Archive | CalPERS RSS feed for this section

Will the gas tax repeal make the ballot? Stay tuned!

2 Mar

Carl Demaio and Reform California are still working to put the gas tax repeal on the November ballot.  I believe (?) the deadline was Wednesday (Feb. 28) but have not heard whether they were able to gather the required number of signatures. 

Here’s what Ballotpedia has posted:

“The California Voter Approval for Gas and Vehicle Taxes Initiative (#17-0033) may appear on the ballot in California as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018.”

Scroll down and have a laugh – Jerry Brown says, “I can’t believe the proponents of this ballot measure really want Californians to keep driving on lousy roads and dangerous bridges. Taking billions of dollars a year from road maintenance and repair borders on insanity.”

Listen, Moonbeam, you should think before you speak. You can’t believe it because it’s not true – proponents of this ballot measure have repeatedly said the money for road repairs is available but being siphoned off for other purposes. You’ve also just acknowledged lousy roads and dangerous bridges, for which you, as Captain of our ship, are responsible, and therefore, liable!  And yes, taking billions of dollars a year from road maintenance and repair to fund your pension borders not only on insanity, it borders on corruption, Sweet Cheeks. Should we have a court martial? Maybe set up a plank? Ooooo – keeeeel haul!

I think Brown is privately shocked about the voter’s response, lots of people have signed. I’m guessing the petitions were turned in, but it will take a while to verify the signatures. 

We’ve been talking about hidden taxes, such as the “franchise fees” the city and county are allowed to collect from utility companies such as Comcast and PG&E. This gas tax was shoved on us by the governor and the legislature, without any input from the voters.  For years now they – including Jerry Brown – have siphoned their outrageous salaries, pensions and benefits out of the road funding. I’ve sat in meetings many times and watched the local agencies pilfer “restricted”  fund to pay down their pension deficit, while roads and other infrastructure in Chico have turned to absolute crap. 

The foxes are in charge of the henhouse People.  For example, Scott Dowell used to be the finance manager for Chico Area Recreation District before he got hired by the city of Chico. While CARD allowed two public swimming pools to deteriorate to sub-code and sub-ADA conditions, Dowell made a extra $400,000 “side fund pay-off” on CARD’s $1.7 million pension deficit, saying it would save the agency money on interest payments to CalPERS. Meanwhile, CARD management has only started paying toward their pensions within the last two years, “classic members” like CARD manager Ann Willmann are only paying 2 PERCENT.  That all happened on Dowell’s watch.  Now he’s running City of Chico finances.  Next Thursday I’d bet my last $5 he’s going to lay down a pretty wild argument for a sales tax increase. 

Cause taxes are their heroin. As long as they can get a fix, put off rehab for just one more fix, one more fix, one more fix…

Just look at Chico Unified School District – they’ve had a bond measure on almost every ballot since 1998, and the last three have passed. But they are getting ready to put another bond on the ballot, because they just got new demands from both CalPERS and CalSTRS for more money, more money, more money…

You probably think you hang around with a nice crowd, but if you send your kid to a Chico school – any Chico school – you are leaving them all day with a bunch of freaking junkies. Wake UP!

A friend of mine recently asked me if I knew city council member Randy Stone is running for Butte County Assessor. I was kinda bitchy – I told her I didn’t give a shit who was running for election, because elected offices don’t matter anymore – it’s $TAFF. And we don’t get to vote for them. 

But, voting is important, especially the initiatives. So I’ll gas up the old election buggy and try to get it out on the road, try to start posting some news about the local candidates, besides just…YECHHHHHHH!

cause we can’t and we won’t and we don’t stop…




City consultant: “more people, more payroll, more allocations” – this is how city of Chico management siphons money from the road fund into their own wallets

1 Mar

Thursday March 8,  City of Chico finance mangler Scott Dowell will give a dog-and-pony presentation about how the city spends money. That ought to be a gas, but instead, I attended yesterday’s (2/28/18) Finance Committee meeting to hear a consultant explain the process of “cost allocation”.

Dowell is disingenuous – who does he really expect to show up on a Thursday at 10 am? Oh yeah, I’ll just ask my boss if I can come in early and take two hours off at lunch, everybody does that! 

You know, I might have had bosses who would go for that, but only once. And you wouldn’t be allowed to discuss it at the work place, that’s a pretty standard rule of getting along with fellow employees  – leave your politics in the parking lot. So, in this way, Dowell is very pointedly leaving out the working class who would have to support the sales tax increase he is going to be selling at his “workshop”.

But, when you have limited time, you use it wisely. Who wants to hear a spin from the Fox in Charge of the Henhouse, when you can listen to a visiting watch dog? That’s how I see consultant Chad Wolford, eversince 2015 when he told council they were spending too much money on “overhead” – administrative salaries and benefits.

As the consultant describes it, cost allocation means, “central administration cost (also referred to as “overhead”) spread down to departments as operating costs.”  Just repeat that a few times, and remind yourself, “operating” means “actual work,” such as fixing the streets, or maintaining the sewer plant. 

Cost allocation is the process by which these ridiculous management salaries are cherry picked from all the departments. Makes it look legal and fair, but it’s really the same old system of moving peas under walnuts shells. Money is moved between restricted and non-restricted funds to pay for stuff that money was not originally earmarked for. 

What’s the use of restricting funds (to their original purpose, such as street maintenance) if you can just transfer them wherever you want to pay for whatever you want? This is the process by which administrators like Orme, Constantin and Dowell take grant money that was originally intended to fix streets and pad it into their wallets. 

The consultant is a nice man, he admitted to me, “this is a very complicated process.”  I replied, “No kidding!” That’s why  I had tagged him into the lobby of the building when he finished his presentation, I had to ask some additional questions. 

Well here’s something that he made pretty clear – the “changes”  (increases) in the allocations are based on staff and salary increases. “More people, more payroll, more allocations,” Wolford said. “Salaries and benefits have gone up, operating budgets are up…” 

So, I don’t think I’ll be bothered with Dowell’s dog and pony show Saturday – ‘scuse me, that’s Thursday March 8 – I already heard how the city of Chico spends it’s money. 

CalPERS nears insolvency – meanwhile city of Chico uses “cost allocation” to rationalize fund pilfering to pay pension costs

27 Feb

Thanks Dude, for this recent article regarding CalPERS insolvency. Former CalPERS board member and erstwhile gubernatorial candidate (2006?) Steve Westly has been speaking up about CalPERS growing pension deficit, warning the agency will collapse if it is not bailed out or “reformed.”

I don’t know what he means by “reform” – to me, this would mean, no more 70 – 90 percent of highest year’s salary at age 50 – 65, cut employer contributions to 10 percent (based on merit and years employed), and make the employees pay their own retirement package. 

Here’s an article from last year that chronicles this mess we’re in from the beginning.

Of course now everybody is screaming for “reform” because they know the system is about to collapse and they won’t get their dough.  Most of these “reformers” mean, taxpayers pay more. That’s what the city of Chico is up to at tomorrow’s Finance Committee Meeting.

Chris Constantin first introduced the concept of “cost allocation” a couple of years ago. It is a process by which they transfer money out of the general fund to pay salaries, benefits and pensions for city employees. It’s very confusing, unless you are the consultant who is hired to explain it every year. That would be Chad Wolford. 

Two years ago, Wolford told us we were “spending too much money on overhead” – meaning, management salaries, and particularly, management pensions.

In response, the city raised pension shares but made adjustments to ensure employees would not have to pay. Mark Orme and Chris Constantin accepted what amounts to 401K plans, which they report will not add to our pensions costs – wrong again Chris! They still got salary increases, and we will have to pay them that deferred compensation, it just routes CalPERS. To me, this is just greed. Look at their salaries:

Orme demands over $200,000 in base salary, but expects us to believe he has our best interests at heart? 

Tomorrow, at an 8:30 am Finance Committee meeting, they will go about “allocating” their fancy lifestyles onto the backs of the taxpayers, taking money that should be providing street maintenance, sewer plant updates and other services for those of us who pay for them, and putting it toward their 70 – 90 percent (do the math on Orme’s salary) pensions. Read the report here:

This is sneaky stealing, if you ask me. The taxpayers are never privvy to this stuff – wonder why they hold these meetings at 8:30 in the morning while you are rushing to work? 



Janus vs AFSCME – “the worker bees” are rising against their oppressors! Go bees!

27 Feb

Yesterday the Supreme Court was scheduled to take up the case of Janus vs AFSCME ( American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees). The center of this case is what unions call “fair share fees” – fees conscripted from workers who do not wish to be members of a union. This practice (which reminds me of the kid who positions himself on a corner near the school and bullies others out of their lunch money) is protected by “collective bargaining agreement”.  Both the city of Chico and the county of Butte have made such an agreement with the unions. This is what used to be referred to as a “closed shop” so a lot of proponents of Janus vs AFSCME are calling for “right to work” legislation.

The plaintiff in the case, an Illinois public employee named Mark Janus, does not want  to pay into the unions. According to  CBS News, “Janus has painted his complaint as a free speech issue. ‘I’m definitely not anti-union. Unions have their place and many people like them… I was never given a choice…'”

The media is warping this issue – journalism isn’t what it used to be. Notice the use of the word “painted“, as though Janus is being deceptive. That’s not news, it’s opinion. The appropriate way to say it would have been, “Janus says…” or even “Janus claims…”,  but the use of the word “painted” is obvious slant. In the past week I don’t think I’ve seen or heard one straight news story on this issue. Today I added a category to the blog – “Our News Media Sucks”.

Opponents say  the case “could fundamentally change the workplace for public employees nationwide. A court ruling against the union, an outcome many believe likely, could seriously dent public unions’ coffers by depriving them of a major source of these so-called ‘fair share’ fees.”   Yeah, unions are scared, because “Without fair-share fees, many unions could lose a large share of their funding. Across the border from Illinois, AFSCME Iowa Council 61 enjoys an overwhelming 83 percent support among covered workers — but only 29 percent of those workers are dues-paying members.”

What does that say to you? People are forced to pay, but still won’t join? Won’t add their voice? Why?

When my father was forced to pay union dues to get jobs as owner/operator of his 18-wheeler, he was very bitter, saying they took more than he spent on gas, tires, and other maintenance. He had it worked out to the per hour charge, it pissed him off so much. We’d ask him what the union did for him, and he said that was the joke – his employers were mostly small businessmen, friends of his, he didn’t need a union. But, highway construction is publicly financed, and the state required them to pay union dues.

Years after my dad died, Teamsters forced the company for whom he had worked many years out of business.  Here’s a related story – Teamsters bragging about putting employers out of business.

Again the slant is pro-union – “the latest victory,” as though private business and the jobs it creates are bad for California.  My dad drove  truck for nearly 50 years, and he never complained about his employers in front of us kids, neither did his co-workers, but they bitched about Teamsters over lunch, over beers, even over their CB radios. 

Remembering those days in the cab of my dad’s Peterbilt, it offends me  that some of these public employees even describe themselves as “workers”.  Soft-handed pussies.

Here’s a very interesting point: “The result of weaker unions is often less money for workers — whether unionized or not. After Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker restricted public-employee unions in the state, the rate of unionization fell by 6 percentage points and teachers’ salaries dropped by an average of $10,000. “

And they’re saying, that’s bad? Cause I’m saying, public employees have been overcompensated for the last 10 or more years, and it’s driving the economy into the dirt. If getting rid of collective bargaining and “fair share” theft is what we need to do to get rid of these over-fed blue jays, then let’s go for it!

The unions are trying to tell us this is bad for “workers” when it’s ” workers” who are pulling the rug out from under them.



City financial officer gives a much different figure for utility franchise fees – ???

16 Feb

City of Chico “Chief Administrative Officer” Scott Dowell finally gave Presson an answer to my question – how much money does the city of Chico receive in franchise fees from PG&E. 

I had found an article from Ch 7 news in Redding:

detailing payments to Chico, Butte County, and other local cities and counties, it  reported a much larger figure – in fact, three figures that added up to over a million dollars for fiscal year 2011-12.

 Chico$ 407,735.25 $ 201,282.46 $ 609,017.71 

Dowell came back to me with $690,768. 

Hmmm. Not sure what to think, I responded with the figures from Ch 7 and asked him where I could find this information in the budget.

Look Scott, I’m not calling you a liar, I’m just asking, why the difference in figures? Maybe he’ll come back and tell me how these franchise fees are based. The article indicates local agencies collect more in franchise fees every year, but maybe that was some kind of sunset thing, and the sun went down on it. I’m willing to give a person the benefit of the doubt.

Gee willikers –  maybe Ch 7 screwed up and gave three years’ figures? 

We’ll see what he says – I’m not expecting an answer before next Tuesday. 


The Buck Stops Here – sign the gas tax petition

11 Feb

I printed out a copy of the gas tax repeal petition, signed it, and mailed it in Thursday, I hope you will do same.

I am not contributing money to the effort but figure two more signatures – including my husband’s – will not hurt. 

Reform California is trying to get the tax measure onto the November ballot. Of course that’s a crap-shoot – what if the voters, heavily bent with public employees, pass it? Ever wonder what proportion of our population is public workers who  benefit from tax increases? Just ask Google!

This data is from the 2014 Census figures. Read the intro – education employees are separated out, the first number you see – 883,408 – is just state, county, and city workers. Scroll down to “Public Employment by Job Classification” to see school workers by state – select California. That’s another 633,301 for a total of over 1.5 million full time, pensioned public workers. 

Also according to the US Census Bureau, the population of California was between 37 and 39 million in 2014, and about 23 percent of those people were under 18, unable to vote. Last year the LA Times reported 18.2 million registered voters in California.

So, 1.5 million voters in that pool does not sound like much, until you take into account – how many voting dependents/relatives do these people have? 

It’s hard trying to predict what the voters will do. Will they even vote, is the question. 

I hate sitting back and waiting, so I try to act. Signing the petition made me feel empowered, as if I was doing something. I think others will act too, if they feel the effort will lead to something bigger. Overturning the gas tax is not only good for our wallets, it’s a strike against the outrageous and dangerous overspending that has become Business as Usual for California and much of the nation. 

My dad had a hat he liked to wear – it said, “The Buck Stops Here.” 




Gas tax opponents hold special petition signings around state

8 Feb

I missed the recent signature gathering event here in Chico – LaMalfa and Nielsen held another rally at Sinclair’s gas station over on Forest Avenue.

Apparently, local Democratic wag Bob Mulhullond was on hand with protesters to tell us we need to shut up and pay. Mulhullond is not above using fascist tactics to shut down his opponents, even sending in pro-abortion protesters. This is not democracy, it’s more like Gangs of New York. 

Mulhullond would like us to believe he cares about highway deaths, but he’s really worried about his wife’s and other public pensions getting paid. 

Luckily the effort in Southern California seems to be going well enough without us.

I wanted to sign the petition so contacted the website, asking where I could sign – they told me to download the petition, print it, sign it, gather any other signatures I  could, and send it in. 

And I  got this note from organizer Carl Demaio:

Two great developments on the Gas Tax Repeal Initiative to share with you:

First, yesterday we hosted two signature drives at gas stations where people could fill up for as little as $1.99 per gallon, got coverage on every TV station in the area, and created gas lines with as much as a 3-hour wait! We got over 3000 signatures on the Gas Tax Repeal Initiative alone from the events.

Well good for that. 

Here’s my message Chico, Butte County and state of California public workers – I’m going to shut down your  gravy train, and spend it on the roads. 

Holiday, stop whining about your salary.