CPOA MOU – cops asking for 5 percent raise, other cherries

17 Oct

I received the agenda for the next city council meeting yesterday, and there at  the bottom is a discussion of the cops latest contract proposal. Here’s the report summary – I’ll admit, I edited in the slashes in that first date, they’d been left out and it looked like nonsense:

Chico POA
Proposal – September 24, 2014
The following is a proposal for a successor MOU to the one expiring 12/31114 between the
Chico Police Officers’ Association and the City of Chico. This proposal is intended to begin the
bargaining process and introduce several ideas that the POA believes can create a better
environment within the City of Chico Police Department, specifically the Departments ability to
retain and recruit police officers.
When possible, the current MOU provision that would be affected is listed. Wording is NOT
final and will be edited to reflect any changes prior to submission to the City in formal

1. Three year term ofMOU: 11/11/15-12/31/17. 1.3A 

2. Salary. 5% increase effective 1/1/15, 1/1116 and 1/1/17. 5.1 and Exhibit B
3. Longevity. Add four new longevity step increases of 4% at the following length of time
of employment with the city: 10 years, 15 years, 20 years and 25 years. New Article
5.12 “Longevity Pay”
4. Pay Step Addition and Adjustment. 5.1C
a. Add a Step H at 5% salary increase.
b. Add a “training pay” step equivalent to $18 per hour.
5. Cash out Holiday Time Banlc Reinstate policy of allowing employees to cash out
unused holiday time bank hours each year. 6.2
6. Vacation Cash Out. Allow employees to accrue vacation above the maximum caps and
to cash out any unused vacation accrued above the caps at the end of each calendar
year. 6.5
7. Holiday Hours. City shall provide ten hours of Holiday Time Bank pay for holidays.
8. OT Pay for Holidays. City shall pay employees overtime rate for working holidays. 5.2
and 6.1
9. FICA and Dental to be paid by City. 6.3

I had to ask Debbie Presson to reload the reports yesterday, because she’d “accidentally” loaded them so that they could not be cut and paste. She complained that it would “take hours” to reload the reports properly, but she did it. I think they are required by law to do that, even though she tried to avoid doing it for years, telling me, she was afraid I’d edit them if they were available in cut and paste. I swear to God, she told me that. All the sudden Chris Constantin showed up and now she has to load them the way I ask. Every now and then I catch her loading them wrong and all I have to do is ask – she reloads them. She claims it’s a matter of a little button being switched. If a private sector worker made that mistake constantly I think they’d be out of a job, but Debbie not only stays hired,  she gets over $135,000 a year in salary and only pays 9 percent of her loaded benefits package.  I know it seems petty – but just think, what does “hours” of her time cost, to load reports into a computer? 

Of course when I cc’d Chris Constantin, he sent me the whole MOU, in cut-and-pastable format.  The summary only highlighted stuff the cops want to change – they want a 5 percent raise (bust a snicker!), they want their holiday and sick leave banks restored, they want, they want, they want. They  remind me of the bums on the street corners, hand out, mouth open, ass slackened.

Michael Jones provides a good commentary on the summary here,


but doesn’t discuss what I found in the whole MOU – the city will still collect union dues, including those  officers who don’t want to join the union (they call that a “service fee”), and then handing the money over to the same union that dumps money into every election. And, Jones reports, the CPOA has missed the filing deadline for their campaign report.  It was due October 6, but still is not posted. Jones dug into the muni code and found this to be a misdemeanor. Wow, let’s call the cops!  Jones was the one who busted the news that such an agreement, according to administrative law judge and ex-city council candidate Joe Montes, is a blatant conflict of interest. 

Here’s our dilemma: these contracts will not come up for discussion on council until AFTER THE ELECTION. And, I will remind Jones, they spend and collect late, so they don’t post their biggest report until AFTER THE ELECTION.  I hope he’s not too disappointed when his candidates, Mark Sorensen, Reanette Fillmer and Andrew Coolidge, are shown to be the biggest recipients of the cops’ attentions, and then all turn around and sign this contract with very little editing. They will also be first on board for the sales tax increase, that’s my next prediction. 

 NOTE – I didn’t catch all the weird typos in the summary, but it’s readable





15 Responses to “CPOA MOU – cops asking for 5 percent raise, other cherries”

  1. Michael Jones October 17, 2014 at 5:50 am #

    Well, Juanita, it may be so 🙂 If it is we will join hands and fight any sales tax increase. Debbie and Dani (Clerk and Deputy Clerk) put the violation information in their Election Handbook, so I got it from there, I think they have the power to fine CPOA (if I remember right). Here’s a letter I just sent to the E-R. I’m using Mark Stemen’s theme that Baby Boomers are greedy:

    The City Council is considering borrowing $8,000,000 from the Sewer Fund (see “sewer” on your CalWater bill) to pay ongoing city expenses. This is a city where a fire captain was paid more (in 2012) than the Secretary of Defense. A city where the city manager is currently paid 119% of what the Governor of California is paid. The Baby Boomers running Chico over the past ten years had a lot of fun spending on credit. Now they want a loan to make Generation X and the Millennials pay for it. The three GenX’ers on the Council (Tami, Randall, and Sean) aren’t going to have much fun running an indebted city government. Baby Boomer ex-mayors Holcombe and Schwab should come before Council and ask that cuts be made now, so that the pain is experienced while Boomers are still in power, and not passed on to the next generations.

    • Juanita Sumner October 17, 2014 at 6:49 am #

      Yeah, I saw that on the agenda. Where’s Sorensen’s angst here? He’s the one who complained they were “borrowing” fast and loose out of the sewer fund, and it was tapped. Now they’re doing all these hook-ups – some done illegally in the county without the county’s approval – racking up all this money in fees off people who have been misinformed as to the viability of septic tanks – sure, now they got plenty of toilet money to loan themselves. We got our notice, it’s very carefully worded to scare people into thinking they need to hook up. The notice threatens drastic price increases over the next few years – hook up now!

      Sorensen is in on the scam, and he’ll be in on the sales tax increase (already is), Fillmer and Gruendl too.

      Are you going to save some of that PAC money to fight the sales tax increase? I have some signs left over from Measure J, I’m ready to stencil and post them at the first notice of any rumblings. Start thinking up short, to-the-point slogans.

      • Michael Jones October 17, 2014 at 7:23 am #

        Yes, we have some money, I forget how much. The City Clerk has the forms listing it! I think it is too late to be much use by Nov 4, so we are saving it to shoot down the Lando-Steven’s tax plan. (BTW I like Mike Stevens, but not Lando).
        I think we go bankrupt if we don’t borrow the money from the sewer fund. I prefer bankruptcy, now that the judge in the Stockton bankruptcy has ruled that CalPERS is NOT exempt in bankruptcy proceedings.
        But I think the city attorney will inform us we must use all available sources of funds before pursuing bankruptcy.

      • Juanita Sumner October 17, 2014 at 7:31 am #

        And you still endorsing Sorensen and Gruendl?

  2. Michael Jones October 17, 2014 at 6:35 am #

    We have endorsed Gruendl, not Coolidge. But Kelly supports Coolidge privately. She’s a Republican. I’m a Democrat, and I like Gruendl. Gruendl has confessed and asked for a chance to fix problems. He’s as smart as anyone in city gov’t, he can get the job done IF he wants to. And we strongly support Sorensen. FIllmer is more risky, since she has no record, but she is very knowledgeable on public employee human resource issues, so she has the skills should she choose to use them for public good. Fillmer and Gruendl are similar in the that respect. We also like Willis, but not his 1/2% sales tax proposal. Molina has potential. Arim-Law is too closely associated with the nasty, lying Chico Democratic Club.

    • Juanita Sumner October 17, 2014 at 6:41 am #

      Sorry for the mix-up – when I read your synopsis of Coolidge’s ER chat, it sounded like an endorsement. The only sign I’ve seen is hard to read, and posted right next to a Coolidge sign – a little confusing.

      so, you’re endorsing the three tigers – good luck there. Hold on tight Babeee!

      • Michael Jones October 17, 2014 at 7:25 am #

        Coolidge has his signs everywhere. I chose too small of a font size for the signs, I guess I’ll practice again some other time

  3. Juanita Sumner October 17, 2014 at 7:34 am #

    Michael, are your candidates taking money or receiving any benefits from CPOA? That’s a conflict of interest, as you and Joe Montes pointed out.

    I voted already, by the way – I wrote in Joe Montes.

    • Michael Jones October 17, 2014 at 9:16 am #

      Yes, still supporting Sorensen and Gruendl. I like them.
      Fillmer and Coolidge promised (in writing) to decline direct contributions from Chico city employee unions (none of the others would). As far as asking the unions to NOT do independent expenditures, they declined to do so, saying that is the unions first amendment right, and they have no control over it.
      Well, I can’t find out if they got contributions from the CPOA except by looking over the candidate’s statements (since the CPOA didn’t file on time). We skimmed them at the clerk’s office and didn’t see any contributions from the unions.

      • Juanita Sumner October 17, 2014 at 11:29 am #

        let’s remind ourselves to look at the reports that come in after the election.

      • Juanita Sumner October 17, 2014 at 11:38 am #

        I’ll tell you what really stinks – Presson isn’t posting the current reports on the website, we have to go to her office to view them!

        What a c*&#!

      • Michael Jones October 17, 2014 at 12:02 pm #

        regarding City Clerk Debbie Presson and the FPPC campaign discloure reports: She told us she expected to have them posted online by the 8th I think it was. The problem is she has to (or is allowed to, I think the law says) redact the addresses of the contributors (the addresses are public info and can be viewed in the paper format). They are in a binder on the desk you first get to when you enter the 3rd floor of the municipal building from the elevators.

      • Juanita Sumner October 17, 2014 at 4:38 pm #

        sorry, I don’t have time to run down to the clerk’s office every time I need to see the information she’s supposed to post on that expensive website.

  4. bob October 17, 2014 at 1:23 pm #

    So CPOA never did turn in their PAC report (a violation of the law but hey, I guess when you’re a law enforcer you are the law) and now they demand raises plus other perks?

    And they have the audacity to demand this right before an election when their bloated compensation and benefits have already been brought to light.

    Well now we know who really runs this town. Face it, all the city council candidates are just puppets for CPO and the firefighters unions. There’s no doubt in my mind a sales tax increase will be on the next ballot and other fees, taxes and borrowed money will find it’s way to these tough feeders.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: