Archive | public employee contracts RSS feed for this section

No on Measure K: a look at the campaign contribution reports shows financial support is coming from those who stand to profit from the bond

22 Oct

The campaign reports are available at Butte County elections – 

http://static.netfile.com/agency/bco/

If you don’t know the name of the organization you want to check, look at the measure or candidate they support and you’ll find  their name.  

I’ve been looking over the contributions to Measure K, and as I suspected, it is being funded by people who stand to gain from the bond money – mostly construction companies and telecommunications firms.

https://noonmeasurekchico.wordpress.com/2016/10/22/who-is-funding-measure-k/

But the biggest contributor, at $30,000, is the California Charter Schools Association. It’s a no-brainer the local charter schools expect to get their chunk of this money. Under a great deal of criticism nation wide, charter schools have been accused of violating laws in their enrollment practices and have shown little real improvement over traditional schools, while draining a lot of money out of the school district by stealing students/ADA.  This donation to our bond effort looks like butter on somebody’s donut. 

In looking at all the reports, I didn’t see what I would call a legitimate donation from any local citizen’s group, just big donations from companies that stand to gain from the bond. It’s just one big juicy pie to these people, and we’re supposed to pay for it.

No on Measure K. 

 

School districts licking their chops over four revenue measures – it’s a lose-lose-lose-lose situation for the taxpayers and win-win-win-win for the unions

18 Oct

Today  as I darkened the bubbles on my mail-in ballot, I again realized – there are four school funding measures on this ballot.

  • State proposition 51 promises $9 billion ($17.6 billion with interest) for K-12 and California Community Colleges for “new construction and modernization” of facilities. 
  • State proposition  55 extends for 12 more years the “temporary” personal income tax increases enacted in 2012 with Prop 30 
  • local measure J asks $190 million for Butte-Glenn Community College District for “upgrading aging classrooms/technology, removing asbestos/unsafe gas lines…” They mention programs for veterans.
  • local measure K asks $152 million for Chico Unified School District, citing leaky roofs, rotten plumbing and electrical, and the need to construct and modernize classrooms,  with a mention of disabled students’ access

The first thing I notice is the repeated claims that our schools are crumbling to the ground, and now we see, Chico schools have not achieved compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, passed in 1990. They keep coming back every  four years with the same claims – when, oh when, will they actually fix the schools?   

Just recently I posted this story from cal watchdog:

https://noonmeasurekchico.wordpress.com/2016/10/15/chico-unified-made-calwatchdog-list-of-schools-with-multimillion-dollar-project-requests-from-districts-where-student-enrollment-has-declined/

While Chico Unified does not mention “overcrowding” in the ballot measure, claims of “preventing overcrowding” are made throughout their arguments in favor of measure K, including the flier that went out last week. But cal watchdog looked at the budget reports for the last four or five years and only one year did enrollment go up instead of down, for whatever unexplained reason. As of 2015, Kevin  Bultema was back to telling the  board that declining enrollment was causing a serious revenue drain for the district. 

Four different tax measures making essentially the same claims, asking BILLIONS in new taxes. And here we have Butte-Glenn and Chico Unified asking for their own measures concurrent with state measures from which they will also benefit. 

Pardon me, but your slops are showing folks.

Here, Legislative Chair of the Cal Retired Teachers Association Rick Light tells us how bad it will be for us here in Chico if we don’t pass Proposition 55, without one mention of Measure K.  He  also talks about a decrease in per-student funding without mentioning that Chico Unified is losing students every year. 

From Chico Enterprise Record:

I respectfully disagree with your editorial endorsement to not fund Proposition 55.

I contacted Kevin Bultema, assistant superintendent of business services for Chico Unified School District, to see his estimate of the loss per student (average daily attendance, or ADA) if Proposition 55 did not pass. His calculations means there could be a loss of $1,330 per ADA. They have approximately 13, 817 students. If they have a 90 percent attendance rate that would be on the lean side of 12,000 ADA. That number times the estimated $1,330 loss would total a whopping $15,960,000 loss.

Since at least 90 percent of a school district’s budget is personnel costs ( being a service industry) there will be a tremendous cut in not only teachers but supporting staff as well. That is $15 million the community businesses will not see. That means classroom size will increase to an unhealthy (educationally speaking) number per certificated teacher.

As to the health funds, many less economically fortunate parents cannot purchase all the needed health care their families require. This produces lost school experiences for our children due to preventable illness.

Are we also losing our sense of humanitarian responsibility? I urge you to reconsider and vote yes on Proposition 55.

— Rick Light, Chico

Here’s who is really pushing these funding measures:

http://div32.calrta2.org/about-us/

“Your partners in pension protection.” 

Yes, they must protect the pensions. A year ago, Rick Light reported to his fellow CalRTA members,

Click to access Winter-2015.pdf

Governor Brown’s budget now includes in the proposal $1.6 billion in State General Fund money for the California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS). This represents the full state contribution to both the Teachers Retirement Fund and the Supplemental Maintenance Benefit Account.” 

He continues, “Please show our gratitude for his effort by writing a simple note to the governor…” He ends his column in the newsletter with a warning of “legislation introduced to radically change pensions in California.” I’m guessing he was talking about San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed’s pension reform proposal, which has since been struck down by Kamala Harris, pensioneer. 

This is the machine we’re up against. These are the school  yard bullies who demand your lunch money, your kids’ lunch money, your grandkids’ lunch money…

Claims of overcrowding in Chico schools blown out of the water by calwatchdog report

16 Oct

One of the claims Chico Unified School District is making in seeking approval of $152 million Measure K is that they want to prevent overcrowding. It shocks me they’d make this claim when finance director Kevin Bultema has warned the board again and again the district is losing students.  That’s a bummer for them because each kid represents a little over $11,000/year in funding.  Bultema has been crying about declining enrollment for years now, reporting almost 2,000 students lost over the last 10 years, and predicting another 135 to 185 lost over the next two years. 

But here’s this “Yes on Measure K” mailer staring me in the face, telling me the district needs to prevent overcrowding.  You know, they think they can say anything, and we’ll buy it. They know better than anybody how poorly educated we are, they don’t think we can read a budget report. I wonder how surprised they were when a group of investigative journalists from Sacramento came up with this:

https://noonmeasurekchico.wordpress.com/2016/10/15/chico-unified-made-calwatchdog-list-of-schools-with-multimillion-dollar-project-requests-from-districts-where-student-enrollment-has-declined/

Isn’t that a nice distinction to bring to our little town?

It’s obvious Kevin Bultema, anxious to keep funding rolling in to pay his $130,000-plus salary and $25,000-plus benefits package, will say anything to get the voters to swallow this lump of horse puckey. 

Please, Vote NO on Measure K.

Why are we allowing Chico Unified employees to feather their own nests while facilities “are sub par”?

12 Oct

A reader responded to an old post about Measure K – read her thoughts and my response here:

https://noonmeasurekchico.wordpress.com/2016/10/12/school-district-claims-facilities-are-sub-par-why/

Why has the district allowed these facilities to deteriorate while district employees pay 10 percent or less of their pension and benefits costs? According to district finance director Kevin Bultema, 

“The employee contribution rates are as follows:

State Teachers Retirement System (STRS)            10.25% – 2% @ 60 years / 9.2% – 2% @ 62 years

Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)      7% for employees hired before 2013 / 6% for employees hired after 2013.”

Furthermore, “Administrators with a teaching credential usually participates in STRS and administrators without a teaching credential usually participates in PERS at the same rates.”

So, CUSD superintendent Kelly Staley pays 10 percent or less out of her $175,000 salary toward 70 percent of her highest year’s salary at age 60 – 62. Her package costs the district $25,000 beyond that $175,000 salary. Her total compensation amounts to five times the average family income for our city, but she stands up there and whines about rotten roofs and peeling paint. 

 I think the administration should be taken to court for embezzling funds to feather their own nests while allowing our kids to sit in this disgusting state of disgrace. 

Yes, there is opposition to the school bond

7 Oct

I made a new blog!

https://noonmeasurekchico.wordpress.com/

I’m trying to learn how to oppose tax measures, and more about blogging in general.  We’ll see how this goes.

Yeah, I feel like Roy Scheider with a bucket of chum, but we’ll see what we get.

Randy, you have got to be kidding

4 Oct

I noticed a person had come over to this blog from city councilman Randall Stone’s campaign website. I won’t direct you there – I’d rather direct you to this:

Because at least Robert Preston is entertaining. Stone is just obnoxious.

Saved the Esplanade? Is that the way you remember it? 

I have been studying the candidates, and I’m not looking forward to this year’s election. 

CARD needs to do a cost allocation study on their programs, find out the real costs of running private businesses under the bus

2 Oct

Off The Wall Soccer owner Mario Sagastume wrote a letter to the paper last week regarding their complaints about Chico Area Recreation District (CARD).

Regarding the recent article by Laura Urseny, understand the owners/management of Off The Wall Soccer (OTWS) are not Anti-Soccer.

To the contrary, all of us have supported, organized, promoted, played, coached and enjoyed the game.  Furthermore, we continue to encourage youth/adults to play the game, indoor and outdoor.

We have not requested CARD to reduce or eliminate their soccer program.  We simply asked them to honor an agreement made with OTWS in 2006.  OTWS opened in 2000 to provide year round soccer.  At the time CARD ONLY offered 11-aside in the Fall.

We were successful for a few years until CARD began offering 7- aside soccer in the Fall/Spring.  This had an immediate impact on sign-ups.  Any small business would struggle to compete with a government organization receiving about 60% ($4,000,000.00) of their annual funding from property taxes.

In 2005 we approached the CARD Board with our concerns and were directed to coordinate with management.  In 2006 the CARD General Manager agreed to only offer 7-aside in the summer and 11-aside in the Fall/Spring.  This was a fair compromise.

In 2013, after experiencing falling participation, we learned CARD had been offering 7-aside in the Fall/Spring for several years.  When we again met with CARD management they apologized and assured us they would abide by the agreement in the future.

Foolishly, we took them at their word, their commitment lasted less than a year.

Last week we approached the CARD Board and requested they have management honor their commitment.  Other than Tom Lando, THEY DECLINED.

Mario Sagastume

Partner, Off The Wall Soccer

Most members of the CARD board wrote off OTWS complaints as sour apples. They ignored the well-made point that they are using taxpayer money to subsidize their efforts to undercut private businesses all over town.

Here’s my suggestion – have CARD do a cost allocation study on their soccer program. When Chris Constantin did cost allocation for the city, he figured in all the salaries involved, which in this case would include director Ann Willman’s $100,000 plus salary and benefits, and even the air conditioning charges in the room where they discussed the programs. I’m telling you – they don’t price these programs for cost, they price their programs to run private businesses under.

Their costs are enormous. They spend about 90 percent of their more than $6 million budget on salaries and benefits. Only recently were CARD management asked to contribute to their own pensions – yeah, that’s right – none of the previous management, not Steve Visconti nor Ed Seagle nor Jerry Hughes – paid one red cent toward their own pension. Visconti recently retired at a salary of over $120,000/year – he will received 70 percent of that, with cost-of-living-increase, for the rest of his sorry life.

Now Jerry Hughes expects to be elected to the board. Let me tell you a  story I heard Hughes relate to Enterprise Record reporter Laura Urseny at a meeting. He was building his new house in Tahoe – that’s right, Tahoe – when his neighbors informed him that his plans trespassed over the property line onto their property. They were trying to tell them he couldn’t do that, and he was telling Urseny that he had got a lawyer to settle the matter. He was telling her, his trespass was just a silly thing, and he didn’t understand why the neighbors were making such a big deal about it. He had trespassed on them, admittedly, and he was making them get a lawyer to get him off their property.

That’s Jerry Hughes. Let me tell you another story about Jerry. When CARD paid three consultants a month or so ago to give a presentation about how to pass bond measures, Hughes asked them a question Michael Worley had already asked (because he’s either deaf or doesn’t listen).  Worley  wanted to know if the city of Chico could run a bond for them, and the consultant said the city would control the money, which might not work out so well for CARD.  When they repeated the same answer to Hughes, he actually turned his back on the consultant while the man was talking and grumbled his way back to his chair. Hughes is not fit for office.  This is how he treats a consultant who is paid with the taxpayers’ money.

And then we have candidate Dave Donnan.  Read here.

Donnan tries to clear up my accusations that others tried to bully him out of running in 2012, but only adds more mud to the water

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to make fun of a man’s problems, but this man is an idiot. I would bet you $5, he hasn’t attended a CARD meeting to date, and he’d admit that, but try to excuse himself with his myriad of personal problems. If he has so many personal problems, I would suggest he keep his dick out of  the public mousetrap.

They’re both horrible. Which leaves us with Lando and Worley.  They’re weasels, but (heavy sigh), they’re weasels we know.   They are professional and businesslike. I wouldn’t expect that out of either Donnan or Hughes.

Three CARD board members will be up in 2018 – Sneed, Mulowney and Ellis. These people need to go. We must come up with at least one viable candidate to run for 2018. I would nominate either Dave Stahl or Mario Sagastume, or both. They’ve been in the recreation business all these years, I’d say it’s time to get some people on the rec board that actually know about recreation.

Oroville puts sales tax increase on the ballot – is their retail sector ready for this?

20 Sep

 

A few years ago I did a post about how great it is to shop in Oroville.

https://worldofjuanita.com/2013/11/22/shop-in-oroville-nice-clean-streets-plenty-of-parking-friendly-folks-and-great-stuff/

Well, forget that – Oroville city staff is bent on raising their sales tax – a full cent!

 

For what? Bill LaGrone’s $158,000 salary and $73,000 benefits/pension package.  A couple of years ago, Oroville police chief Bill LaGrone talked Oroville Silly Council into making him “Public Safety Director”, giving him both the police and fire departments. They might have thought they were saving money – did any of these people do well in math? They’re paying this guy the equivalent of two salaries anyway.  And holy freaking cow – what kind of benefits does a person get for $73,000/year? Retirement in a palace in Dubai?

Oroville police department salaries are on par with Chico, even a little higher. Because? You got me – a town of 18,000 residents? Here’s something I forget – the incorporated city of O-ville does not include Thermalito or Palermo, who have no police department, and are under the jurisdiction of the county sheriff.  In fact, a lot of what we think of as “Oroville” is actually county, the city of Oroville is a very tiny little burg.

Small, and too poorly run to justify salaries like this:

http://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/Cities/City.aspx?entityid=81&fiscalyear=2015

City-Data reports that Oroville employs about 23 police employees – including dispatch, but not including LaGrone – at an average salary of $66,000. That stacks up well against Chico police salaries, for a town about four times as populated.  The average employed Orovillian makes about $30,000, which is about half the state average income. The median family income is reported between $36,000 – $47,000/year, with about 20 percent of the residents living on $20,000/year or less.  Knowing that, you might predict – the crime rate in Oroville is high for California,  alarming for such a small town, with such a well-paid police force – see for yourself here –

http://www.city-data.com/city/Oroville-California.html

more here

http://www.bestplaces.net/economy/city/california/oroville

Oroville is our county seat, so I read on one website that the population goes up by about 7,000 during the day due to the influx of employees working at the county, city and schools. These people are most likely the folks who take the high salary county and city jobs and drive back to their homes in Chico – drive to Oroville some morning, see the conga line.  See the brand new cars.  Then drive home about 5 pm – see the same conga line, same people, driving their expensive cars back to Chico.  I’m guessing they don’t even slow down in the retail district, or even gas their cars in O-ville.

I’m shocked that the city council could  be stupid enough to put this tax on the ballot. Only one  councilor opposed it, and only because he wanted it pegged specifically  for public safety.  The rest of the council went the general fund route, because it would require only the simple majority – 51 percent of the voters who actually show up at the polls. Sounds like a slam dunk.

And it also seems pretty obvious that they aren’t shaking down their own residents as much as the outer lying folks who drive in to shop there. 

Well, that’s okay. I’ve already become very adept at internet shopping.  Farewell, O-ville, City of Fools. 

 

 

Enterprise Record running interference for Chico Area Rec District

14 Sep

I sent a letter to the editor of the Chico Enterprise Record Sunday, detailing the breach of promise described by Off The Wall Soccer in their dealings with CARD. My letters usually run within three days of sending. Instead, today, the ER published the following announcement about this week’s CARD board meeting.

CARD agenda filled with master plan, soccer, ideas

Staff Reports

CHICO >> An update on the projects on the table, as well as possibly competing with a local soccer business, and getting involved with a community- based recreation entity will be on the agenda for the Chico Area Recreation and Park District board.

The next board of directors meeting for the Chico Area Recreation and Park District will be 7 p.m. Thursday at the Chico Community Center, 545 Vallombrosa Ave.

General Manager Ann Willmann will be providing an update on the various projects that are in development or exist, as well as what’s happening with the CARD master plan. The board asked that the master plan be updated, and a $ 19,500 contract was awarded to Melton Design Group of Chico to provide those services.

At the last meeting, the board directed Willmann to meet with Off the Wall Soccer and others about the soccer program. Representatives from the indoor soccer business said in August that an old agreement with CARD not to compete over some soccer programs has been overlooked. The board asked to talk about that issue in September. The business maintains that competition from CARD is jeopardizing its financial stability.

At the August meeting, the board also heard from private organization Everybody Healthy Body representative Bill Brouhard who asked that a CARD representative participate in its meetings. The community group is evaluating local recreation assets and has been looking at developing a recreation complex or campus in Chico. CARD is interested in the concept because it has been talking about a proposed aquatic center.

Yeah, you see the Melon Head is going to get yet another very posh contract from CARD – $19,500 to update their General Plan? Why do they need Ann Willmann? 

Then that weak paragraph about OTWS.   She’s taking CARD’s perspective – she was there when OTWS presented the documentation of years of agreements, acknowledgements of agreements broken, and promises to keep their word in future. Over and over again. She heard the whole story, and this is what she prints. I say “she” because I know Urseny wrote the story, or at least provided the outline, but she’s embarrassed to put her name on it. I would be too.

And then they act as though “Every Body  Good Body” just rolled into town – surprise! They want to build an aquatic center too! Urseny doesn’t say anything about the inappropriate nature of their relationship with CARD or Chico Aquajets – Brad Geise, president of Aqua Jets and member of the old “aquatic facility advisory committee” is a board member of EBGB. Ann Willmann gave them cut rate pricing for their meeting(s?) at Cal Park Pavilion. Let’s stop being coy here folks, this is not being reported properly to the public, and the newspaper is going along with it.

We need this newspaper like a moose needs a hat rack.   Reporter Laura Urseny is in bed with CARD, they need to send somebody new into those meetings. But who? All of their reporters are horrible.  

What to read some journalism?  Here’s the letter I sent Sunday that hasn’t been run yet. 

I attended the August 18 CARD board meeting at which owners of Off The Wall Soccer reported CARD management has not honored a good faith agreement made with them in 2006 and is undermining their business with predatory pricing.   

 

OTWS opened in 2000, offering 7-a-side  soccer programs that were not offered through CARD.  In 2005, OTWS experienced dramatic decline in membership and found CARD had begun offering 7-a-side programs, at less than half the price.  OTWS owners felt it was inappropriate for a public agency subsidized with taxpayer money to undercut legitimate private businesses.  They approached CARD’s board, which instructed management to resolve the conflict. CARD management agreed to offer 7-a-side soccer only in the summer months 

 

OTWS owners report CARD has reneged on their agreement several times since 2006, and they’ve had to go back to management and the board repeatedly to get them to honor their word. 

 

At the August 18 meeting, long time board member Jan Sneed acknowledged “we agreed to this,” promising to “make it right”.  Nonetheless, staff again told OTWS they have scheduled competing programs that began this Fall. 

 

With six-figure salaries and nearly $2 million in pension deficit, the CARD price of $319 per team does not even begin to reflect overhead at CARD. Are they offering these programs below cost in an attempt to steal business?   They are using taxpayer dollars to compete unfairly with businesses all over town.  

 

Is this really an appropriate mission for a recreation district? 
Juanita Sumner

Oroville seeks to increase sales tax by a full cent – letter writer does the math

13 Sep

Thank you Steve Christensen for writing the following letter to the Enterprise Record. We need more people like Steve.

Oroville’s tax proposal would be far above norm

Chico Enterprise Record 9/13/16

In November, Oroville voters will decide whether or not to approve Measure R, a $ 3.6 million tax increase ( 1 percent added sales tax). Mayor Linda Dahlmeier said Oroville has fallen behind because we’ve not yet raised sales taxes. I’ve researched cities in Butte County and the six adjacent counties that surround us. Only four cities in this neighborhood of seven counties have already imposed an added tax by increasing sales tax ( Red Bluff one- quarter of 1 percent, Paradise, Wheatland and Williams one- half of 1 percent).

None of these four collect the other added tax, the utility tax. Oroville does. Utility companies in Oroville are required to add 5 percent to our utility bills and send it to the city. Annual revenue is $1.6 million, which averages $100 per citizen. The total population of the four cities with the added sales tax is 50,000. The total added sales tax revenue is $2.5 million, which averages $50 per citizen.

We’re already paying twice as much in added tax as our neighboring similar cities. If Measure R passes, Oroville’s added tax revenue ($ 3.6 million in new tax plus $1.6 million in existing tax) will average $ 325 per citizen. That’s 6 1/2 times more than any city in our circle of counties.

Measure R calls for a full 1 percent increase, twice the amount of the other cities. Measure R does not repeal the utility tax, which none of the other cities have. Oroville wants way too much from us.

Vote no on R.

— Steve Christensen, Oroville