CARD moves meetings to Cal Park, moves ahead hiring consultant for proposed aquatic center

22 Mar

Thursday night I attended the regular Chico Area Recreation District Board meeting to see what I could find out about plans to build an aquatic center. What I saw and heard made me feel even more strongly that there’s a back room effort to get this project past the voters. The board voted unanimously to hire a consultant to come up with a proposal to sell to the taxpayers.

Jerry Haynes is out as CARD general manager and Steve Visconti has stepped back in to fill the interim while the board has (you guessed it!) hired a consultant to get a new director. They have had one director after another, Visconti “retiring’ last year only to be tapped to fill in again. One woman left citing “differences with the board” and the paper insinuated there was hostility. Now Haynes has left, citing same.  I don’t frankly know how anybody can get along with Board member Jan Sneed, who attacked me verbally and physically one night after a meeting. She’s hostile, I’ll tell you what, and I’m guessing you either do what she wants or you’re out of a job. CARD has an interesting staff history.

The General Manager of Chico swim team Aquajets was asked for a progress report on that committee that hasn’t been having any meetings. He said he was speaking on behalf of longtime CARD manager and board member Jerry Hughes, who has been the spokesperson for this effort from the beginning. I realize, they’ve taken everything into an “ad hoc” committee of Hughes and Brad, and therefore do not have to notice the meetings or include me in any way. But, Brad had a proposal for the board, they said they’d all received it. Despite Brown Act rules saying any document presented to the board must be available to the public, there were no copies. 

Brad told the board they needed to hire a consultant to design the new center, and the board voted to do so. End of conversation! 

I had to leave at that point, so I emailed the next morning asking for that proposal. CARD staffer Jennifer Marciales sent me a version that won’t cut and paste, but here’s the link:

3-9-15 Jerry Hughes Document

I noticed a little strain between the board and Brad. When he was done making his demand, Brad left with my husband and I, got into a very expensive little sports car, and zipped out. I really get a kick out of these people who come with their hand out for public money – same for the Cannons and their Bocce Ball request – they never come to these meetings, they don’t know ANYTHING about the CARD budget or the other programs, but they come in and demand money for something that serves less  than one percent of the city population.   But never any talk about how they will pay for it when they’re laying off workers to avoid paying Obamacare.

I noticed in this report that there have been three design proposals already submitted, but the only one I’ve seen is from local consultant Greg Melton, I posted that on this blog previously. So, I asked Marciales to send me the other two proposals,  but I haven’t heard back from her yet. 

Since I sat in on the Brown Act workshop with League of Women Voters, I’ve realized how little respect these  agencies have for the public.

I also asked Marciales why the meeting location was suddenly moved from the central CARD center on Vallombrosa to the very distant and removed Lakeside Pavillion. She answered, “the Board has requested that the Regular Board Meetings be held at Lakeside Pavilion”  That’s it, no explanation, just “let them eat cake…”

Tags: , ,

Thank You League of Women Voters for a great presentation on the Brown Act

18 Mar

I’m so sorry I didn’t take my camera with me to the League of Women Voters’ “Brown Bag the Brown Act” presentation today – I’ll have to tell you about it.

I was impressed with turn-out – I counted at least 30 heads, with my eyesight, and the bobbing around, I’m guessing about 35 all together. And I didn’t count the presenters, or the women who stood at the door to greet everybody. Or the guys with the Action News camera. I am thrilled to see people – and the media! – interested in this topic. I’m so sick and tired of the “whatever” attitude that seems to be seeping into people’s heads these days.

As LWV President Jane Wanderer put it, the Brown Act is about “the public’s right to know what government is doing and why.” 

Speaker Susan Wilson moved right along in her presentation, well aware there was a speaker behind her, but wanting to be sure  everybody present got a rudimentary lesson on the BA, pointing out things she feels are important along the way. I went to a presentation by Chico City Clerk Debbie Presson, given at an early meeting of the current Sustainability Task Force, and boy was this different. I realized these rules can be interpreted.  Of course, Presson interprets them on behalf of the city council and staff, while Wilson works as “watchdog” of local government. Of course their viewpoints are going to be quite different, and I found Wilson’s presentation to be much more extensive and enlightening. 

Here’s where Wilson and Presson have a difference of “interpretation” – Wilson says these agencies “don’t have the right to decide what the public should know…“, the rules are very precise. Except in the instances of employee contract negotiations, pending litigation, and real estate transactions, which can be done in closed session, all conversations involving a majority of the board (which would be four of our city councilors) are to be reported to the public. That includes meetings, phone calls, e-mails.  

Presson seems to think she can pick and choose what is kept in the record. She’s supposed to keep complete notes of the conversations that go on in the morning meetings, which are not video taped, but I’ve caught her so many times leaving out whole conversations from the record, the public couldn’t possibly know what’s been going on with the trash franchise deal or other business the city is conducting. 

Wilson lamented that more people don’t take their government agencies to task over violations, but she admits it’s hard. She spoke about “ad hoc” committees – “a way people sort of skittle around the edges [of the Brown Act]...trying to avoid involving the public…”  The Sustainability Task Force, as well as the Economic Development Committee, have gone just about completely ad hoc, avoiding even having to notice their meetings to the public. When I tried to get on the notice list for  the STF, committee chair Mark Stemen told me he’d have to do it himself because the city wouldn’t give him any staff.  But if you watch the agendas, you see council receives regular reports and recommendations from the STF, and has recently dedicated staff time to a new website. 

http://www.chicosustainability.org/

I feel the city of Chico pushes the public back by the forehead all the time.  The rules are simple, and as you guessed – the city of Chico is not compliant with a lot of this stuff. Like, they’re supposed to be specific in the agendas, so you know what the discussion is.  We used to get reports on the website for the various items – now we get “Finance Report”, and something like, “Frank Fields will give an update on our finances…” That’s all they had at that last meeting – but then the newspaper comes out with the story about the $4.8 million they found laying around – why wasn’t that in the agenda? Why wasn’t Frank’s report attached to the agenda? Instead we get “verbal report.” 

And, we can demand any of those reports or documents received by council at those meetings, but they get out of that by saying, “oh, we have no idea who will come to these meetings, or how many…” And, if you ask for copies, Presson can charge for them, and has.

I had to leave with the end of Wilson’s presentation, I had to get a corned beef on the stove for dinner.  I am sorry I missed Tim Crews’ presentation, I’m guessing he talked about his adventures getting public documents out of people like Debbie Presson.  Crews is a great advocate for Sunshine. 

But these people can work and slave for this law, and if the public is not paying attention, all the Sunshine in the world will not change anything. The Brown Act, as somebody remarked, is a tool – like a hammer or a screw driver, it’s useless unless you pick it up and use it. 

Thanks to the League of Women Voters for having this presentation. If you’d like to support this type of event, they will be having a fundraiser,  an evening of  wine, beer and olive oil tasting, with “gourmet appetizers”, at Manzanita Place on April 19. Tickets are on sale now – $35 advance, $40 at the door. Find out more here:

https://www.facebook.com/events/791411917606762/

 

 

 

Tags: ,

Don’t forget that Brown Act workshop tomorrow at the Women’s Center – that’s Wednesday March 18, noon to 1:30 pm. It’s FREE!

17 Mar

Rose reminds me, it’s free, and don’t forget to bring a bag lunch.

League of Women Voters to talk about Brown Act – March 18, Chico Women’s Center

Fund Raiders: City of Chico still using the same old walnut shell finance scam – watch that pea!

17 Mar

Today I notice, in the stats information provided by Word Press, people have been reading old posts where I bitched about the way Dave Burkland and Jennifer Hennessy were managing business Downtown, and how council was following right along like Hansel, Hansel, Hansel, Hansel, Gretel, Gretel, and Gretel.

For instance, somebody read 

https://chicotaxpayers.com/2012/08/29/hennessy-is-using-city-funds-like-walnut-shells-to-hide-and-move-money/

I bitched about the way they were transferring money from one fund to the other so they could get around spending rules. Some funds were being completely emptied into the General Fund, which has pretty lax rules about how it is spent. Every report Hennessy gave was full of assumptions and allocations – “assumptions” that we would be getting all this money to spend, and then “allocations” to cover when their ASS-umptions fell through.  Most of that money went to salaries, benefits and pensions for “public safety” and management, who paid zero to four percent of their own packages. 

Council went along right up until Burkland’s retirement, and the finger pointing and back stabbing began. All heads turned toward Hennessy, who made a well-timed exit to Temecula. The public turned kind of ugly, asking about criminal prosecution. Council members made veiled comments – AFTER the fact, how corn-venient. I almost felt sorry for Hennessy – council sat there through all of it, the public sat through it, with their fingers in their noses, but as soon as the shit hit the fan everybody was ready to string her up!

So now we have Mark Orme, Chris Constantin and Frank Fields essentially doing the same thing – how is what they are doing any different that what Hennessy was doing?  

Look at current agendas – almost every two weeks, Frank Fields asks for another budget allocation – meaning, the city is over budget, and they need to move  money from one or another “dedicated” fund (rules about spending)  to prop up the General Fund kitty. Chris Contantin’s report on the cop raises is full of assumptions about property tax and sales tax revenues going up. I think we should start calling him Chris “Pollyanna” Constantin. 

They will approve the cop contracts tonight. (NOTE: Excuse me here, I forgot, they have to wait for the two-week sunshine period to be over, so write those e-mails).The cops will get another $2 million added to their budget, which is already more than half the city pie, all based on assumptions. The fire department gets almost as much, I don’t know how much longer Constantin can work his voodoo to  fund everything. When he leaves I predict we will have major problems. 

Did you ever see spit disappear on a hot griddle any faster than that $4.8 million they scraped out of the car seats? That was some slight of hand, Bruddah. 

Well, I wonder if Gandalf is available, because our next city manager is going to have to be a regular wizard.

Something slouches toward Chico – garbage tax about to become a reality

16 Mar

I’ve been trying to follow the garbage “franchise agreements” at both the city and the county for over a year now, so it’s frustrating to all the sudden see people bitching and moaning, just as the deal is about to become done. The county has announced their new rules – you get the hauler they choose for you, and like me, a lot of people who have had nothing but problems with Waste Management in past have liked the service they’ve had from Recology, and they’re not taking the switch laying down.

When residents of Forest Ranch showed up at a last minute meeting called by District 3 super Mo Kirk, they were mad they hadn’t heard anything until now. Kirk told them it had been in the agendas – that’s going to cost you in 2018 Maureen.  I hope you realize, you just lost a lot of votes in Forest Ranch, a lot of them only having realized who you were about two weeks ago. Now they know, and they won’t forget to vote.

 I’m in the city, also in Maureen’s district, but I’m waiting for the details to come out about the city’s deal – Chris Constantin has been refusing to answer my questions, saying it’s still in the works. One thing he has told me is that service will be required in the city limits – you will have to either sign up with the hauler they hand you or you will have to get a permit to haul your own garbage – that’s if they approve of the vehicle you’ll be using.

The county, according to Paul Hahn, is not requiring residents to sign up for service. It may be a requisite in Paradise, where they signed a deal with Northern Recycling and Waste Services that significantly raised rates. I’ve asked Constantin repeatedly – where are the plans for a low-income garbage subsidy? If the city is going to require that we sign up for garbage service – including those of you who have been sharing service with a neighbor – then they must have a plan to subsidize low income households. No, I’m not a lawyer, I’m a decent person, and that’s what decent people would do.

My family has shared with our tenants for years, and we have a lot of friends and neighbors who find this to be a solution to “all those trucks in the neighborhood.” I’ve also known and heard about people who’ve made agreements with their neighbors to select the same hauler. I’ve heard from a lot of people who got together with neighbors over problems with Waste Management service, and switched as a group to Recology. I’ve told  Chris Constantin I had problems with WM for years before switching to Recology, and I want to stay with Recology.

It’s time to make noise people. If you are unhappy with this deal, I’d recommend writing a letter to the Enterprise Record or News and Review. Follow it up with a letter to council. CC Mark Orme mark.orme@Chicoca.gov  and Chris Constantin chris.constantin@Chicoca.gov

Letter: Taxpayers should be wary of Chico garbage deal

POSTED: 03/06/15, 5:30 PM PST |

3 COMMENTS

Taxpayers should be wary of Chico garbage deal

I do not want the same folks that negotiated the union contracts giving city firemen $200,000 a year negotiating the city’s garbage rates. When was the last time city negotiators had the taxpayers’ best interest in mind? I can’t remember any.

This isn’t Hemet. Chico taxpayers know the real reason for “franchised garbage” is so the city can bank the six or seven figure “franchise fee” from the haulers. The fee is really a “garbage tax” because the ratepayers will pay it every month in fees. As is typical, the tax will be squandered by the city to pay their exorbitant salaries and benefits.

City streets were designed for firetrucks, garbage trucks and empty city busses. The streets are falling apart because of the lack of routine maintenance. Cracks in asphalt have to be sealed, which is cheap preventative maintenance, otherwise water gets in and the freeze-thaw cycle breaks up the asphalt. There is no money to seal the cracks because we are squandering millions paying city firemen three times what they are worth.

If city streets necessitate the garbage tax, let’s dedicate every cent of the franchise fees as additional funds for street maintenance, in addition to what’s already being spent. Ha, ha, that will never happen.

As always, private enterprise would better serve the taxpayers than city control. There are already reports from the county that rates have doubled since the county adopted “franchising.”

Everyone will see who the real tax-and-spend liberals on council are with this one.

— Bill Smith, Chico

Something’s malodorous about new garbage deal

On March 1, new trash hauling rules began for the citizens of Butte County. Three waste hauling firms were granted hauling services by zones. The three firms are Waste Management, Recology, and Northern Recycling Waste Services.

Last August I switched from Waste Management to Recology since the three other homeowners on my four-house cul de sac were using Recology. Having an extra-heavy waste hauling truck breaking up our privately owned road made no financial sense, so I went with Recology to limit the heavy truck damage to our road.

At that time Waste Management was charging $58.27 for three months service while Recology was charging $68.07. Now I’m forced back with Waste Management at a price of $102.52, almost double the prior rate.

And if that isn’t enough of a kick in the head, they only pick up recycling every other week instead of weekly. I’ve no option but to put recycling in the weekly trash pickup every other week.

To coin a phrase, “Something’s rotten in Denmark.” This situation has a corruptive odor.

— Steven K. Sterzer, Chico

Tags: , , ,

Fiscal morons about to cut nearly $2 million deal with Chico PD

12 Mar

City management and council met in closed session a couple of weeks ago to discuss the cop contracts. Here’s the link to the latest proposal:

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=100&meta_id=44013

I cut an excerpt here, in which the city manager reports, we don’t have the money to give these raises, but he is assuming our situation will get better? That’s pure speculation, and I think it’s irresponsible.

They say the cops are offering to pay (BFD) 12 percent of their pension. 12 percent of the cost of 90 percent of their highest year’s pay at 50 years of age. Oh, please!  “New hires” pay 50 percent – just watch, in future, they’ll  say that creates a conflict in the ranks, and they’ll want wage increases to cover that 50 percent.

 

Financial Capacity The City is projected to end the 2014-15 years with a negative $4.5 million general fund balance and no General Fund reserves. However, the 2013 financial measures, improvement in the economy, and operational savings allowed the city to finish 2013-14 with over $4 million to carry over into 2014-15. Preliminary information indicates that the same conditions exist for 2014-15, and the City estimates it will have additional funds to carry over into 2015-16, albeit it will not be as much as 2013-14. The City Council approved a deficit reduction plan that anticipated contributing $800,000 in 2014-15 towards the deficit. The strengthening of the City’s position allows the City to contribute about $3.3 million in 2014-15. The policy question before the City in negotiating this MOU shows a policy direction of balance. A very conservative approach would require that any and all available funds must go to pay the deficit before any additional expenditures in operations. However, this approach is not feasible due to the City’s need to continue to provide quality services as expected by our community. The conditions seen in the Police Department in terms of the attrition rate, ability to recruit, competitiveness of compensation and overall operations indicate a condition of instability. This is similar to what other cities are facing where large numbers of officers are leaving. In the City of San Jose, the lack of comparable salary and benefits has led to a staffing level that fell from almost 1,400 sworn offers to under 800 with more officers leaving than being retained. While Chico’s situation isn’t as dire, if the City does not balance the need for competitive compensation with other internal changes (which are underway), Chico will risk being under the same pressures as San Jose. This MOU will fit well into the City’s goal of turning the situation around and helping to strengthen the Department’s ability to serve the community.

Tags: , , ,

League of Women Voters to talk about Brown Act – March 18, Chico Women’s Center

7 Mar
Found this notice in the Enterprise Record:

League of Women Voters of Butte County will host “Shine a Light on Government: Brown Bag It to the Brown Act” on March 18. It will be noon to 1:30 p.m. at Chico Women’s Club, 592 E. Third St.  Those attending may bring a bag lunch. The public may attend.

Let’s talk about the city’s spending problem – time for an intervention?

4 Mar

Here’s my kitchen table analysis of last night’s decision by council to put only half that “found” $4.8 million toward our deficit.

Let’s say I owe $7.8 million on my credit card. While cleaning my car one day, I find $4.8 million in the seat cushions.

I think that part of the analogy is good – Frank Field’s explanation just sounded like sloppy book keeping.  So, I drop a lot of change out of my pockets – same difference. When you’re dealing with somebody else’s money, it’s easy to get a little too comfortable being a slob, isn’t it?

Given – this found money doesn’t cover my whole bill, and we’ve gotten so used to living on credit these days. What’s a little debt, eh?  So I just keep on spending as I have, racking up the bills, and I think, “maybe I should use the found money for something extra…”

My son’s birthday just passed, and my husband’s birthday is around the corner. I would have liked to buy my son a new computer, they expect the kids to have all the latest technology for school these days. And, my husband likes to watch sports while he’s working around the house, I’d sure like to present him with a new tv for his shop, something big that he can see from the garden. 

And, frankly, like the city of Chico, I’ve continued to spend money.  “Necessity” dictated that I go out and buy that new washing machine. People expect you to be clean these days, just a couple of years ago the library tried to pass an ordinance that you couldn’t come in there with body odor. So, I’d added about $500 to my deficit before I’d even found the money!

At this point, most of my friends would be worried. I would be worried. That sounds, well, irresponsible. 

But the city of Chico has a list of stuff they’d already spent – sounded like Christmas came early down at the cop shop. The city had already been spending on fancy new gadgets for the police, even when they were still digging that 1,000 foot hole that dbski4it (sp?) was talking about in the comments section of the ER.  They hired three new police officers recently, with nothing but best wishes to pay for it.  

Do you think they already knew about this found money when they were on that spending binge?  Do you think the found money was concocted so they could give the cops those raises they’ve been negotiating in closed session?

Like I said,  last night’s meeting raised more questions than it answered.

 

Wow! City just found $4.8 million laying around the office! Under the couch cushions or what?

2 Mar
I’m too busy to talk about this right now, but I will say, this article raises more questions than it answers. Read it good.
Chico City Council to decide how to spend extra $4.8 million

By Ashley Gebb, Chico Enterprise-Record

POSTED: 03/01/15, 6:18 PM PST |

0 COMMENTS

What: Chico City Council meeting

When: 7:30 p.m. for council business

Where: 421 Main St., Council Chambers

Other details: Joint meeting with Airport Commission at 6:30 p.m. precedes regular City Council meeting

Chico >> What would you do with an extra $4.8 million?

The city of Chico will have such a decision to make Tuesday, as it is determines how to spend a surplus of funds revealed during the 2013-14 audit. Council directed staff to bring back a report on possible expenses during the development of the 2015-16 budget, and three options are being presented to the council.

The meeting starts at 7:30 p.m., an hour later than usual because the council will meet at 6:30 in a joint public meeting with the Airport Commission.

In his report to council, Administrative Service Director Frank Fields notes that while the one-time savings are very positive, more needs exist than the one-time money can meet. As the city continues its road to fiscal recovery, a strategic plan on how to spend these funds would continue those efforts.

“It’s simply imperative that we remember where this city was just under two years ago, and that council action has gone a long way to bring the city back on a path to fiscal health. However, the city is not fiscally healthy,” he wrote. “As a result, utilization of these one-time funds has to be done strategically and consistent with current fiscal policy.”

The city has already spent nearly half a million dollars on previously approved items that were unbudgeted. They include $190,000 for three new police officers, $120,00 on a waste franchising consultant, $120,000 to fix inadequate infrastructure in a flood-prone neighborhood, and $48,000 for repairs to Sycamore Pool.

That leaves about $4.4 million to be spent.

One proposal is to dedicate more than $4 million to reduce the city’s general fund deficit, which sits at $6.97 million. The remainder would include a fund balance carryover of $200,000 and $181,000 transfer to the Zone 1 Neighborhood Parks Fund.

The other two proposals would transfer far less to the deficit, for which an annual paying-down plan is already in place.

Most proposed additional spending would go toward about $450,000 in city maintenance, infrastructure and equipment. Both proposals include $85,000 for a streets condition assessment, $75,000 for city-wide time-keeping and police department advanced scheduler program, $74,000 for a laser mapping system for the Police Department to use at crime scenes and major accidents, $50,000 for LED street lights at critical intersections, and $50,000 for city hall monitoring equipment.

The only non-city expense in both proposals is $25,000 for the Chico branch of the Butte County Library. The city reduced its annual contribution from $100,000 to $75,000 for this fiscal year, and the county opted not to backfill the funding gap in hopes a new agreement could be made later in the year, which means that without additional funds, the library will be forced to close Mondays and open two hours later Tuesdays through Thursdays, writes county Chief Administrative Officer Paul Hahn in a letter to council.

Councilor Sean Morgan said he has some concerns about that allocation and its fairness to other community agencies that received less funding from the city for this fiscal year.

“If we are going to look at one organization’s request for public funds that is used to getting them, we have to look at everybody,” he said. “It’s not fair to do it one at a time.”

The one difference between the two remaining proposals is one would reduce the general fund deficit by about $2.5 million, and use the remaining $1.5 million as transfers — $200,000 to the airport fund, $181,000 to neighborhood parks, and $1.2 million as a general fund balance carryover.

The other proposal would reduce the deficit by $2.3 million and spend $1.6 million on $500,000 to the airport fund, $181,000 to neighborhood parks, and $200,000 transfers each to technology replacement, fleet replacement, facility maintenance, general plan fund and as a general fund balance carryover.

The $4.8 million in excess revenue was the result of both revenue enhancement and expenditure savings. One factor was the 2013-14 budget did not includes estimates of impacts of the city’s second round of employee layoffs and negotiated salary and benefit concessions, which resulted in $1.1 million in savings from the Police Department, $630,000 from general government and $300,000 from public works. Additional savings were realized from the Fire Department and Parks Department.

The city also received an additional $560,000 in sales tax revenue, $325,000 in increased property tax revenue, and $800,000 in miscellaneous revenue related to a property tax administration refund and fund contributions related to waste hauler negotiations.

Contact reporter Ashley Gebb at 896-7768

Unbridled greed seems to be in vogue this season!

26 Feb

I was sorry to see the Butte County Supervisors vote to raise salaries at the sheriff’s department by 5 percent. They had to eliminate four positions to do it, at the same time they are implementing Measure A. They say they want to make the job more attractive to new recruits, but cut positions. 

You know the old saying – “If it smells like horse puckey, it probably is…”

I’ve long heard, from people I know in the sheriff’s department, that they’ve had a gripe with Chico PD, whose salaries have been a lot higher for years. Instead of joining the movement to bring police salaries, and benefits and pensions, back into a reasonable range, the sheriff’s department has jumped on the chuck wagon. They’ve been eating steak, believe me – now they want caviar. 

Meanwhile, Chico PD fights to get their salaries even higher. They also are asking for five percent raises, and I’m guessing they will get them. Along with plenty of other perks and benies. Alot of benies.

They’ve mounted their typical campaign – “Crime is on the rise in Chico!” This is the same dog and pony show they trot out every time their contracts are on the table. Recognize the pattern here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFX-cMdR3o4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6TweSKJ59E

Get your yard ready, we will have to mount a campaign against the sales tax increase that will be proposed for the 2016 ballot. It will be interesting to see who brings it up. 

 

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →