May | 2019 | Chico Taxpayers Association

Archive | May, 2019

CA Senate rejects Newsom’s “water tax” proposal, but it’s far from “dead”

I don’t know how many people are aware of Gavin Newsom’s proposal to add a 95 cent tax to our monthly water bill. He says the state would use the money to “help communities clean contaminated water systems.”

Communities? In most towns here, Cal Water owns the water systems. In fact, they’ve just recently raised our rates citing various projects they need to do, most of them necessitated by new subdivisions. Developers have already or should have paid fees. Why is the general ratepayer expected to pick up the tab for the for-profit, publicly traded utility provider? Shouldn’t infrastructure be what you are already paying for?

I was happy to hear that the California Senate rejected the idea.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article230438084.html

“A Senate budget subcommittee rejected Gov. Gavin Newsom’s water tax plan on Wednesday, instead recommending finding $150 million elsewhere to finance a safe and affordable drinking water fund….”

The Senate instead proposed that the money “be found” somewhere in the state’s projected $22 Billion surplus. That’s $22,000,000,000.

But, it’s not just a one-time $150 million fix, they want to establish a permanent fund, meaning, they will have to find a permanent funding source. They have ways of getting around the voters. “’It’s been a big stumbling block when it’s called a tax,’ said Steve Maviglio, a Democratic strategist who worked with water tax backers. ‘That’s the beauty of this. It’ll be in every budget.‘”

Again, why aren’t the water districts, particularly the for-profits, being made to maintain their infrastructure within the boundaries of their ever-increasing rates? They want to raise our rates AND put an additional tax on us.

The proposal still has to be heard in the Assembly. Contact Assemblyman James Gallagher at james@gallagherforassembly.com or by phone at (530) 420-5066 and tell him to reject this scheme. Legislatures feel this kind of heat, it really affects their behavior if it’s focused on the seat of their pants. “A water fee proposal died in budget compromise talks last year as Democrats worried about asking constituents to pay more.”

You may as well contact Senator Jim Nielsen at his Chico office (2635 Forest Avenue), by phone 879 – 7424, or at his Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/senatorjimnielsen

Tell his staff you’re not happy with the proposal the Senate came up with. Ask them why the district agencies aren’t paying for it.

And, you might join Reform California’s campaign to pressure legislators to reject this bill. I signed up for their mailing list and received news of this tax proposal in February, and I believe their actions were successful in getting the Senate to reject the original tax proposal.

12 Democrat Legislators Named Targets of Campaign to Defeat the Water Tax

Reform California is working on a number issues to “make California more affordable”. Check out their website at

News

Tags: Gavin Newsom water tax

Comments Leave a Comment
Categories Cal Water, Reform California, Uncategorized, utility rate increases

Assistant City Manager Chris Constantin lays out his scheme to “shoot (taxpayer) money into the economy at the time the economy is tanking…”

14 May

Just last month Chico City council listened to a consultant’s pitch about placing a revenue measure on the 2020 ballot. They voted to hire the woman, from the same firm that has passed two school bonds, EMC, of Oakland. They also approved a $60,000 budget to run a voter survey and then make a strategy for Staff to use the information gathered to twist sentiment in favor of higher taxes.

I attended an earlier presentation before the Finance Committee and taped it. I was shocked at the statements made – they talk pretty frank at these morning meetings because they know nobody will show up. I was particularly interested in the presentation made by Chico assistant city manager Chris Constantin. Constantin has hatched the same plot described by Sacramento City mayor Darrell Steinberg – a shells and peas scheme called “securitization.” People need to know about this scam scheme, so I wrote a letter to the Enterprise Record.

In 2018 57% of Sacramento voters passed Measure U, a half-cent sales tax increase. Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg had promised voters new revenues would not go to employee pensions, instead toward economic development. However, immediately after the election, Sacramento City Council voted unanimously to place the revenues into the general fund, which pays for salaries and pensions.

Lesson learned – with a simple majority measure, the voters lose control over how the money is spent.

Promising again to keep the money from going to the pension deficit, Steinberg proposes to “securitize” $25,000,000 of annual Measure U revenue to create a capital equity fund. That fund would finance the sale of bonds, to be repaid by Measure U receipts over a 25-year period. So, half the sales tax revenue would go toward creating more debt. And the bond money could be spent at council’s indiscretion.

City of Chico staffers have proposed the same “securitization” plan to our council, who plan to put a revenue measure on the 2020 ballot. Assistant City Manager Chris Constantin has proposed using a sales tax measure to fund bonds. Constantin told the Finance Committee the fund could be used to “shoot money into the economy at the time the economy is tanking…” He would not further explain this scheme to a skeptical committee, but assured Sean Morgan “we’ll contract the type of folks who can do it.”

Subsequently, Council approved up to $60,000 from the general fund to pay a consultant to talk us into this scam. Don’t fall for it.

