Jun 182018
 

We’ve been hammering Stan Sniff for fiscal mismanagement for the last 9 months. We also accurately predicted that the local media would endorse Sniff for re-election because it was easier than giving serious consideration to Chad Bianco AND the local media are afraid of the tyrant.

Amazing things are happening after the election exposed Stan Sniff’s serious weaknesses.

Last year, Sniff demanded $50 Million More and got $18 Million of it. He also threatened to leave the New Jail empty. The Jail staffing issue is completely spun out in the article. (Imagine that)

However, what is ignored, is that the budget for 2018 is pretty much the same as the budget for 2017. What changed? Sniff got his tail kicked at the ballot box.

By their own admission the article says that this year’s budget is only $8 Million short of what the tyrant asked for. Again, this year’s budget is basically the same as last years’ but rather than being $50 million short, it is $8 Million Short in the mind of the tyrant.

The RSO employees and the Board of Supervisors are no longer to blame. Last year, Sniff claimed he needed $50 million more than they budgeted. He received $18 million more from the board. He also found $10 million in extra funding for expediting the declination of ccw permits.
Nothing ever came of the $50 million he demanded in January of this year. He lied to the board when he said he needed the money for unincorporated areas and the new jail. Somehow, none of Sniff’s gloom and doom occurred when the board refused the $50 mill request. This is a separate demand for $50 million more, versus the demand in 2017 for $50 million.
Not only did Sniff not need the $50 million, he found $10 million like magic! (Amazing things happen when the Sheriff gets hammered over CCW Permit Issuance – he finds money to speed up the denials as there are only about 400 more CCW’s than there were at this time last year)
It sure sounds like the Sniffmeister was deceiving the board for more funds. That’s $60 million of unnecessary tax dollars Sniff sought. These numbers reflect just this fiscal year which ends June 30, 2018.
But, wait, there’s more – he is returning $10 Million to the county from last year’s budget! That is $70 Million! (Perhaps the overtime rip-offs of Contract Cities were not as widespread this year due to scrutiny…)
I find this interesting as recently the Desert Sun was repeating Sniff’s it is all the supervisor’s fault talking points. They must not be talking to their endorsee often enough to keep the talking points in sync.
We had psychologically profiled Sniff in the past and had made an assertion that the dollar amount was a key issue for Stanley’s psyche. IT did not matter what were or how, just the cash baby.
This sure looks like proof. The story of Sniff’s fiscal gyrations will continue to be told while ICE continues getting stonewalled, corruption continues within the department and Felons are getting sprung from Prison in almost real time.

  3 Responses to “Stan Sniff Update: Riverside Press Enterprise Article is a Case Study in Bias and Half-Truths. Sniff’s Budget Agenda Exposed”

  1. Everyone should know by now that NOTHING is ever Stan Sniff’s fault. It’s never Sniff’s fault, just ask him and he will have a finger ready to point at someone else. Maybe his campaign slogan can be, Don’t blame me, it’s someone elses fault. Even that psycho freak friend of his Steve Grasha blames someone else for him. And all those retired friends of Sniff blame others for his epic failure in the primary election. It sounds like the court jesters on the second floor are now pointing the finger of blame at each other as their ship sinks into the abyss.

    Sniff’s administration is now casting blame at the Board of Supervisors for the multi million dollar back charges they are currently attempting to impose upon the contract cities. It appears that Sniff and his administration have done a very poor job of cost estimating and now they are presenting the contract cities with back charges to the tune of several million dollars per city. Of course the city leaders are furious because for years they have been told that all these extras were included in Sniff’s bid. Sniff has had all of his minions extremely busy trying to convince all the city leaders that it’s not his fault (a very common theme with Sniff) and that the Board of Supervisors is to blame for everything.

    One thing Sniff is NOT and has never been, is a businessman. If the Sheriff’s Department was a private business, Sniff would have sent it into bankruptcy already. He has proven himself to be an epic failure, but don’t blame him, because everything is someone elses fault. We are so sick of hearing him say that, Sniff please do us all a favor and just resign.

  2. When you’re child is given an allowance they must learn to budget the money or go without. They can’t whine and cry when they spend all the money. This is a lesson the Sheriff/retired Colonel Stanley never learned as a child.

    Stanley comes from a family who clearly “Spared the rod and spoiled the child.” Then again they probably don’t know about that since they were probably atheist too. Stanley can blame Stanley Sr. for his suffering, because Stanley Sr. never said,”No!”

    Stanley is just like his father. His family had a date Grove on Highway 111 in Indio back in the days. It was disgusting and filled with trash and debris. They were told numerous times by code enforcement to clean it up, but refused. It was said, Sr. didn’t care to listen to anyone, and was very arrogant. Sound familiar?

  3. I’m very surprised some of these Mayors and City Managers aren’t telling Sniff to stick it in his pipe and smoke it. When you have your cost estimators bid a job and then turn around right before it’s done and tell them you underbid it and now need more money, that is BS! Once again, Sniff abuses his position of power. Sniff is a LIAR!!

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)