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address:XXXXXXXXXX 
Entity City, State, Zip: WILDOMAR CA 92595
Agent for Service of Process: PAULA WILLETTE
Agent Address: XXXXXXXXXXX
Agent City, State, Zip: WILDOMAR CA 92595

After completing their investigation, the Riverside County Grand Jury concluded that the City of Wildomar did not adhere to their own written policies and procedures when they contracted directly with Diamond.

It appears that Wildomar’s City Manager Frank Oviedo is willing to ignore the Riverside County Grand Jury in order to preserve the services of his own personal “gofer.”

Whenever there is any duty or position that needs to be addressed, Oviedo is able to hand it over to Willette on his behalf.

The dark side of this contractual relationship is found in the current language  of the current parcel tax measure, Measure Z, where the tax revenue produced by the proposed $28 per year parcel tax goes far beyond  the original park maintenance fiscal requirements, which previously financially supported the duties of  Community Services Manager Willette, and which will likely expand Willette’s “duties”  under the guise of “restore funding for recreational services/community events…,” according to the city’s latest “informational” brochure.

Can you say dance  and sewing lessons?

Does Wildomar even need to facilitate dance and sewing lessons?

In my opinion, the vehemence with which Wildomar City Councilmember Bridgette Moore supports the fiscally risky Measure Z (if it fails, perhaps another $100,000 will have been wasted, just like Measure D wasted $100,000 in June 2011) is to bolster the employment status of her friend and political ally, Paula Willette.

Perhaps, after all, the City of Wildomar is willing to cavalierly dismiss the Riverside County Grand Jury by failing to  timely submit a  written response in order to keep their future options open (such as hiring Willette as an employee without opening the position to the general public).

Wildomar’s elected officials and City Staff should be embarrassed.

But rogues generally revel in their bad-*ss attitude.

Comments can be made to

If Measure Z Passes…

October 20, 2012




With the decision of the Wildomar City Council to, in my opinion, prematurely make another attempt for a $28 per year parcel tax, currently known as Measure Z, they have created a double-edged dilemma for themselves from which they cannot escape, regardless of the outcome of the November 2012 election.

If Measure Z passes with a 66 2/3% majority, then they should have to answer to the Citizens of Wildomar for the following question: “Why didn’t you put a simple parcel tax on the ballot in June 07, 2011?”

If Measure Z fails to pass, despite the costly and questionable implementation and facilitation by a Northern California-based consultant, then the Citizens of Wildomar will understand that their elected leaders are like second-strike felons; “One more serious mis-judgment and you need to be sent away for good.”

Either way the November 06, 2012 election turns out regarding the current parcel tax measure, the Wildomar City Council needs to understand that their judgment and leadership skills are woefully inadequate.

Comments can be made to