Tags: Chris Constantin Chico Ca, securitization

Comments 4 Comments
Categories Chico bankruptcy, Chico pension deficit, Chico revenue measure, Chico sales tax increase, Uncategorized

State population “estimates” based on new housing contruction, not occupation – but Mark Orme still claims he has “hard numbers” on Camp Fire evacuation

10 May

I’m sorry to sound like a broken record, but again Chico staff is blaming our financial problems on the Camp Fire evacuees, and the Enterprise Record/Mercury Register are providing the spin.

State: Chico’s population grows by more than 19,000

“State: Chico’s population grows by more than 19,000″

“Most growth from Camp Fire survivors”

“Last week, the state Department of Finance released the figures, with Chico having grown by 20.7 percent as of Jan. 1, 2019. The population as of the new year was 112,111, according to the state, up by an estimated 19,250 people from a year earlier.”

Ah, again, there’s that key word, “ estimated”. But, city manager Mark Orme continues to use the words “hard numbers”…

“City Manager Mark Orme told the City Council Tuesday that it was “a huge relief” to actually have hard numbers rather than suppositions or assumptions.“

I don’t know what to call that, is it a lie, or just a fib, or just misleading? I mean, anybody who reads the story will see the word “estimate” repeatedly. Furthermore, below they admit that their “estimate” includes “people moving into Chico for other reasons.“

“The state figure is an estimate, but also includes people moving into Chico for other reasons.”

Reporter Laura Urseny says, “The state came to those figures by gathering data from other government agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles, as well as local and county government agencies.”

But if this is true, why do they need to make “estimates“? I had to ask Mark Orme for the actual report – he sent me a press release.

https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/e-1-2019-press-release-1556737607.pdf

“These population estimates are produced annually by the Department of Finance for use by local
areas to calculate their annual appropriations limit. The State Controller’s Office uses Finance’s
estimates to update their population figures for distribution of state subventions to cities and
counties, and to comply with various state codes. Additionally, estimates are used for research
and planning purposes by federal, state, and local agencies, the academic community, and the
private sector.”

Furthermore, these “estimates” are not based on any poll of human beings, but on the number of houses built. You know the popular adage – if you build it they will come. They actually “estimate” the occupancy of houses built and even the number of people living in each house.

“Changes to the housing stock are used in the preparation of the annual city population estimates.
Estimated occupancy of housing units and the number of persons per household further
determine population levels. Changes in city housing stock result from new construction,
demolitions, housing unit conversions, and annexations. The sub-county population estimates
are then adjusted to be consistent with independently produced county estimates.”

And did you read that – they then “adjust” their estimates to “be consistent” with each other.

So, the whole report is BS, and then Urseny adds her spin, for (BS)(BS)! (BS squared)

So, before you read the ER again, take one of these – still available on Amazon.com

My mom gave me these little pills.

Tags: Mark Orme liar Chico CA

Comments 2 Comments
Categories Uncategorized

Quiz Number 1: Sacramento Measure U

3 May

Our first quiz, based on this article:

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article229871849.html

Read the questions below carefully, refer back to the article, and go ahead and use google if you want, I always do. You can also comment below, and yeah, you can be anonymous. You can even use a fake e-mail, I wouldn’t know the difference.

If we get enough people to participate, I may award prizes. Next time I’ll do it in a poll, so there’s no cheating. This is just a fun run.

Sacramento City Measure U passed with what percentage?

2/3’s voter approval
100 percent
57 percent
it failed

What did Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg promise Sacramento voters if they passed Measure U?

the new revenue would not go to employee pensions
that he would “invest new city resources in economic development, disadvantaged neighborhoods, the creative economy and real pathways for young people.”
told voters the majority of the revenue generated by U would go toward a series of projects to uplift the city’s disadvantaged neighborhoods and to increase the city tax base
all of the above

What did Sacramento City Council vote unanimously to do after the measure was passed?

directed budget officials to place new Measure U revenue into the general fund, which pays for most basic city services, salaries and pensions
asked the city treasurer to come back in the coming weeks with a plan to securitize $25 million of new Measure U revenue per year to create a capital equity fund. That fund could raise about $400 million upfront through the sale of bonds that would be repaid by Measure U receipts
proposed the second pot of roughly $25 million in new Measure U revenue per year be set aside for achieving economic equity.
all of the above

What issue splits the council?

getting out of CalPERS
securitization of Measure U funds
firing their city manager
paying the pension deficit

What does “securitization” mean?

making sure to lock the doors at city hall every night
describes the process by which groups of such illiquid assets (usually debts) are packaged, bought, securitized and sold to investors.
placing revenues in secured funds and limiting them to specified uses determined by the voters
all of the above

What does “illiquid mean”?

solid
nothing it’s a typo
Illiquid refers to the state of a stock, bond, or other assets that cannot easily be sold or exchanged for cash without a substantial loss in value {a company may be illiquid if it is unable to obtain the cash necessary to meet debt obligations)
incontinent

ANSWERS: (backwards) 3, 2, 2, 1, 4, 3

Scoring:

6 of 6 – write a letter to Chico City Council

5 of 6 – write a letter to Chico City Council

4 of 6 – write a letter to Chico City Council

3 of 6 – hang in there, and keep reading

2 of 6 – hang in there, and keep reading

1 of 6 – really? You’re not trying. I made this thing easy enough for a high school kid to figure out, read the articles again!

Comments 6 Comments
Categories Uncategorized

Let’s have some fun learning about tax measures!

3 May

Let’s have some fun people – I’ve learned so much crazy stuff about “revenue measures” the last few years, I want to share! In future posts I want to share what I’ve read about the different kinds of tax measures and how they’re passed, but today I’d like to jump ahead with these two stories from the Sacramento Bee.

I’d call this lesson, “Stuff you should learn from your neighbors”.

Learn it, know it, live it. There will be a quiz.

Sacramento mayor promised tax money for your neighborhood. Will millions go to pensions instead?

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article229871849.html

Sacramento’s business community issues strong rebuke for Measure U tax money projection

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article229876304.html

Comments Leave a Comment
Categories CARD revenue measure, Chico pension deficit, Chico revenue measure, Chico sales tax increase

Too many managers leads to gross mismanagement of Bidwell Park – but watch Staff use it as an excuse for a revenue measure

1 May

A few weeks ago we were all so outraged over the cutting of 31 healthy oak trees near Chico Creek Nature Center. The chicken feathers hit the fan. I was glad to see some outrage over a long-time pattern of neglect and mismanagement of Bidwell Park. But, here again, city staff is using this as another pitch for a revenue measure.

This week city public works director Eric Gustafson admitted he didn’t make a work plan for that job – how would the crews know what to cut? Furthermore, he didn’t properly mark the trees. In fact, the city had no standardized system for marking trees, even though an arborist has been on staff for a couple of years now. And the staffer who was supposed to be supervising the crews “had been called away…” Called away to what? Lunch? The bathroom? What other “emergency” would prompt a supervisor to leave a crew with no work plan and no standardized tree markings? Cutting trees over a foot in diameter? This is incompetence.

This incident is just another example of how badly the city manages Bidwell Park. And Chico Area Recreation District took over the Nature Center several years ago – all these managers, but no management?

Gustafson has the nerve, again, to cry about his “staff shortage“. Didn’t he read this post I made at the time?

https://chicotaxpayers.com/2019/03/31/keep-rattling-your-chains-write-letters-to-both-papers-tell-them-we-know-where-the-money-is-going/

Gustafson continues to repeat The Big Lie – staff shortage. But he admitted to the Park Commission ” there were ‘a lot of assumptions made,’ and gaps in communications became obvious.” Assumptions? Gaps in communication? That’s not caused by a staff shortage, it’s caused by a lack of attention to your job. In fact, early reports of the incident said that Gustafson was notified of the cutting at about 11am but did not come out to the job site – less than 5 miles from his office – until about 2 in the afternoon. I think that’s dereliction of duty.

The Big Truth – they’ve deferred maintenance and cut the working staff in the park because they’ve been siphoning money out of the park fund to pay their pensions. Looking at the 2018-19 budget, under “expenditures” on line 996, I found $287,396 in “indirect cost allocation”. As explained by city assistant manager Chris Constantin, that’s money taken from the park fund to pay salaries and benefits of non-park department employees.

Constantin explained it one day in a meeting – as we sat discussing a certain issue, all the employees in the room, from the council members on the board to the city manager to the finance director to the clerk, and including any staffers who came in to give a report, or just because they might be asked a question, were being paid out of the pertinent fund. So when the Finance Committee takes up the subject of putting a revenue measure on the ballots for “road maintenance,” the road fund is billed for the time of every employee in that room, their salaries, benefits and pensions are taken out of that fund. That includes a percentage for the “Pension Stabilization Trust,” out of which is paid the “Unfunded Accrued Liability” (Pension Deficit).

So don’t buy this story about “staff shortage” – tell the truth. It’s time to trim management, in fact, get rid of “classic” employees who are only required to pay 11 percent of their benefits. New hires are required to pay 50 percent. Get rid of the bloated bureaucrats who refuse to do any work, and hire some young people with better attitudes who are willing to pay their own freight.

Tags: Bidwell Park, Chico Creek Nature Center, Eric Gustafson Chico Dept. of Public Works, Oaks Massacre Bidwell Park Chico CA

Comments 2 Comments
Categories CARD revenue measure, Chico pension deficit, Chico revenue measure, Chico sales tax increase, Uncategorized

Search

Chico Taxpayers Association