I got a great comment from Emily this morning. It was good to hear from somebody, besides me, and Dave, and BC, who is worried about the city’s intentions to foist a Pension Obligation Bond on the taxpayers, currently being discussed in closed meetings.
“Thanks for publishing all of this. I live in District 3 and asked both Denlay and Schwab (I do not consider Breedlove a serious candidate) about their plan to deal with Chico’s unfunded pension liability. Schwab emailed me back immediately with the same response she said she had already sent to you: best way is to make sure businesses can thrive here by improving infrastructure etc, state’s payment requirements are unrealistic and Chico is advocating for change, city has a pension stabilization trust w which to grow its payment funds, and city is considering a pension obligation bond though there’s “some debate” whether those are beneficial.“
Thank you again Emily, for taking time to engage the candidates. I had a discussion with Ann, and tried to contact Denlay, who never got back to me.
I’ll give Ann credit – she responds, and she’s honest. But I have to differ with her statement that the state’s requirements are unrealistic. Schwab and her full council signed contracts allowing over-generous salaries and unrealistic employee contributions, and now she says it’s CalPERS’ fault?
Furthermore, she admits there is “some debate” over POB’s being “beneficial“. That’s an understatement, given the warnings the consultant made about the volatility of such bonds. Why would these investments fare any better than CalPERS’ investments, which have been coming in at half or less than their projections? The consultant made it clear – poor returns, which he also said repeatedly are very likely, would be a disaster for the city. The bond holders would take our entire General Fund. That’s about all we have left, besides the already established “Pension Stabilization Slush Fund”.
And, I don’t think the consultants were being fully honest about the streets leasing deal, I think that’s even more risky than they are willing to admit at this stage.
Denlay’s response to Emily was worse.
“I had to follow up with Denlay, who did respond with her ‘instincts’ about how to deal with this problem: get diverse stakeholders together to understand the problems as a whole before working on a solution, need to get different stakeholders to agree on a plan to pay it down within 30 years, but that Chico has ‘many pressing issues even beyond pension liabilities,’ including illegal encampments, needle handout programs, and the state of City Plaza.”
That’s what I’ve been saying about Denlay – she is way over her head. She doesn’t understand that the pension deficit is the biggest debt the city faces, that it is being paid by the taxpayers at the expense of all our city services, and if we don’t do something about it, we’re in for BANKRUPTCY. Worse, she obviously didn’t watch the consultant’s presentation, which is just plain LAZY, girlfriend. The first thing I look for in a candidate is their knowledge of the committees. I’m going to guess she doesn’t even know what committees or who is sitting on them.
But she has been tutored about the POB, because a reader sent me the response he got out of her. That’s what she’s talking about when she says “get diverse stakeholders together to understand the problems as a whole before working on a solution, need to get different stakeholders to agree on a plan to pay it down within 30 years.” The operative word here is “stakeholders” – is she including the taxpayers? Because the consultant also made it very clear that this bond will not go to the ballot, meaning the taxpayers are out of the conversation.
Emily added, “I’m at a bit of a loss bc I can’t believe Schwab is even considering the pension obligation bond, but it doesn’t look like Denlay understands the issues very well.“
Thank you Emily, you put it in a nutshell.
But, I’ll still say, at least Schwab is honest, and she responded more clearly. I’ll also tell you something else about Schwab – she wants to get re-elected, I believe she wants to hold onto her seat until she is termed out, so I believe she listens to criticism better than most.
So, it’s time to contact Schwab – she’s not just the District 3 candidate she’s your mayor, and a member of the Finance Committee that is forwarding a recommendation to Council. Tell her what you think of this insane idea.
Tell her you know the sneaky, dirty truth that Mark Orme doesn’t want us to know. This isn’t the kind of bond that shows up on your property tax bill. It’s the kind of bond that drains city finances, written to be paid ahead of any of our other debt and ahead of financing services. This POB will show up in the form of PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICE CUTS, UNMAINTAINED STREETS, A FILTHY PARK, AND HIGHER SEWER FEES.
And there’s the next thing that will show up on the horizon – another tax proposal. They’ll let the streets go to crap, the park will remain a giant hobo camp, and you will continue to see “quality of life crimes” without any response from the cops. When they think we’re about up to here with it, they’ll offer another tax increase. They’ll tell us it’s for the streets and public safety. Oh yeah, remember – just like they told us the Trash Tax would go to the Street Fund. The truth is, they’ve voted year after year to put it in the General Fund, out of which they make their 7-8-9-10-and now 11 million dollar UAL “catch up” payments.
So tell Ann you’re hip to those kind of tricks. Yes, we need to address the pension deficit, head on. Meaning, THE EMPLOYEES, ESPECIALLY MANAGEMENT, NEED TO PAY MORE. And they need to do it without the raises council has given them every time they’ve agreed to pay more of their pension – how asinine is that?
That’s ann.schwab@chicoca.gov
Chico Taxpayers Association 
Denlay has the big money behind her. I’m afraid she will get elected and be a disaster. She along with the ice cream lady will go along with what ever Orme says.
Well, don’t be too sure – Ann has been a consistent top vote getter for years, I think she’s a strong candidate. I think I’m not the only person who sees Denlay for what she is – her real last name is Klingbeil, her husband is a cop in Nevada County, and she’s just a shill for the public safety PACs who want to perpetuate the CalPERS deal.
Schwab certainly has my vote after I heard back from Denlay on this one. I just can’t vote to hand over the city to someone who doesn’t understand the issues the city’s facing. I am also concerned about the homeless/drug/needles issue, but the underlying pension problem must be addressed in order to have a long term chance at solving these other public safety matters.
Well Emily, I guess we should have taken Breedlove more seriously – he sank Ann’s battleship!
If Denlay wants to play city council, well, let’s show her how it works. We need to inundate this woman with emails telling her to forget that her husband is a cop and look out for our interests instead of her own, personal interest. Which would be to make sure her hubby’s pension is funded.