Archive | Chico sales tax increase RSS feed for this section

City Manager Mark Orme and Mayor Andrew Coolidge are trying to mislead the public regarding the sales tax measure

12 Mar

In a recent news conference, Chico Mayor Andrew Coolidge chastised those of us who are unhappy with the direction the city has taken. “You have the choice to be a critic and complain about the issues we face, or roll up your sleeves, get to work and help make Chico a better place to live,” he said, adding, “Progress was never made by complaining.”

Roll up your sleeves? Who the hell does this total jackass think he’s talking to?

Coolidge likes to avoid the real issues that are causing people to criticize. He won’t admit, Chicoans have plenty to complain about. City manager Mark Orme boasts that, “The City of Chico says it’s in the best financial shape it has been in recent years,” the next minute telling Chicoans they won’t get the usual basic services if they don’t pass the upcoming sales tax increase measure. “It’s an opportunity for the public to make a determination of what they want their future to look like. I’m not going to advocate one side or the other, but what I am going to be is honest about the constraints on current resources.”

Despite his dire warnings, Orme continues to make sure he and the rest of staff get their pensions, funneling millions of dollars from city departments – money intended for services and infrastructure – into the Pension Stabilization Trust. Every year that Orme has told us they have deferred maintenance because they can’t afford to fix the streets or clean the parks, or guarantee our safety in our own homes, he’s paid increasing amounts toward the pension deficit. We’re under “constraints” but we are still able to dump $11.5 million into the pensions? Apparently Mr. Orme gets to decide who is under “constraints” and who is not.

I also believe Orme is publicly insinuating that the measure is a specific tax. According to NSPR, “Orme, however, made indications during Thursday’s address that investments in police and fire departments, road maintenance, homelessness solutions and small business support would be made.”

Council members and staff have said repeatedly that this measure will only require a simple 51% majority to pass. That means – Sean Morgan has reminded people – if they state any intended expenditures for this money, it has to be a 2/3’s majority measure, that would be dedicated to those specific expenditures. Morgan has made it clear that he, for one, wants a general measure that can be spent as council and staff determine among themselves.

Let’s all remember, council and staff wanted a Pension Obligation Bond until Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association made it very clear that such a bond had to go before the voters, and threatened to sue the city of Chico if any such bond was passed without voter approval. And it would have had to get 2/3’s approval.

When Yuba County used specific promises to pass a simple majority tax measure, they were sued by HJTA and two Yuba County citizens. The first judge decided against the county, but the county used taxpayer money to take it to a higher court, where their appeal was approved. Very unfortunate for the taxpayers of Yuba County.

Let’s not make the same mistake in Chico. We have to make sure the voters get the straight facts. Don’t depend on Mark Orme to “educate” anybody.

I’d also discourage people from participating in the online survey – they can screw your submission any way they want. That’s why your responses are not made public on the site, you don’t even know if they are read by anyone but Staff.

Instead, notify your district representative, and include the entire council in your email, that you will not support this tax.

I knew cars and even bikes were a hot commodity in Chico, but socks and underwear?

9 Mar

I think most Chicoans would agree with me – our town is suffering an unbelievable crime wave. Today it really hit me – I went to buy socks at Walmart, and I had to ring a bell for assistance, because socks and underwear are now in glass, locked cases. I had to point to the pack of socks I wanted and then wait for the employee to take out a key and hand me the socks. Maybe I’m the last one to know – I found a lot of articles about it online, dating back about a year.

“There’s a good reason that specific Walmart has added security to stockings and underpants: theft.”

But not all Walmart stores are doing it, just those stores that are seeing significant losses due to theft. 

“‘Some products are subject to additional security. Those determinations are made on a store-by-store basis,’ Walmart headquarters said in a statement to Bring Me The News. “

So, hmm, Chico a hotbed of sock and underwear thieves, very interesting… uh, I mean, embarrassing. I knew cars and bikes are hot items, but socks and underwear? That’s troubling on a number of levels. First of all, whether it’s a loss, or loss prevention, the additional cost will be added to every pair of socks and skivvies we buy. Second, these people walk out of Walmart and into our neighborhoods, stealing packages off of our porches, parts from our cars, tools, etc. Posts I’ve seen on social media express frustration with Chico PD’s handling of the problem. Store owners as well as residents are left to take matters into their own hands.

So Walmart responds by hiring additional security and locking up everyday items. I’ll guess other stores are doing it too. I’d also guess that the discount stores have a bigger problem with shoplifting because of the reclassification of thefts of less than $950 as misdemeanors. The added employee costs, as well as the specialized equipment, along with the inevitable losses, are tacked onto our purchases.

That’s just another aspect of the inflation we’ve been seeing, in everything. A sales tax increase is just adding insult to injury. Let your district representative know what’s going on in your neck of the Chico woods, and how you feel about paying more for less.

Passing the pension buck – letter writer tries to ignore the “catch-up” payments, which are all on the taxpayers

3 Mar

Last week a regular letter writer responded to my last letter to the editor. He misquoted a figure, and then he falsely stated that most of CalPERS benefits are paid through investments.

I am concerned with an error in fact appearing in a letter in the Feb. 23 edition on your Opinion page. Juanita Sumner (who often writes good fact-based letters) is clearly mistaken. At the conclusion of her second paragraph she states that public employees pay (at the most) 27%* of their retirement benefit “leaving the rest … to be picked up by the taxpayers.”

(*NOTE – I didn’t say “27%”, I said 22.7%, and that’s the correct number. That’s a big difference with these numbers, pay attention. I’d also like to see ER Editor Mike Wolcott PROOFREAD SOMETHING once in awhile. This is how misinformation gets out there. )

At least 60% of every CalPERS retirement benefit dollar annuity paid (to about 633,000 retirees) at this point in time is paid from investment profits gained with the CalPERS fund (now at least $475B). This leaves local contracting agencies, like the city of Chico, or state taxpayers to pay, at the most, 27%. These percentages vary little from year to year, from fractions of 1% to a very few percentage points over the past several decades.

All public employees (yes, I am a retired one) have negotiated their contracts with administrators under the direction and supervision of elected public office holders. We get the government we deserve by who we elect. Each reader, citizen, registered voter should decide whether they elected the right folks.

It is obvious to me that special interest groups strongly influence who gets elected. In the case of the CalPERS complex, but not always transparent, workings those groups would include: political parties, labor unions, leagues or associations of cities, counties, school board administrators and probably a few others I can’t think of right now.

Abe Baily, Chico CA

I don’t think he’s a liar, I think he was misled, or more likely, misunderstood information he got from the CalPERS website. I know retirees, and they don’t understand any of it, they don’t know how close they are to losing everything with CalPERS. They mislead themselves about how unsustainable CalPERS is, and who really pays. Yes, as taxpayers, they pay – they have to drive the same streets we do, live in the same crappy town – but they are also on the very generous receiving end. So yeah, they really don’t want to know the truth. These crazy pensions are like heroin – as long as you get your monthly fix, you don’t care where it comes from, or think about whether it will come next month.

https://www.calpers.ca.gov/page/about/organization/facts-at-a-glance/asset-liability-management

There you have a presentation that is confusing, but if you pay attention, you see and hear what’s really going on. Look at the “CalPERS buck” – very misleading. The illustration tells us that 60 cents of every dollar paid to retirees comes from CalPERS investments, while CalPERS employers pay (an average?) of 29 cents and members, or retirees, pay 11 cents. Those employer and employee shares are close to reality, but what they don’t include, are the “extra” or “catch-up” payments made toward the deficit. That’s all on the taxpayers. (+the 29 cents!)

The deficit is created by unrealistic payments, unrealistic shares paid by members, and historically poor performance by CalPERS investments. While CalPERS made great gains this year – 21%! – there are a couple of problems. First of all, it’s a one-time gain made on the backs of people recovering from the COVID shutdown.

Second, it follows years of single digit performance. In fact, in 2016, the fund returned only .61% – that’s 61 cents on the dollar, kids. Up from 2009 when they tanked, going 24 points into the red.

With losses like that, year after year, CalPERS has racked up a deficit of over $150 million for Chico, up from $143 million just last year. That’s despite rising “pension stabilization” or “extra” or “catch-up payments” – last year, $11.5, $18 million projected by 2025. Staff and council instituted the Pension Stabilization Trust a few years ago, siphoning millions from every city fund, but the deficit just keeps going up?

How does that happen? Well, for another thing, Council just handed out a bunch of raises to cover any added share the employees have agreed to. It’s like digging your way out of a sand pit.

So, I had to respond to Baily. I don’t like the nasty tit-for-tat Wolcott likes to run in the letters section, but I’m not going to sit by while Baily spreads misinformation, using my name to do it. Sorry Abe, nothing personal. You old gas-bag.

Abe Baily is mistaken when he states “At least 60% of every CalPERS retirement benefit dollar annuity paid at this point in time is paid from investment profits gained with the CalPERS fund”.

Bailey misinterpreted that from the CalPERS website. Gains are up this year – a 21% return, attributed to COVID recovery. A one-time gain after years of abysmal performance. Meanwhile, CalPERS administrators admit, “Obviously these gains, we have a lot to thank from you (sic) our EMPLOYER community, cause your contributions, I recognize, have gone up a lot to help fund that improved funded status.” CalPERS demands more from employers every year.

Furthermore, there’s still the pension deficit, $150 million, up from $143 million just last year, created and perpetuated by a combination of unrealistic employee contributions and consistently poor performance by CalPERS investments. Every year the city must make “extra” or “catch-up” payments. Last year, Staff took $11.5 million out of city funds – money intended for services and infrastructure – and siphoned it into the Pension Stabilization Trust, which is restricted to those payments.  

Contrary to Baily’s belief, the taxpayers contribute the lion’s share, not only paying a share toward payroll, but picking up the entire deficit, with interest. At the cost of our roads, parks, and public safety services.

Employees should pay a larger payroll share, and should pay a share toward the deficit. Instead, Mark Orme suggests a sales tax increase, to replace funds siphoned into the PST.  

This is called, “passing the pension buck”.

Juanita Sumner, Chico CA

Tags: ,

Chico Finance Committee will have an OPEN MEETING tomorrow – sewer rate increase, sales tax increase, CalPERS pension debt update

22 Feb

Wow – tomorrow the city of Chico is having an OPEN MEETING! I feel like I’m waking up from a bad dream. Just last week I sent a note to my district representative, Worthless Reynolds, asking her why she had agreed to chair a CLOSED Internal Affairs Commission meeting AFTER THE STATE MANDATE HAD BEEN DROPPED. She never got back to me.

So gee, it was a big surprise to get this agenda from the clerk.

https://chico.ca.us/sites/main/files/file-attachments/2.23.22_fc_agenda_packet.pdf?1645208231

And wow, here it is: “The agenda is also attached.  Please note this meeting is being held in person at the Council Chamber Building… ” I just about crapped myself with glee.

And just in time for some stuff that needs to be discussed with the public in attendance – a sewer rate analysis, a presentation from the consultant who is going to run the tax increase campaign, and a “CalPERS costs update”.

The sewer rate analysis is the beginning of a rate increase(s) for those of you on sewer. The city has been eeking up the sewer rates eversince Dan Nguyen-tan, Scott Gruendl, and Colleen Jarvis were on council. Staff complains they don’t get enough money to properly maintain the sewer – actually, the problem, according to people like former city council member Mark Sorensen, is that the sewer fund has been “dipped into” to pay salaries and pensions that don’t have anything to do with the sewer system. That’s called “allocation” – just type that, or “Chad Wolford”, into the search bar at the upper right of the blog and you’ll see I’ve written a lot about that here.

They’re going to tell us it’s because the sewer is over-whelmed – that is a lie. During the Paradise evacuation, they told us the sewer was running at less than half capacity, but still tried to say the evacuees were overwhelming it. Keep an eye on this conversation, it’s going to be full of shit.

Then we’ll hear from consultants Clifford Moss about their “PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY” regarding the sales tax increase measure. Meaning, the pitch they will give us to make us want to raise our own taxes. Please note – this is being done with $91,000 in taxpayer money. The irony is so rich it’s giving me the farts.

And then, the piece de resistance – finance department staffer Barbara Martin will give us the most recent “actuarial report released by CalPERS, the results of the recent Asset Liability Management (ALM) process CalPERS completed and steps that have been taken to manage costs.” This is important, because this is the reason for both the sewer rate and sales tax rate increases. Here’s the report from CalPERS. There are several videos here, if you really want to see why Chico is turning into a total shithole, watch this. There will be a quiz.

https://www.calpers.ca.gov/page/about/organization/facts-at-a-glance/asset-liability-management

Tags: , ,

Recipe for a pension deficit

3 Feb

Employer Share Employee Base Share Employee Cost Sharing Total Employee Contribution  “Classic”                                               “Pepra” – employees hired after 2013
CME 7.54% 8% + 6% = 14.00%         CME 7.54% 7.50% + 6% = 13.50%CPSA 7.54% 8% + 6% = 14.00%        CPSA 7.54% 7.50% + 6% = 13.50%CNF 10.54% 8% + 3% = 11.00%        CNF 10.54% 7.50% + 3% = 10.50%DIR 10.54% 8% + 3% = 11.00%         DIR 10.54% 7.50% + 3% = 10.50%L39 10.54% 8% + 3% = 11.00%         L39 10.54% 7.50% + 3% = 10.50%SEIU 10.54% 8% + 3% = 11.00%       SEIU 10.54% 7.50% + 3% = 10.50%UPEC 6.86% 8% + 6.68% = 14.68% UPEC 6.86% 7.50% + 6.68% = 14.18%

CalPERS SAFETY – Classic                  CalPERS SAFETY – PEPRAEmployer Share Employee Base Share Employee Cost Sharing Total Employee ContributionCFSM 19.42% 9% + 3% = 12.00%      CFSM 19.42% 13.75% + 3% = 16.75%CPM 19.42% 9% + 3% = 12.00%        CPM 19.42% 13.75% + 3% = 16.75%CPOA* 13.42% 9% + 9% = 18.00%    CPOA* 13.42% 13.75% + 9% = 22.75%IAFF 19.42% 9% + 3% = 12.00%         IAFF 19.42% 13.75% + 3% = 16.75%

Gee, scuse me, but this above is what an answer from City of Chico Human Resources staff looks like. I asked the HR staffer for the most recent figures on the shares employees pay toward their own benefits, and she sent me a spread sheet. I’m not accusing her of anything, but it’s just about impossible to cut-and-paste a spread sheet. First she tried to pretend she didn’t understand the question, it took me a couple of days, asking the same question over and over until she sent me this chart. I guess she thought she was throwing toothpicks at a vampire.

So, here, let’s sort that mess out.

Let’s take the management unit, CME – meaning, Mark Orme and other department heads (public safety management, as you see further down, is separate). The chart is divided between “Classic” and “PEPRA” employees – Classic being, employees hired before 2013.

“Classic” Employer Share – 7.54%

Employee “base” share – 8%

Employee Cost Sharing – 6% – this is the amount of the former “Employer Share” that the employees have agreed to pay.

See there – the total “contribution” for management staff, some of the highest paid city employees – Employer + Employee contributions – is only 21.54%. For salaries in excess of $100,000/yr. Orme makes over $200,000, and only pays 14%, or $28,000/year. The taxpayers add another $15,080. For a pension of 70% of his highest year’s salary, or $140,000. Plus Cost of Living Increase. Plus benefits.

That kids, is why we have a pension deficit. Orme’s personal deficit is about $70,000. He’s been working for Chico since 2013. He started at a salary of about $189,000, increasing to his current “base pay” of $207,000/yr. He started out paying NOTHING toward his pension or benefits. That’s right, until the last few years, MANAGEMENT PAID NOTHING. Pressure from groups like ours led to tiny incremental increases, but the damage was done. A guy with a $189,000 starting salary, paying nothing, but expecting 70% of his highest year’s salary in pension – how can that be sustainable? And he knew exactly what he was doing, they all do.

While Orme keeps crowing that he and other employees now pay more of the “employers” share, they’re also getting salary increases that more than cover their increased shares. Of course that raises the debt, and the taxpayers are still on the hook for as much as 80% of the total cost.

Here’s a note for you “defund the cops” folks – the cops and fire department pay more than anybody. Look at the chart.

CPOA* Classic: Employer Share -13.42%; Employee base share – 13.75%; + Employee Cost Share – 9% = Total employee contribution – 22.75% The total contribution is almost 36%. Of course, that still creates a deficit. And again – the “employer share” is deceiving, we, “the employers” are on the hook for the deficit too. Including interest. And Cost of Living Increase.

So, if all this is confusing, let me give you a picture: You’re in an 8 foot hole on the beach, and the sand is crumbling in around your head. You shovel and scrape as fast as you can, but the sand is quickly building around your ankles. Suddenly you notice a person – Mark Orme – on top, shoveling sand right in on you. Faster and faster. You notice a group of seven others – that would be council – shoveling right along with him. That’s the pension deficit folks, and we can’t wait for Orme to bring us a ladder.

The tax measure he’s bringing us is just more sand.

COVID inflation hits the poor hardest – meanwhile, Chico gets ready to increase sewer rates, again…

28 Jan
California’s poor face new dilemma: inflation

“There’s no question that the massive shutdown in much of the state’s economy, ordered by Gov. Gavin Newsom to battle the pandemic, made things worse for the millions of Californians already feeling economic distress.“

Yes, the shutdown, not COVID, has been the main source of our miseries in California. In Newsom’s California, the rich got richer, and the poor got poorer.

“While most workers in upper-income brackets could adjust by continuing to work from home, Californians in low-wage service sectors such as hotels and restaurants saw their jobs disappear.“

California has the highest gas tax in the nation – although, sometimes Pennsylvania edges us by a percentage of a cent. Ironically, both Pennsylvania and California are listed in the bottom 10 as far as roads go. Of course the price of gas affects everything.

“Overall, living costs in California and the four other Pacific Rim states are up 8.2% in the last two years, driven by especially sharp jumps in the costs of food, energy and automobile fuel, PPIC calculated.“

And not necessarily in that order – the price of gas drives up the cost of food and all other commodities. And they’ve admitted, as we buy more, they raise the prices, so it’s obviously manipulated with the blessing of the government. Think ENRON SCANDAL.

https://www.investopedia.com/updates/enron-scandal-summary/

What is the city of Chico doing to help the poor? Well, at present they sit in closed meetings discussing tax increases. The Finance Committee meeting at which they discussed their plans to raise sewer fees via such schemes as a “volume tax” or lease/sales of the sewer plant was closed to the public, as admitted by the clerk. The rest of the meeting was continued to a special meeting scheduled for this coming Monday (1/31/22). They held their discussion of the Community Grant Block Funding awards, but went right ahead and discussed the sewer taxes in a closed meeting. I can’t believe people don’t see that as a blatant move to keep us from knowing what is actually going on with city finances.

Here’s a blast from the past – an article from the Humboldt Times Standard, about a 2011 sewer increase – 22%. Read the article – it sounds like the city didn’t really inform the public, and people were not aware that they could protest the rate hike formally.

Chico sewer fees to increase by 22 percent

Sorensen and Schwab are no longer on council, but nothing much has changed in how council operates. And that would be Staff.

Clerk admitted members of the public were not able to sign into today’s Finance Committee meeting, but it went on anyway

26 Jan

On Saturday (1/22) I posted the letter I wrote to the Enterprise Record. Wolcott ran it Monday. I have complained here many times about trying to participate in closed committee meetings via Zoom, and I’ve made city staff and council members aware that I was not able to sign in or even watch meetings. I’ve also complained here and asked staff many times to make recordings of the meetings available to the public – they simply respond that they are not required to do so. They are required by law to post meeting minutes, but do so at their own speed. As of Christmas they were 6 months behind, so I complained about that. The clerk came back from Christmas vacation and posted the missing minutes in less than two days, without any explanation as to why those minutes weren’t posted within two days after the meetings.

My district rep Kasey Reynolds told me that the meetings would remain closed for the duration of Newsom’s mask mandate, February 15. Instead of holding important business – including various tax increases – until the public could be included, they scheduled an 8am Finance Committee meeting for today. Frankly, I’ve given up on trying to sign in. I have work to do, I can’t sit around all morning being held out of public meetings by the forehead. I was surprised to receive a notice from the clerk’s office about a half hour into the meeting.

We are having difficulties with Zoom this morning.  Please try the link again.

I received this message while I was at the grocery store. My grocery store does not enforce the mask mandate. Neither does the home improvement store at which I purchased a new washing machine this morning. I think that’s ironic – businesses I patronize are not supporting the mandate, why is the city of Chico still holding citizens out of meetings?

Today the agenda included discussion of a sewer tax. The city wants to tax the public according to how much water they use, water we not only already pay for, but water on which we pay a 5% Utility Users Tax.

And then there’s this scheme – read carefully, they’re basically issuing bonds on your toilet, another attempt at taxation without public approval:

For Option 1, The utility issues bonds secured by net revenues of the utility to pay the “sales” price. The General Fund receives an upfront cash payment from the utility. Alternatively, the City can do “seller financing”, where the City’s General Fund owns a note payable by the utility over time for the purchase price of the sale. In either the scenario, the utility is generating income for the General Fund, over and above what can normally be done under Proposition 218.
If the “sales” price is paid entirely upfront, and if the publicly offered bonds used to finance the
sale were sold on a tax exempt basis, then the proceeds of the sale/bond issue must be used by the City for public improvements. If the “sales” price is paid over time through “seller” financing, then the annual payments can be used by the City for any lawful purpose.

Read it again. They want to sell the sewer plant to themselves, and then issue bonds to pay themselves back? They put the money in the General Fund, and then it can be used for anything, and that’s going to be the pensions.

Read more here:

https://chico.ca.us/sites/main/files/file-attachments/1.26.22_fc_agenda_packet.pdf?1642784160

Mayor Andrew Coolidge and council member Sean Morgan are on the committee, Morgan is the chair. These guys are already under recall. Let them know how you feel about them planning to raise our taxes in meetings they have closed to the public.

andrew.coolidge@chicoca.gov

sean.morgan@chicoca.gov

Tags: ,

City staff reports not everybody has adequate internet participate in remote meetings, but Council continues to close the meetings anyway – all the while discussing ways to raise our taxes

22 Jan

In the early 2000’s, the phone company came through our mid-Chico neighborhood, replacing the phone lines. They were out there for about two weeks, our service was interrupted, and we were able to chat with them about what was going on. The senior technician told me, “people all over this town are paying for internet, but they’re not getting it.” He said the phone lines were over 50 years old, and starting to crumble. He said we were lucky to get phone service.

Well, now that he had mentioned it, we realized – since we had moved into that house in 2001, we’d immediately found that we got better reception for our phone in the front yard. We also noticed that many of our neighbors would stand in their front yards, talking on their cell phones. It was an “a-HA!” moment.

We were new to internet, it hadn’t occurred to us – our internet would be out for days at a time, and we just figured that was par for the course.

Here we are, 2022, and it hasn’t changed much. We have better phone service, but our internet is still sketchy, we’ve had to learn to turn devices on and off to reconnect. I found out how weak it really is when I tried to participate in Zoom meetings after the city closed meetings to the public in 2020. I just couldn’t get into the meetings a lot of the time, and while staff was sympathetic, they couldn’t help me – they don’t run the internet.

When I tried to “attend” a Finance Committee meeting last year, I was unable to get in. I called the clerk on my phone as instructed, but neither she nor the IT guy could get me in. When they informed committee members via email (which is funny, they could get my emails but I couldn’t get into the meeting), Randall Stone was the only member who seemed concerned. Meanwhile, Sean Morgan observed, “she must have poor internet...” – as if that was my fault?

Fast forward to Mark Orme’s scheme to sell us internet service. Orme is planning to use COVID relief money to get into the internet business – $4.8 million – telling us he can offer it at a more affordable rate. While I don’t understand the mechanics of this proposal, it’s very clear – staff and council know we don’t all have equal access, but they keep closing the meetings and telling us we can “participate” via Zoom.

https://www.actionnewsnow.com/news/local/chico-city-council-unanimously-votes-to-approve-the-interim-broadband-master-plan-moving-closer-to/article_adcd2f6a-8a18-52e2-bd9b-bbb1665c40a2.html

According to the city’s consultant ($$$$), there’s not only gaps in service, it’s based on how much you can pay. So they are shutting out people who could least afford all the taxes they are bringing up in their closed meetings.

“There are gaps in affordability in Chico and there are gaps in service availability meaning that it is not ubiquitous. There are different pricings and different availabilities in different areas of town based on the infrastructure available,” said EntryPoint Networks Solution Services Director Bruce Patterson.

That’s right, “based on the infrastructure available…” So yes, we’ve been paying for service we don’t get, and with Staff’s knowledge.

Patterson says the average person pays per megabit is around 70 cents but says he’s seen cities using this same model that people pay as little as 3 cents per megabit.

And here finance director Scott Dowell admits those of us who don’t have good internet are “at a disadvantage…” This isn’t what they said when I was struggling to get into that meeting.

“You are at a disadvantage if you do not have a speedy, reliable internet service. We’re almost shifting the concept that, shouldn’t we treat internet service as a utility that everyone should have access to at a reasonable price?” says Dowell during a phone interview with KRCR Tuesday morning.

I’m fed up with the closed meetings. When I complained to my district rep, Kasey Reynolds, she just shrugged it off. “We discussed meetings last night, we will be having the next two by zoom (while the Governor has indoor mask mandate still) then returning to in person meetings. Trust me I would rather be in person too i hate zoom!“

She has obviously heard the consultant’s report regarding the state of our internet infrastructure and service, but she unapologetically tells me that meetings will remain closed for another month, while they put the tax measure on the ballot. Having hired a consultant with taxpayer money already, in closed meetings. I’d like to see the screen door bust her right across the ass next November, but I don’t have the money to run against her, I’m hoping some good candidate will step forward. We’ll see.

So I did what I usually do, I wrote a letter to the editor.

As the city of Chico uses taxpayer money to pursue a sales tax increase measure, discusses a consumption-based sewer tax, and anticipates a state-wide rental tax, they continue to work in meetings closed to the public. Staff and council claim the meetings are available on Zoom, even while acknowledging that internet service in Chico is not equitable.

According to the city’s consultant, “There are gaps in affordability in Chico and there are gaps in service availability meaning that it is not ubiquitous… based on the infrastructure available.”

When I tried to participate in a morning Finance Committee meeting via Zoom last year, I made it clear to Staff and committee members that I was not able to sign into the meeting, it kept cutting out. Sean Morgan observed, “she must have poor internet.” But the meeting went on anyway.

Council and Staff are well aware that Chicoans do not have equal access to internet, but they continue to close meetings to the public. Furthermore, committee meetings, even though it is possible, are not recorded for further viewing. When one member of the public asked about this, the clerk informed him that is not required. That is council’s decision.

Furthermore, council and committee members are allowed to review and redact anything they do not want in the minutes, keeping the minutes held up for months at a time.

“Taxation without representation – the quandary of a populace that is required by law to pay taxes but has no say in the matter.“

Juanita Sumner, Chico CA

 

Chico City Staff (Orme) is duping the taxpayers into paying a lot more of the pensions than they are telling us

17 Jan

I was cleaning my computer files and found this report from a January 2018 Council agenda. I’ve contacted Jamie Cannon in the city Human Resouces Department and asked her to direct me to a more recent report with current figures, I’ll post any response I get from her.

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=280&meta_id=57592

This is an old report but it shows how the city’s (taxpayers’) contribution GOES UP AUTOMATICALLY EVERY YEAR, with no input from the taxpayers, while any increase in employee share has to be bargained and approved by the employees.

This report also shows that we pay ALL OF THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY, WHICH MEANS, WE’RE PAYING MORE SHARE THAN IS REPORTED IN THE “REGULAR” PAYMENTS. They don’t include the UAL when they figure shares, they exclude it and just leave the taxpayers to pick it up. The whooooooole thing!

Tomorrow night council will consider asking employees to pay part of the city’s payroll share – 3 – 6%. But no mention of what a consultant told the Finance Committee in September 2020 – “each year the city makes two types of payments to CalPERS – the ‘normal cost’ or ‘payroll’, and the ‘extra’ payments toward the Unfunded Actuarial Liability (UAL)…”

https://chico-ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?meta_id=79891

Look at the city’s share of the cost, and compare it to the employee shares, and then join me in demanding that the employees pay not only bigger shares toward the payroll share but pay the same share of the UAL.

Chico Staff and Council using the COnVID scam to shut the public out of meetings – meanwhile, they’re using OUR money to hire a tax measure consultant

14 Jan

Another COVID shut down – are you getting sick of it yet? Being told to wear TWO MASKS? Being told to vax-vax-vax, then BOOSTER? Then mask anyway? Get OUT!

Don’t worry, while we’re sitting around wringing our hands, Rand Paul is kicking the shit out of COVID.

Here Paul takes Fauci on over his fascist “take down” tactic – using his $420,000 salary, to “take down any scientists who disagree with him.” Paul reads directly from emails between Fauci and friends. Fauci protests like a teenager, “you just attack me...” But, as Paul asserts, Fauci’s own email trail confirms it. Hearing his own words, Fauci just keeps protesting that Paul is out to get him. “You keep distorting the truth!” protests Fauci, as Paul reads verbatim the private emails between Fauci and other “scientists”. Fauci claims this is a personal attack – wow, just like the personal attacks he initiated against doctors from Harvard, Oxford, and Stanford?

What a world we are living in. Yes, politicians are using COVID for political gain. And as a power tool, they just like to screw people!

Right now, Chico City Council is using taxpayer money like a power tool, to hire a consultant to screw a sales tax increase up our collective ass. And they’re doing it in closed meetings, under cover of COnVID. I’m going to go back to calling it “COnVID” because that’s what it is – a big CON job, a SCAM, a FLEECING of the American public. With no real science behind it, Chico City Council used hysterical calls for reinstitution of the mandates to shut down “public” meetings, oh gee, just as they are hiring a tax consultant?

Here’s a good morning stretch exercise – put both hands back there on your ass. Find your tailbone. Run your finger up from there – that’s your backbone. Learn to use it, and write to your council now, tell them to get their hands out of your purse.

Tags:

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →