CPOA MOU – cops asking for 5 percent raise, other cherries

17 Oct

I received the agenda for the next city council meeting yesterday, and there at  the bottom is a discussion of the cops latest contract proposal. Here’s the report summary – I’ll admit, I edited in the slashes in that first date, they’d been left out and it looked like nonsense:

Chico POA
Proposal – September 24, 2014
The following is a proposal for a successor MOU to the one expiring 12/31114 between the
Chico Police Officers’ Association and the City of Chico. This proposal is intended to begin the
bargaining process and introduce several ideas that the POA believes can create a better
environment within the City of Chico Police Department, specifically the Departments ability to
retain and recruit police officers.
When possible, the current MOU provision that would be affected is listed. Wording is NOT
final and will be edited to reflect any changes prior to submission to the City in formal
bargaining.

1. Three year term ofMOU: 11/11/15-12/31/17. 1.3A 

2. Salary. 5% increase effective 1/1/15, 1/1116 and 1/1/17. 5.1 and Exhibit B
3. Longevity. Add four new longevity step increases of 4% at the following length of time
of employment with the city: 10 years, 15 years, 20 years and 25 years. New Article
5.12 “Longevity Pay”
4. Pay Step Addition and Adjustment. 5.1C
a. Add a Step H at 5% salary increase.
b. Add a “training pay” step equivalent to $18 per hour.
5. Cash out Holiday Time Banlc Reinstate policy of allowing employees to cash out
unused holiday time bank hours each year. 6.2
6. Vacation Cash Out. Allow employees to accrue vacation above the maximum caps and
to cash out any unused vacation accrued above the caps at the end of each calendar
year. 6.5
7. Holiday Hours. City shall provide ten hours of Holiday Time Bank pay for holidays.
6.1A
8. OT Pay for Holidays. City shall pay employees overtime rate for working holidays. 5.2
and 6.1
9. FICA and Dental to be paid by City. 6.3

I had to ask Debbie Presson to reload the reports yesterday, because she’d “accidentally” loaded them so that they could not be cut and paste. She complained that it would “take hours” to reload the reports properly, but she did it. I think they are required by law to do that, even though she tried to avoid doing it for years, telling me, she was afraid I’d edit them if they were available in cut and paste. I swear to God, she told me that. All the sudden Chris Constantin showed up and now she has to load them the way I ask. Every now and then I catch her loading them wrong and all I have to do is ask – she reloads them. She claims it’s a matter of a little button being switched. If a private sector worker made that mistake constantly I think they’d be out of a job, but Debbie not only stays hired,  she gets over $135,000 a year in salary and only pays 9 percent of her loaded benefits package.  I know it seems petty – but just think, what does “hours” of her time cost, to load reports into a computer? 

Of course when I cc’d Chris Constantin, he sent me the whole MOU, in cut-and-pastable format.  The summary only highlighted stuff the cops want to change – they want a 5 percent raise (bust a snicker!), they want their holiday and sick leave banks restored, they want, they want, they want. They  remind me of the bums on the street corners, hand out, mouth open, ass slackened.

Michael Jones provides a good commentary on the summary here,

http://chicopolitics.com/2014/10/16/police-staffing/

but doesn’t discuss what I found in the whole MOU – the city will still collect union dues, including those  officers who don’t want to join the union (they call that a “service fee”), and then handing the money over to the same union that dumps money into every election. And, Jones reports, the CPOA has missed the filing deadline for their campaign report.  It was due October 6, but still is not posted. Jones dug into the muni code and found this to be a misdemeanor. Wow, let’s call the cops!  Jones was the one who busted the news that such an agreement, according to administrative law judge and ex-city council candidate Joe Montes, is a blatant conflict of interest. 

Here’s our dilemma: these contracts will not come up for discussion on council until AFTER THE ELECTION. And, I will remind Jones, they spend and collect late, so they don’t post their biggest report until AFTER THE ELECTION.  I hope he’s not too disappointed when his candidates, Mark Sorensen, Reanette Fillmer and Andrew Coolidge, are shown to be the biggest recipients of the cops’ attentions, and then all turn around and sign this contract with very little editing. They will also be first on board for the sales tax increase, that’s my next prediction. 

 NOTE – I didn’t catch all the weird typos in the summary, but it’s readable

 

 

 

 

Tags: , , ,

Chico Taxpayers Association votes ‘No’ on A and ‘Yes’ on B – A proponents pulling out all the stops with trash mailer

16 Oct
Say 'No' to property rights violation, say 'Yes' to private property rights.

Say ‘No’ to property rights violation, say ‘Yes’ to private property rights.

A friend of ours was telling my husband the other day, the ballot language of Butte County Measures A and B was confusing to him. I really thought I knew the measures, but when I tried to explain it to him, I found myself fumbling. So I whipped out the Voter’s Pamphlet.

On page 04-1114-501, there is a brief history of these measures under “Impartial Analysis.” It all came back to me – and made me kind of angry. Back in February of this year, 4 of 5 supervisors voted Ordinance 4075. Those four – Teeter, Lambert, Connolly, and Kirk, all seemed to agree that a committee of interested parties including law enforcement, pot growers and other “affected” property owners was a reasonable way to regulate marijuana grows in our county. The growers were happy enough with it. Law enforcement reported that raids went down as more growers worked to comply with 4075.

By June a group led by dissenting Supervisor Larry Wahl brought in signatures to overturn 4075. In response, 4075 proponents quickly brought in enough signatures to get Measure B placed right under it on the ballot.

I don’t like Candace Grubbs.  I think she plays favorites, and I think she gave the Measure A people more play than she gave the Measure B people.  I believe Larry Wahl stood up for her when County Admin Officer Paul Hahn called her on inappropriate use of staff for personal business, so she turned right around and did just exactly what he said he would  ask her to do – used county staff time to check each and every signature on the Measure B petition instead of doing the usual sampling, like she did with Measure A. She’s a bitch and she knows it, I’d have to get a lawyer up her ass to prove anything. And Larry Wahl will protect her as long as she does what he says.

Measure B is the same as 4075, except for a provision that the supervisors may not change the ordinance without a vote of the people. The county supervisors put together a committee of interested citizens and they worked for the better part of a year on 4075, arguing constantly between Larry Wahl’s Hate Camp and the various growers who didn’t necessarily agree on anything. One thing everybody seemed to agree on – they wanted to stop the environmental degradation, the water theft, and the ingress and egress of illegal aliens with military style weapons. The measure they came up with put strict limits on number of plants, restricted water usage, established residential and sanitary requirements for grow sites, setbacks, prohibitions from growing near schools and bus stops, fines of hundreds of dollars a day for noncompliance – to hear the Measure A proponents say this measure will cause lawlessness is just hilarious.

Measure B is loaded with restrictions on the growing and processing of pot. When B proponent Andrew Merkel came to speak to Chico Taxpayers, he stated several times that pot needs to be regulated, and that's what this measure addresses.

Measure B is loaded with restrictions on the growing and processing of pot. When B proponent Andrew Merkel came to speak to Chico Taxpayers, he stated several times that pot needs to be regulated, and that’s what this measure addresses.

My dad always told me, there’s no arguing with crazy people or liars, and that’s what we’re up against with the proponents of Measure A. They’ve all got their anecdotes – no names, no dates, no addresses…  They put out their own newspaper full of complaints about grows and activities that would be illegal under Measure B.

This is what our local law enforcement do with their union dues.

This is what our local law enforcement do with their union dues.

This “newspaper” is completely loaded. For one thing, they claim that Measure B will change the current ordinance – that’s an outright lie folks.

I find it hilarious they complain about professional signature gatherers – Larry Wahl used pros to collect signatures for Measure A, the city initiative he hoped would put college students out of city elections. That bombed because his employee Stephanie Taber was found to be using her office computer inappropriately for campaign purposes, while she and her friends were yakking up how much they hated college students and how they shouldn’t be allowed to vote here. She still works for Larry, and she’s been pretty busy with her peanut gallery. I’ve been getting Larry’s notices, asking people to write letters without any facts, just complaints. Here they also complain that they won’t be able to bother the police or sheriff with facetious anonymous complaints about anybody they feel like harassing.

Measure A was not passed by the supervisors - it was brought in by petition, and the supervisors had to either change the current ordinance drastically to suit these people or put it on the ballot. The only difference between Measure B and the current ordinance is a provision that the supervisors can't change the ordinance without a vote of the people.

Measure A was not passed by the supervisors – it was brought in by petition, and the supervisors had to either change the current ordinance drastically to suit these people or put it on the ballot. The only difference between Measure B and the current ordinance is a provision that the supervisors can’t change the ordinance without a vote of the people.

One of their latest claims is that Measure B will hurt the economy. Stand back folks, I hate to tell you – have you noticed how many “grow shops” there are sprung up around town?  They advertise marijuana trimming equipment on tv now, I’d seen the commercials about 10 times before I realized what they were talking about – machines that groom marijuana buds. They have all this specialized equipment, fertilizers, grow juices, special dirt, little gopher proof baskets, plastic grow bags – and it’s selling like hotcakes out the door. These shops are doing really well, in addition to Home Depot and Payless Lumber and all the building supply stores.

And, this is just an anecdote from an old issue of Life Magazine, about 1984, I saved it for years because it had a gorgeous picture of Princess Diana on the cover. Humboldt County was The Scene way back then. The Life reporter talked to local businesses who said pot had become a regular cornerstone of the economy. The car dealerships said their sales were through the roof at harvest time, and all the local businesses noticed the trickle down, especially cafes and hotels that filled up for weeks with folks who came from elsewhere to work the harvest.

So don’t try to tell me the pot industry is bad for the economy, that’s pretty weak Larry. I guess they  realized they weren’t getting anywhere with their lame stories about grandmas being terrorized at their mailboxes. Do you notice, all the stories they tell are of grows that would be illegal under Measure B? And here a guy who says the sheriff is understaffed is telling us the sheriff needs to be sent all over the county investigating hillbilly squabbles. Measure A will drag the sheriff and police into neighbor disputes. 

What I don’t get is why three of the four supervisors who originally approved the current ordinance, 4075, have turned about face and signed on to Measure A.

What's with the flip-flop Bill, Mo and Steve?

What’s with the flip-flop Bill, Mo and Steve?

Connolly, Kirk and Lambert all argued fiercely with Larry Wahl that they thought 4075 was a perfectly legitimate ordinance, that it had come from a broad spectrum of citizens on that committee, who really worked hard, gave of their personal time, argued this thing out.  But now they all sign on to this bullshit campaign against Measure B? 

I’m done with Mo Kirk. She doesn’t have the decency to attend either of those CPUC hearings, she can’t write a letter protesting this PG&E rip-off, instead sic’ing a PG&E employee on me. Now I find her name on this propaganda piece stuffed into my mail box? 

She said, at our Chico Taxpayer’s meeting, she didn’t want Butte County being known as “where they grow pot.” Well, for your information Maureen, Butte County is currently known as one of the poorest counties in California. Less than 25 percent of your constituents have gone beyond the 12th grade. Butte County’s unemployment rate is currently higher that the state’s. What exactly is it you’d like Butte County to be known for? The drunken DA who racks up his car with his kids in it? The sheriff’s sting operation at the stripper bar? The murders at Inskip? How about the Jimmy Campbell killing? How about the city of trees in which all the trees are turning brown? How about the park that’s falling apart? Wow, Butte County has such a rich heritage, maybe Maureen’s right , I wouldn’t want to spoil what we got going here.

UPDATE: I got a nice note from a person who wanted me to know, “Measure A is a referendum (citizen signatures). Wahl did lead the charge to pass the amendments, but the signatures for both the A referendum and the B initiative were collected by voters. http://www.buttecitizens.org has more background.”

Thank you Sister, I did not mean to imply that Wahl actually gathered any signatures. 

Thanks for your interest in fairness and clarity.  Thanks also  for the link – that’s  http://www.buttecitizens.org

 

Tags: , , , ,

Sac Bee: E-mails show the governor’s office was involved in CPUC/PG&E San Bruno scandal

14 Oct
  • GDO3570NN.2

Hector Amezcua / hamezcua@sacbee.com

Gov. Jerry Brown during the 8th Annual California Hall of Fame on Wednesday, Oct. 1, 2014 in Sacramento.

Tags: , ,

Introducing Jeanne McKinney, CPUC judge

14 Oct

Jeanne McKinney’s Experience

Administrative Law Judge

California Public Utilities Commission

Government Agency; 501-1000 employees; Utilities industry

January 2012 – Present (2 years 10 months) San Francisco

Senior Counsel

Calpine Corporation

Public Company; 1001-5000 employees; CPN; Utilities industry

April 2009 – December 2011 (2 years 9 months)

Advise operating gas plants on compliance with financing, project documents, power purchase agreements, environmental and other regulatory laws. Review regulatory filings. Work with development team on new natural gas and solar (PV) projects including acquisition of real estate and other rights; regulatory compliance; regulatory filings. Work with outside counsel to draft and negotiate variety of documents for development and operation of power plants.

appointee

San Francisco Parks and Recreation Open Space Advisory Committee (PROSAC)

2006 – 2011 (5 years)

• District 8 Appointee, San Francisco Recreation and Park Department (RPD) Citizens Advisory Committee on Open Space (PROSAC) 2006 – present (Chair, 2009). Advise RPD and District 8 Supervisor on community issues such as bond proposals, capital improvements, park programming and property acquisition policy. As Chair, set agendas, ran meetings.

Attorney

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Partnership; 201-500 employees; Law Practice industry

2006 – 2009 (3 years)

Real Estate and Business Attorney: acquisition, disposition and financing of commercial properties; acquisition of land for utility scale solar development; business formation; debt and equity financing of businesses. Industry focus: solar energy, hospitality, wine, commercial office.

Secretary

Playwrights’ Center of San Francisco

2008 – 2008 (less than a year)

Attorney

Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP

Partnership; 501-1000 employees; Law Practice industry

2001 – 2006 (5 years)

Summer Associate and later Associate working in Business Finance and Real Estate Departments. Significant projects included: project financing (sale/leaseback) of 78 MW power plant; acquisition of equity interest in small energy project in St. Lucia; participation in CPUC regulatory proceedings; office leasing.

Law Clerk

California Public Utilties Commission

Government Agency; 501-1000 employees; Utilities industry

May 2000 – December 2000 (8 months)

Law Clerk for Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Division

Documention Production Director

CMS Cameron McKenna

Partnership; 1001-5000 employees; Law Practice industry

1997 – 1999 (2 years)

operations specialist

Application Resources

1996 – 1998 (2 years)

Tags: , ,

Chico Taxpayers Association endorses anybody but Gruendl

14 Oct
My sentiments exactly.

My sentiments exactly.

I love this picture so much I may put it on buttons or a t-shirt. I got it on a mailer I received yesterday with the message, “Fire Scott Gruendl.” Chico Taxpayers Association couldn’t agree more! 

Gruendl told me years back, he was going to “bring some decent salaries into this town.” I thought he meant, better jobs for everybody – he meant he was going to join public workers all over the nation in jacking up their salaries by way of a contract MOU that attached salaries to “revenue increases but not decreases…”  That MOU was followed by increases of 14, 19, 22 percent over the next few years. City Manager Tom Lando’s salary went from about $65,000/year to about $165,000 a year, and Gruendl’s salary as Glenn County Health Director went up from around $50,000/year to just over $100,000.

In Glenn County he tried to eliminate a department and bring it under his management, demanding a huge salary raise to go with it. The retiring director was so mad at Gruendl, he cancelled his retirement in order to stop Gruendl from taking over his department. That’s what Dave Burkland did under Gruendl’s direction here in Chico – he eliminated positions, such as RDA director, Airport manager, and several others, took those titles and added them to his salary. His predecessor, Greg Jones, had enjoyed a $190,000/year salary after Lando. Burkland took a lessor salary, but then, under Mayor Gruendl’s direction, eliminated positions and added the salaries to his own, going from about $165,000 to almost the $190,000 Jones had retired on.  Gruendl stood by applauding – they told us they were saving money. That was and  remains a blatant lie, but Gruendl still insists he’s done a good job of stewarding our city.

Okay, let’s talk about what a freak this guy is. In 2012, he followed a city council candidate to his car in a dark parking lot, and swaggering like he was on meds, proceeded to threaten the man for divulging public information from the city podium. 

http://worldofjuanita.com/2012/03/22/scott-gruendl-threatens-city-council-candidate-for-asking-questions/

He acted similarly at a committee meeting when I asked him why he and his neighbors protested a low-income housing project next to Doe Mill. Gruendl led that protest, claiming that low-income housing lowers property values for neighbors. He had the project moved over to North Valley Plaza, with no concerns for the neighbors there. Now North Valley Plaza is a wreck, piles of dirt have sat where successful stores had sat for years. “It’s always been an eyesore,” says the owner of the Pour House. No, it wasn’t always an eyesore, that happened on Gruendl’s watch. That was a viable part of town, with good family housing all around it. Why was it okay to place low-income housing there, but not next to Gruendl’s hood?

When I asked him this at a morning meeting, he shocked the entire assemblage by threatening to close the meeting. He never answered the question, even though the very topic of the discussion was, why people don’t like low-income housing in their neighborhood!

Gruendl has also voted to raise his own salary as councilor, he’s voted to lay-off employees and make them pay more of their own packages but he still receives salary and benefits as council, paying only 2 percent of his $9,000/year salary toward his $21,000+ health insurance package.  He also receives health insurance from Glenn County and from Chico State where he is a part time teacher.  All this free health care, two extra salaries, in addition to his $100,000+ salary from Glenn County.

What a pig. He’s got himself so overextended he thinks it’s okay to drive 102 mph down a public freeway, endangering lives and making a mockery of the public trust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyLJ9cQij0k

You can see it on the Superior Court index, here, just type in “Gruendl, Scott”:

http://www.buttecourt.ca.gov/online_index/Search.cfm

He was only fined $859? A friend of ours kid was fined over $400 for a bicycle infraction. I’ll never forget the story Gruendl told on “Chico Left” – ah, remember Tim Boozekay?   It was the first week of school, and the cops were out in force giving tickets for anything. Gruendl had been stopped, admittedly jaywalking, by a gal from Chico PD – he said he told her, “you don’t know who I am…” and walked away. He bragged about that.

I’ll say it – if you reelect this ghoul, you deserve what you get. He’s driven our city into the dirt for his own financial gain. Ask anybody in Hamilton City what they think of him – Ham City opted out of Glenn County mosquito district, cause they said Butte County mosquito district gave them a better deal. A few years ago, Gruendl tried to force Ham City back into the Glenn County district, admittedly just for the revenues. He thinks it’s okay to loot the public  coffers for his own gain, he’s an unbelievable pig.

A vote for Gruendl, is a vote for bankruptcy. Furthermore, it’s a vote for corruption, greed, and embezzlement. It’s a travesty of the public trust.  

 

 

Tags: ,

Democracy is not a spectator sport!

10 Oct

Well, I feel like an American – I just returned about an hour ago from the CPUC hearing on the PG&E rate hike proposal. I feel like an American with a lap full of bullshit.

What did I tell you about these judges? Here we find ourselves with one Jeanne McKinney, Administrative Law Judge, flanked by a court reporter on the one hand, another man who ran the slide show, and a giant bald headed muscle man who was there to enforce the time limit.  

Pick out the security guy.

Pick out the security guy.  He turned out to be a big pussy cat, obviously intimidated by righteous old people.

Judge McKinney introduced herself with this explanation: “My black robes show my commitment to upholding the law…”   She went on to explain the proceedings. The time limit would be two minutes  (even though there weren’t that many speakers signed up).  She promised, “I will not interrupt you,” adding, “everybody should be careful not to interrupt or speak over each other…”  I don’t know if this comes from her training in mediation, or if she’s been to a few hearings where the public has got obstreperous, but she seemed prepared for a riot, being real sweet but firm, like a kindergarten teacher with license to paddle.

I was real impressed with the turn-out, on a workday afternoon, including people who’d driven from as far away as Taylorsville. There was a delegation from the Sutter County Taxpayers Association. I didn’t get to count the attendants, but I’d estimate at least 30 concerned citizens, ratepayers, business and home owners. These weren’t angry protesters, like those who who  came to the hearing in San Francisco last week.

http://sfappeal.com/2014/10/protestors-demand-removal-of-ca-public-utilities-comission-president/

But they were concerned, very anxious, and several of them besides me even angry about the rate “changes” proposed by PG&E.  All of them agreed that the proposal was, as one woman put it, “a slap in the face,” to those of us who’d tried to conserve.

The big news  to me was the announcement, not included in the notice I received in my bill, that these new rates would mean, “high usage customers may see their bills go down and low usage customers may see their bills go up.”  Read that again – I thought it was a typo, but as if butter wouldn’t melt in her mouth, the judge read that line several times from the handout.  Our assembly passed a bill behind our backs, “lifting the cap on lower-tier rates…”  And here they come, like Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham, to rip off the poor to give cheaper rates to the rich.

What outraged me – and several other speakers mentioned this too – in the handout, which the judge of course read to us almost verbatim, it  says the CPUC’s “Core Principles for Rate Design Proposals” are supposed to “encourage conservation and energy efficiency…”  As Julian Zener, former member of the Chico Sustainability Task Force, pointed out, “this [change] actually incentivizes heavy use…”  He pointed out the social inequity of such a move – social equity was supposed to be a component of the city ‘s Sustainability program, but I sure as hell didn’t see any other members of the STF at the hearing. Maybe they’ll show up tonight at the 6:30 hearing,  and report back to me?

There were other outrages – the spin of this whole thing, the confusing language, the baldfaced contradictions – we really should have been circling that building with signs, we shouldn’t have participated. We should have blocked the driveway and stopped the hearing.  Again we have handed them our tacit consent – all they need is for us to show up at the hearing, so they can say they did their legal diligence in telling us about the hike. 

But, I wanted to vent, and I hoped to see others vent as well. I was not disappointed. Patricia Miller from Sutter County Taxpayers Association was the first speaker – right away I could feel my balls swelling up.  Miller reminded us, one of the rate increase notices we’d received in our bills over the last couple of years was to pay for the fines and infrastructural repairs in the wake of the San Bruno explosion.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2014/09/02/pge-san-bruno-gas-explosion-fine/14979593/

A $1.4 billion fine – handed off to the ratepayers. Miller objected to that, and asked if we ratepayers would also be on the hook for the recent fine given to PG&E for “judge shopping” for these farcical hearings. Here’s the latest article I found – PG&E and CPUC are getting a colonoscopy from the FEDS!

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Federal-prosecutors-probing-PG-E-CPUC-e-mails-5804757.php

I sure hope so anyway. This whole PG&E scam really needs to be investigated. There’s no accountability when the judge’s “prior experience includes serving as senior counsel to an independent energy producer and handling business disputes and transactions at two San Francisco law firms.”  I love the spin – that’s just a round-the-corral-don’t-step-in-bullshit way of saying “lawyer for a energy utility.” I can’t believe they don’t have to be straighter about that, and tell us which one. This woman didn’t deserve the respect we gave her, that facetious speech about her black robes – Jeanne, honey, you should be working under a red light.  

Miller’s husband Chuck stood up next – he poked at the judge, asking her questions about the “green” energy plans Jerry Brown has put in place – have they gone anywhere? He already knew the answer – NO! But the judge just repeated that she was not there to answer questions about PG&E, just the “proceedings“.   Miller was right to bring it up – Governor Brown has mandated  33% of power be generated by “green” sources, and that has raised our rates with no real results. We’re still on the grid, we’re still paying for power shipped in from who-knows-where at what “real cost.” Judge politely answered that she couldn’t answer his questions.

Even with the outrages we were hearing, people continued to be polite. The third speaker, Paul Sullivan from Chico, complained that “raising prices on the low users – people who struggle to pay $150 bill – we feel that would be detrimental…”

Speaker after speaker complained that the new rates would be onerous for the poor.

Speaker after speaker complained that the new rates would be onerous for the poor.

Bill Brattigan came all the way from Taylorsville to attend. He joked that rate increases are good for him, he owns a solar business! Solar is getting cheaper, he says. He says, changing the tiered structure to give lower prices to the high users is hardly going to motivate people to go onto solar. He’s right – the new tier structure will reward high users, and punish low users. So why would anybody make the switch to solar? Furthermore, PG&E screws solar users – they give them 4 cents a kilowatt hour and then sell that for 35 – 50 cents. 

Several speakers complained that the pricing changes would not be conducive to conservation, which is a core principal of the CPUC.

Several speakers complained that the pricing changes would not be conducive to conservation, which is a core principal of the CPUC.

I’m sorry, I didn’t catch the name of the next speaker, an 88 year old woman from Oroville, who complained that rates just keep going up, without explanation. When her bills for herself and her disabled vet son started climbing over $500 a month, folks at PG&E set her up on the CARE program – which currently cuts your bill by about 44 %.  But a few years later, they raised the maximum income, and she became ineligible, and “the bills started coming in again…”  She made a point that a couple of others had made – when they bought their house, years and years ago, they were told that they would  be paying some fees to set up infrastructure. But this woman says she’s seen housing fill in all around her, the infrastructure has been built and running for years, but those charges have not disappeared from her bills. I’ve seen many notices in which they say the charges will only last for a year and a half maybe – but my bill never goes down.  

Whose bill has gone down? Anybody?

Then this lady really dropped a bombshell – she was nervous by this point, they had  the red digital clock on the front table, ticking down the time. This lady used to work for Butte County Assessor’s office, she lived here in the 1950’s when Oroville Dam was built. She reported that the Dept. of Water Resources was talked into building all of PG&E’s infrastructure, it’s all on public property, and they pay no property taxes on this property that generates out power.  She said the assessor (gave no name) was upset that the property would be taken off the tax rolls. We all pay taxes on our homes, but PG&E pays no taxes on the property with which they generate billions of dollars a year. 

She left the podium telling everybody she’d only recently started reading “these little slips of paper” that come with her bill. Wow, did she feel taken, and encouraged everybody to be more vigilant. Thank you very much 88 year old lady, you kick ass. 

I was glad to see Julian Zener and Grace Marvin appear. Those two have really brought up some nuisance bullshit before Chico City Council – Zener was a member of Ann Schwab’s Sustainability Task Force, by which the city gave PG&E a golden ticket to screw  every resident of this town, in exchange for a $400,000 grant that was parceled out to members of the task force. I’m so sick of this corruption Downtown, I was surprise to see these two stand  up on their hind legs and bitch out PG&E. Zener pointed out the “discrepancy” between the CPUC’s stated goal of conservation and their new “rate changes”, as well as the social inequity of charging poor people more for energy than rich people. Then he pointed out a “discrepancy” between what PG&E will tell you on the phone and what they say on their website, regarding the details on solar power pricing. 

Grace Marvin described her efforts, time and expense that went into an energy analysis of her home, the lengths she has gone to to save money, the “thousands” she spent installing solar power – all for naught. Her family got WRAM’d as soon as the savings started rolling in. Remember WRAM is how they collect more money off you if you don’t use enough energy. “This doesn’t make sense,” she said, “it’s like a slap in the face.”   I must agree with her.

Mary Laprad came up to remind everybody that PG&E is a business. Businesses should roll expnses into their business operations, not pass them onto their customers. She described the rate increase notices as “continual. People who try to conserve are perennially hit with rate increases…”  If you pay attention to your bills, you see she’s right.

Beef farmer Marv Freeman (who may be a relative of mine, I will have to look him up) stood up to say PG&E drove him out of the dairy business, and now they charge him a $200 a month fee for each pump he runs to water his grass and his steers. Like me, Marv can’t just pass his expenses on to his customers, he just has to swallow these bills and go on. I can’t raise my rents just because my bills go up, and Marv can’t get more for his beef, his customers will walk away along with my tenants. He really summed it up good – “PG&E is too big to go broke, but I’m not…“

Another man who came from the Sutter area was Robert MacLared. He was very nice, but reminded the judge, “No request from PG&E ever gets turned down…”  He also complained that changing the tiered rate would discourage conservation – “rates just keep going up.”

Then a local mobile home park owner, Larry Elliot, stood up in his work clothes, obviously a busy man. He had  humdinger of a problem – he has to pay his tenants’ PG&E bills, because it’s one big hook-up. He is not eligible for CARE, but has to give CARE rates to his tenants. So he is subsidizing his tenants’ power. Of course he can turn around and collect it back in their rent . Think about that Dummass, and get back to me – you can only squeeze so much out of people who can’t afford to live anywhere but a trailer park. So, they’re lowering the CARE payment from 44 to 32 percent – WHOA somebody has tied NELLY to the tracks! 

The notice I got said they were lowering CARE, but didn’t say how much.  The handout we received  said it would go from 44 to 32 percent. I think they will also close the orphanage and send a couple dozen old  ladies to a work house. 

That was the end of the public comment. The judge had kept her promise – even when speakers, including myself, went overtime, she didn’t say anything. I’m proud to say, I was the first speaker to shove that two minutes bullshit right back up her ass, and  I just ignored Mr. Ape (who was never introduced so I had to make a name for him) when he tried to eyebrow me off the podium.  After I sat down, the judge sent him out of the room to get this big red card that said “Time Up”. But the other speakers just ignored him when he’d hold it up. Almost everybody went over two minutes. 

But the hearing was  still over in under an  hour. What nerve she had to limit our comments like that, a whore of Babylon like her. I told her I wasn’t too happy about paying her pension, either, and she just sat there like she was getting an enema.

While I did see a few familiar faces, I didn’t  see one councilor or council candidate, I didn’t see my county supervisor, or any of our “local leaders.” I saw true leaders – if the public will lead, the leaders will follow.

As we were leaving I recognized former city council candidate, Chico businessman Ali Sarsour. Mr. Sarsour is a regular attendee at a lot of meetings, but he keeps his tongue. I have no idea what he is thinking, I wish he would speak up, I think he knows a lot of stuff. As we left the parking lot I noticed the bumper sticker on his car, “Democracy is not a spectator sport”. 

 

 

 

 

Tags: , , ,

Did you know that PG&E is allowed to pick the CPUC judge that hears their rate case application?

8 Oct

According to an article by Ellen Knickmeyer of Associated Press (10/7/14), “A PG&E representative acknowledged communicating with top commission officials to pick the judge for a PG&E rate case.”  After revelations of  other “back-channel dealings between utility executives and officials of California’s Public Utilities Commission,”  a judge is being asked to bar all private contracts between utility companies and their regulators. 

Well, for Pete’s sake – it’s about freaking time! 

Knickmeyer reports “In the hearing before a state administrative law judge, rate-payer groups and others criticized both PG&E and the utilities board for secret communications,”  after a PG&E representative actually admitted “communicating” with top commission officials to pick the judge for a PG&E rate case.  

As the kids say today, “OMG!” Put another “!” on that. And a double “G” ! ! 

These people are dirty, sheesh, the stuff they pull. They enrich themselves at our expense, they collaborate to steal from us!  That’s racketeering. And, that’s nobody’s fault but our own.  How many of you have written those letters/e-mails I been asking you to write? Get on it! Be sure to reference this storyThese people need a torch to their bottoms – that’s OUR JOB! 

 At last the local media seems to have come alive – I read this story in the Chico Enterprise Record. I don’t know if it was intentionally picked off the wire, or just by accident, but at last our local media is telling us something important.

Here’s the whole story:

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/642501a737b148359847139e6a5e6086/regulator-sought-donation-california-utility

I’ll remind you all again, that rate increase hearing is tomorrow at Holiday Inn, two sessions at 2 and 6:30 pm. I might print a copy of this story and wave it at them. Should I ask if any of them were “shopped” by PG&E? Will any of you be there to back me up? 

 

Tags: , , ,

CPUC hearing on PG&E rate increase – Oct 9

7 Oct

The CPUC will be hearing public comments regarding PG&E’s proposed rate hike this Thursday,Oct. 9, at Holiday inn. There will be two sessions, at 2 and 6:30 pm.

I don’t expect them to give us much time, so please think about what you’d like to say, and put it into a very short statement. We may be limited to three minutes or less. We can be sure they will be hostile toward us.

One thing you can do is bring in as many of your old bills as you can round up, just hold up that stack, let them know you pay attention. Tell them your rates have been raised repeatedly and the baseline has been cut dramatically. PG&E is creating a hostile atmosphere for business and residents in our town.

Frankly, I’ll say, they’ve created anxiety and fear in our homes. We’ve all been making drastic lifestyle changes, cutting back our usage, but our bills aren’t going down.

But I also intend to ask some questions – what is the justification for this rate increase?  Where is the money going? How much of PG&E’s budget goes toward pensions? What portion of their own benefits and pension do PG&E workers pay?

Please join me – I will try to attend both sessions. Don’t be a patsy.

We will not get help from any of our elected leaders – they are too busy grandstanding on the steps of  City Hall, opening shopping season Downtown.

Tags: ,

What’s a little budget appropriation between friends? Time to “clean up” the budget!

3 Oct
4.4.
CONSIDERATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION/BUDGET MODIFICATION FY 13/14 The Supplemental Appropriation/Budget Modification addresses budgetary adjustments necessary for “clean up” of budget vs. actual expenditures in Fiscal Year 2013-14. (Report – Frank Fields, Accounting Manager)Recommendation : The Administrative Services Department recommends approval of Supplemental Appropriation/Budget Modification No. 2014-ASD-016.

 

I can’t post the report, because Debbie Presson loads the reports in such a way as they can’t be cut-and-paste, even though she promised she wouldn’t do that anymore. You can look at it here, if you can make heads or tails of the Suit Speak, get back to me.

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=89&meta_id=41862

But a cursory reading says they want over $32,000 extra,  for  “salaries and benefits…expenditures exceeding revenues…bloat, fart, burp…”

 

 

Tags: , ,

Take a look at the city’s PG&E bills

2 Oct
This is just part of the city's monthly PG&E bill - the grand total for the month of

This is one of two checks made out monthly to PG&E by the city of Chico.

Check #2 - for one month of PG&E the city of Chico lays out about $160,000.

Check #2 – for one month of PG&E the city of Chico lays out about $160,000.

I don’t know how many times I’ve sat in meetings Downtown, shivering cold. No matter what time of year, the air conditioning in that building seems to be running full-tilt boogie.  I can’t stand refrigeration, I get over cold, then over hot, it’s hard to sit still and concentrate. When I paid a visit to the city building recently, I noticed everybody in there was dressed as if for Winter, wearing sweaters over long-sleeve shirts. I realize, they want to look business-like, but I think they can do that in less clothes. Having to pay this kind of money to air condition the management types who insist on three piece suits in July is an onerous burden for the taxpayer. Get a pair of Bermuda shorts Chris and Mark! 

When I read the rate increase proposal from PG&E I couldn’t help but wonder what that would mean to the city of Chico. I finally decided to take my own personal time and go down to the city to view the utility bills. I knew it would be high – there’s not just lights and ac for the big building Downtown, the city owns properties and little office buildings all over town. They also pay for street lights and electricity for irrigating all those community green ways and the stupid  medians and sidewalk greenery along public streets. So, it really adds up.  The grand total for the period from August 14 to September 14 is over $160,000. 

Now, the irrigation and some of the lights are paid for by “assessment districts” – homeowners are assessed for this maintenance in their property tax bills.  

This list shows the funds from which the money is taken to pay the amounts in the bills. I think some of these accounts are homeowner assessment districts.

This list shows the funds from which the money is taken to pay the amounts in the bills. I think some of these accounts are homeowner assessment districts.  This is just one page I found, there were others.

It’s not a very big portion of this bill though. Most of this bill is for electricity used in city owned buildings.

Yes, I think the city wastes a lot of electricity. I think they have way too many lights and computer stations running for no good purpose. Also, since they laid off so many employees, they have a big empty building Downtown that is still sucking a lot of juice. One suggestion I’d make is close the third floor and shut off the power up there. 

When Ann Schwab  formed the Sustainability Task Force, she said the first priority would be too look over city properties and see where the belt could be tightened. Frankly, I don’t even think she found a belt. I think Mark Stemen needs to get his priorities in order. Stop messing around in our private business, and turn that butt-candle to the city of Chico. Don’t even talk to me about roof tiles until you’ve reduced the city’s electricity usage Mark – I want a 20 percent decrease before this latest PG&E rate hike kicks in. 

One month's electricity to run the sewer plant.

One month’s electricity to run the sewer plant.  This is only a fraction of the sewer budget – most is made up of salaries, benefits and pensions – check the city budget.

I can't find any explanation on this bill, see any address here? Over $2200 for what? And over $2300 last month. I smell air conditioning.

$2200 a month for lights and air conditioning at the animal shelter. Again, this pales in comparison to the salaries and benefits in that budget. 

Almost $100 a month to light a sign at DeGarmo Park.

Almost $100 a month to light a sign at DeGarmo Park.

This is what it costs to run a traffic signal for a month.

This is what it costs to run a traffic signal for a month.

I took pictures of page after page, not all of them – one bill was 158 pages long – but whatever caught my interest. 

$254/month to keep lights on at the Stansbury Home?

$254/month to keep lights on at the Stansbury Home?  That’s more than twice the bill my family had in our 1800 sf home, and we lived there 24 hours a day.

This is still part of that $122,000 bill - look at the details - over $300 for "gas procurement"? What the hell?

This is still part of that $122,000 bill – look at the details – over $300 for “gas procurement”? What the hell?

 

One other conclusion I’ll draw from looking at these bills – the  rate increase is going to hurt the city. They’re going to use it to try and stick us for some sort of tax. 

Well, off to work. 

 

Tags: ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →