Chico Taxpayers Association

At last, a somewhat more objective piece on the Chico sales tax measure council is working to place on the ballot (Spring ’22?) Of course it’s from the Redding news station.

https://krcrtv.com/news/local/chico-moves-forward-with-1-sales-tax-ballot-measure-business-leader-responds

The reporter didn’t go to a Chico city Staffer, they didn’t just stop some half drunk dooffass on the street, they went to the Chico Chamber of Commerce. Why is that important? First of all, the Chamber represents businesses all over town who will be affected by this increase. And, under past director Katie Simmons, goaded on by members Tom Lando and Marc Francis, they not only endorsed a sales tax increase but made an analysis of exactly where the money should go. In their January 2018 “Special Report,” the chamber recommended “$3 million for Chico PD, $90 million for roads, and $130 million for pensions…”

Here’s the blog post I wrote about it, but the report is no longer available at that link.

Yes, the Chamber was describing a “special” tax. Then Katie Simmons left to become the disaster relief coordinator in Paradise. Things have changed at the Chamber, under interim director and local businessman Mark Chrisman. While I get the idea Chrisman believes the city needs to put a sales tax increase on the ballot, he’d be more inclined to support a special tax.

“First of all, it’s a general sales tax, not a special sales tax. The general tax goes into the general fund which means it’s at the hands of the city council, how they want to spend the money,” says Chrisman during a phone interview with KRCR Wednesday. “There are two sides to this coin. There’s the consumer side paying the 1%, but then there’s the other side: how are those funds going to be used?”

Good questions, citizen Chrisman. A general tax can be spent on anything, and judging from the conversation at that May 2021 Finance Committee meeting, it’s going to the pensions.

The city of Chico knows they can’t get 2/3’s approval. At that May 2021 Finance Committee meeting, Sean Morgan made it clear he does not want to pursue a special tax. Since this meeting was closed to the public, available only on Zoom, I’ll have to quote the minutes:

“Mayor Coolidge stated we should include parks. Chair Morgan stated that if we say parks, police, and fire, that’s a special tax.”

Morgan also asked staff to look into a Transient Occupancy, or Bed Tax increase. He and Coolidge also want bond(s) attached to the tax, and Morgan wants a Pension Obligation Bond. That’s so funny, because in his preceeding report, Manager Orme denies any such desire.

“We keep hearing this is going to pensions and that is a false argument to be had.” A false argument? Really? Keep reading. Remember, these are the minutes as transcribed by the clerk and approved by every member of the committee and the city manager before they were posted.

“Chair Morgan asked if staff could bring a recommendation to Council that includes a potential sales tax, show the difference in revenue based upon a half or one cent tax, and he is not opposed to a TOT increase as long as it’s not crazy. The POB was before mass inflation and the rates have changed. He suggested using a pie chart that shows how this would all flow together.“

Services Director Scott Dowell was glad to oblige. “Director Dowell stated we’ll need more than $50 million, the City would need more like $100 million to pull that off. If we move forward on the pension obligation bonds, how will one affect the other?“

So there they were, plotting to convince us that the revenue increase would go toward infrastructure and public safety, all the while intending to use the revenues to secure a Pension Obligation Bond. The committee directed Staff to bring back another report answering those questions at either the July or August meeting. Both were closed to the public, available only on Zoom. When I tried to participate in a Zoom meeting, my computer cut out constantly, and despite messages and phone calls to the clerk asking for help, the meeting continued without me. That’s how much they care about “transparency”.

When the POB came before council, little Kami Denlay informed the group that it’s illegal to foist a tax, including a bond, without the consent of the voters. The rest of council ignored her. Fortunately I wasn’t the only member of the community that was watching, and I wasn’t the only person who reported council and Staff’s intentions to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. HJTA immediately responded with a Cease and Desist order, meaning, if the city moved forward, they would sue.

The city’s response was to pull all discussions regarding the POB from the public. Meanwhile, I am still waiting for the clerk to post the minutes for the subsequent Finance Committee meetings. Yeah, that’s right, closed meetings, minutes over 6 months behind. Want to know why? Because there’s really only one staffer who transcribes ALL the minutes, for every meeting. And then she has to have then approved by every member of whichever council, committee, commission or task force, and let then redact, or remove, any comment they made that they don’t want the public to see. In fact, you see nobody is quoted completely, you get the clerk’s summary of what was said. They list members of the public who address the group, but not what they say. In fact, Dave complained that the Zoom videos were not made available for the public, and the clerk simply responded that she is not legally required to do so! I heard that exchange, but it was not included in the minutes.

Knowing fully well there is a back log (there have been lawsuits over lack of minutes), you’d think Orme would hire more employees for the clerk’s office. Instead, he gave Clerk Debbie Presson a raise and then hired $100,000+ “Public Information Officer” Linda Gizzy. If you study up on the duties of the “clerk of the record,” you’ll find, she’s supposed to be our Public Information Officer. She’s supposed to insure that the people have all the information, instead, it looks like she’s doing just the opposite.

So I wrote to the clerk, asking her when the minutes would be available. I’ve been enjoying a somewhat friendly relationship with the clerk’s office, but I sure as hell haven’t had a response to that inquiry. So much for Sunshine! Oh yeah, Orme talked about that too, let me know if you agree:

“City Manager Mark Orme stated because of due diligence of staff and the policy makers, we now have more transparency and trust of the public.“

UPDATE: I never got any response from Chrisman or anybody from the Chamber, so I’m going to throw out a guess – they’ll endorse it. The chamber is partially funded by the city of Chico, they get 10’s of thousands of dollars toward their CEO salary, so I doubt they will rock the boat. Sheesh, I hope they surprise me!

I happened to read the ER the other day, when Mike Wolcott ran a swishy push piece about Chico City Manager Mark Orme. I’ll tell you what – Orme has been hearing his own name around town lately, and not just from me, and it’s pissing him off. So he called Wolcott, who is a stooge, and asked him, could he write something nice, and oh yeah, don’t forget to mention the tax measure…

“November 2022 may seem like a long time away, but there is a lot going on in the city of Chico government right now. A city tax is currently being planned to be on the ballet next year. Meet the person in charge of running the city of Chico day-to-day: Mark Orme.“

This is called “rebranding,” or changing a bad reputation to a good reputation. I learned about this tactic watching the various consultants who have conga-lined through the city of Chico and Chico Area Recreation District. If there were polls on city leadership, Orme’s ratings would be dropping about as fast as Joe Biden’s. Let’s face it – look around you, and ask yourself, how much has the city deteriorated since Orme rode into town in 2013? How much have the pensions gone up? How come Orme got a 457 Plan (special 401K for public workers)?

Somebody had to answer this obvious push piece, so I wrote a letter to the ER. It’s time to push back, and keep pushing, until Orme gets the message – GET OUT!

Chico City manager Mark Orme is correct, the state’s CalPERS program is dysfunctional and puts a strain on the city’s finances. It’s frustrating that the only solution Orme offers is raise taxes.

How about opting out of CalPERS? According to CalPERS, someone would need to accept responsibility “for sufficient funding to continue paying the retirement and death benefits paid and for future benefits”. If employees would agree to pay their own pension deficit, take more rational pensions, and pay more reasonable shares of the cost, we could all be done with CalPERS.

Employees pay 9-15% for pensions of 70-90% of salary, creating the deficit. Just look at the math. But, employees do not pay toward the deficit – the taxpayers are left on the hook for an increasing amount every year. Last year Staff directed $11.5 million from city infrastructure and services toward “extra” payments to CalPERS. If they won’t agree to ditch CalPERS, why not ask employees to share in the “extra” payments?

According to Transparent California, Mark Orme’s personal pension deficit is about $70,000. At a base salary of $207,000/year, Orme could easily afford to pay his own pension deficit and more than his current 9% share.

The ER reporter forgot to ask Orme why he didn’t recommend a 2/3’s ballot measure – here’s why – a simple majority measure isn’t restricted to public safety, streets or fixing the sewer plant. The additional revenues would most certainly disappear down the pension hole.

If you are unhappy with the current leadership and direction of the city of Chico, remember this – city councils come and go, but the city manager stays in place, making the same recommendations no matter who’s on the dais. Write your letters to council, the paper, let them know how you feel about Orme’s tax measure.

NOTE: Here’s a union mouthpiece from Glenn County who decided to chime in on Newsbreak App:

Jeremy Lazarus16h ago – This writer knows nothing about PERS or the City’s budget. The current pensions are absolute trash and account for a very small amount of yearly budget. If employees are expecting to pay more without a wage increase then it is no longer a benefit and no longer a desirable job. I suppose you’d prefer unqualified workers responsible for the City’s infrastructure.

This is what I’m up against trying to shed some light on city operations and the pensions. As soon as you go up against a tax measure you find yourself up against the unions. When we opposed Measure A, the CARD parcel tax, we were fighting Chico Police Officers Association and the Service Employees International Union, the two biggest public workers unions in town. They put over $60,000 into pushing Measure A, because they knew it was intended to pay down CARD’s pension deficit, and whatever is good for CalPERS, is good for the unions. We beat their asses, sent them crying home to their mamas. And I’m ready to do it again, how about you?

Staff’s comment to my inquiry about the rental tax bothers me – “The recommendations will likely come back to Council in January.” So I wrote a letter to the editor about it. I think it’s important to remind people – the city is running a tax blitz, and it’s all about the pensions.

I was glad to hear Chico Internal Affairs Committee directed Staff to stop pursuing the rental tax on the Dec 6 agenda. But a staffer told me, “The recommendations will likely come back to Council in January.”

Staff has repeatedly recommended a “gross receipts” tax on both businesses and all rentals within the city limits, as well as an annual registry fee. According to the staff report, “The City could consider removing the unit exemption entirely requiring even renters of single family homes to pay the tax. Furthermore, the definition could be changed to residential and non-residential property, picking up any property rental within the City.”

Staff’s only concern is to “raise additional local funds”. They are desperate for revenues to cover their pension deficit, created by unrealistic employee contributions. Council has already approved a general sales tax increase for the 2022 ballot. A general tax measure has no restrictions on spending. The mayor has suggested sales tax revenues would be used to secure bonds. The city has already attempted to secure a Pension Obligation Bond without the approval of the voters.

They’re determined to ignore the obvious solution – instead of raising the price of everything all over town, Staff needs to pay more realistic shares toward their generous pensions, or accept smaller pensions. Council instead grants salaries over $100,000/year and 70-90% pensions, with employee shares only 9 – 15%, the taxpayers on the hook for increasing payments. Let’s change the structure of our payroll from Defined Benefits to Defined Contributions.

Juanita Sumner, Chico