Still time to fight the water rate increase – DRA recommends cutting proposed hike in half

11 Nov

I have not been following the Cal Water rate increase lately – frankly, from my stats, I get the sickening feeling that nobody else in Chico is paying attention either.  Neither of the papers are covering this, nor has the city council discussed it. Let’s face it – a rate hike is good for the city of Chico, because it will mean increased Utility Tax revenues, and both newspapers seems to be nothing but propaganda rags for the city of Chico these days, so don’t expect them to make any waves.

Just in case you’re still asleep, wrap those warm feet around this – Cal Water wants to raise your bill by almost 40 percent. That’s alot, especially if you’re still in the habit of watering anything besides your shower and toilet.

 And here’s the real sticker – they try to tell us it’s for infrastructure, but I have the legal notice received in my billing – over half the increase will go to employee pensions and benefits. Furthermore, what they apparently didn’t mention in those notices was, the stockholders were going to get a nice little slice too.  

This should feel familiar to you – remember the time that big kid came out from behind that tree on the way to school, punched you real hard in the guts and said, “Gimmee your lunch money!” Well, this is more of the same.

Disgusted ratepayers in Marysville formed a group – “Marysville for Reasonable Water Rates” – check out the latest news on their Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Marysville-For-Reasonable-Water-Rates/176321489194208

They made a formal complaint to the California Public Utilities Commission, which was more than I could get out of the lobsters around here. This resulted in a hearing with the Department of Ratepayer Assistance, which suggested their requested hike be cut in half.  Cal Water came back with a proposal to increase the discount for their Low Income Rate Assistance program, but those who don’t qualify for LIRA will pay more to make up for that increase.  

Something that keeps making me madder and madder is why they say they need the increase – because we’ve been using less water. We’re not only conserving already, but we’ve reacted to the increases they’ve already shoved up our asses. I’ve watched my bill at  this house increase from an $8 service charge to $14. I’ve watched the price of a ccf go from about 50 cents to a dollar. In Marysville and Oroville they’re paying over a dollar for tier one.  This has nothing to do with the “cost” of providing water. It has everything to do with enriching management and shareholders. While you let your lawn die, some guy in Arizona is receiving a check made up of your money. 

The issue still needs to go before a panel at the CPUC, sometime in “early 2014.” Below I’ve pasted a news release from Cal Water – don’t slip in the bullshit, and you can get the information you need. Cal Water is not telling us below how much of the increase is going into employee benefits and pension, but they do suggest “the establishment of a health care balancing account that will track changes in employee health care costs and provide for the sharing of these cost changes between customers and shareholders during the rate case cycle. The parties believe the health care balancing account provides protection to the company and its customers due to the uncertainties arising from continuing changes in medical costs and insurance nationally, while providing an incentive to actively manage these costs downward.”  They’re offering to show us what they spend, so we can bitch about it and “incentivize” them to cut costs? How? By chasing after the Cal Water trucks, barking like a dog? “Hey, you been gaining too much weight lately! And you need to quit smoking, I saw that cigarette!” 

No, we don’t want to pay for that stuff, stop it. And it’s not really for the meter readers or the trench diggers, it’s for the soft-handed management types, like Mike Pembroke.  We need to contact the CPUC, now.  Familiarize yourselves with this page on the CPUC website:

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/puc/aboutus/Divisions/CSID/Public+Advisor/

There is a lot of information here and contact information. Be sure to identify yourself and where you live. Tell them how the rate hike will affect you, and that your answer is going to be, USE LESS WATER.

 

Settlement Agreement Reached in California Water Service Company’s General Rate Case

SAN JOSE, CA–(Marketwired – Oct 30, 2013) – California Water Service Company (Cal Water), the largest subsidiary of California Water Service Group (NYSE: CWT), announced today that it has entered into a settlement agreement with the California Public Utilities Commission’s Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) and other parties to its 2012 General Rate Case. The Commission may or may not adopt the settlement agreement as proposed by the parties.

If the settlement agreement is approved as proposed, Cal Water would be authorized to invest $447 million in districts throughout California over the three-year period (2013 – 2015) in order to provide a safe and reliable water supply to its customers. Included in the $447 million in water system infrastructure improvements is $126 million that would be recovered through the Commission’s advice letter procedure upon completion of qualified projects. Under the terms of the settlement, the Company would be authorized to increase gross revenue by approximately $45 million in 2014, $10 million in 2015, $10 million in 2016, and up to $19 million upon completion and approval of the company’s advice letter projects.

Addressing affordability, the settlement agreement provides for an increase in the discount provided to qualified low-income customers as part of its Low Income Rate Assistance program throughout Cal Water’s service areas in California, and an increase in the Rate Support Fund assistance to customers who reside in high-cost service areas.

Another provision of the settlement is the establishment of a health care balancing account that will track changes in employee health care costs and provide for the sharing of these cost changes between customers and shareholders during the rate case cycle. The parties believe the health care balancing account provides protection to the company and its customers due to the uncertainties arising from continuing changes in medical costs and insurance nationally, while providing an incentive to actively manage these costs downward.

The Commission is expected to issue a final decision on the case in early 2014. Additional information about the settlement agreement may be found on the Commission’s web site at www.cpuc.ca.gov.

California Water Service Group is the parent company of California Water Service Company, Washington Water Service Company, New Mexico Water Service Company, Hawaii Water Service Company, Inc., CWS Utility Services, and HWS Utility Services. Together these companies provide regulated and non-regulated water service to nearly 2 million people in California, Washington, New Mexico, and Hawaii. California Water Service Group’s common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “CWT.” Additional information is available on our website at www.calwatergroup.com.

This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“Act”). The forward-looking statements are intended to qualify under provisions of the federal securities laws for “safe harbor” treatment established by the Act. Forward-looking statements are based on currently available information, expectations, estimates, assumptions and projections, and management’s judgment about the Company, the water utility industry and general economic conditions. Such words as would, expects, intends, plans, believes, estimates, assumes, anticipates, projects, predicts, forecasts or variations of such words or similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. They are subject to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Actual results may vary materially from what is contained in a forward-looking statement. Factors that may cause a result different than expected or anticipated include, but are not limited to: governmental and regulatory commissions’ decisions; changes in regulatory commissions’ policies and procedures; the timeliness of regulatory commissions’ actions concerning rate relief; new legislation; electric power interruptions; increases in suppliers’ prices and the availability of supplies including water and power; fluctuations in interest rates; changes in environmental compliance and water quality requirements; acquisitions and our ability to successfully integrate acquired companies; the ability to successfully implement business plans; changes in customer water use patterns; the impact of weather on water sales and operating results; access to sufficient capital on satisfactory terms; civil disturbances or terrorist threats or acts, or apprehension about the possible future occurrences of acts of this type; the involvement of the United States in war or other hostilities; restrictive covenants in or changes to the credit ratings on our current or future debt that could increase our financing costs or affect our ability to borrow, make payments on debt or pay dividends; and, other risks and unforeseen events. When considering forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind the cautionary statements included in this paragraph, as well as the annual 10-K, Quarterly 10-Q, and other reports filed from time-to-time with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Company assumes no obligation to provide public updates of forward-looking statements.

1720 North First Street
San Jose, CA 95112-4598

Contact:
Tom Smegal
(408) 367-8200
(analysts)

Shannon Dean
(310) 257-1435
(media)

Tags: , , , , , ,

Scott Gruendl and friends in denial over loss of Measure J – still giving away rainbows down at City Hall

9 Nov

With the help of the media, the city of Chico continues to distract us with “Sit/Lie,” while behind closed doors they’re negotiating the employee contracts. Just the other night they handed a bone to the cops – longtime Chico police officer George Laver was promoted from sergeant to lieutenant, a significant pay raise. Days later, the department announced Laver intends to retire soon. He will retire at lieutenant’s salary. This is one form of spiking, and there they do it right in front of us, with the full blessing of our idiot council.

Including Mark Sorensen, who told me personally that Brian Nakamura was hired to wield a big stick with the employees and their unions. But just a couple of weeks ago, Nakamura complained to a full room at a Tea Party meeting that if he tried to make any changes to existing cop or fire contracts, “the city chambers would be packed with people wearing red Chico Fire shirts… ”  The cops and fire bring in big lawyers from out of town, he said, wa wa wa! Sheesh, this big gun assassin I heard so much about is a quivering woos!

They are laying off people Downtown who do work that brings in revenues, and protecting a pack of prized pigs who won’t even pay their own benefits to keep the city from going under. This idiocy needs to stop with the next election.

Scott Gruendl is up in November 2014. Gruendl, Ann Schwab and Mary Goloff, put Measure J, the cell phone tax, on the ballot, and wrote the arguments in favor. They tried to tell us the money would go specifically to police, fire, fixing the streets and maintaining the parks, but instead of putting those specifics into writing they wrote the measure to deposit the receipts in the General Fund, where they could use it any way they wanted. They also lied about the average amount a customer paid in UT, and about what they would be losing if Measure J failed to pass. They wrote the measure to include “all forms of electronic communication now available or those which become available in the future,” with staff deciding what constituted “electronic  communication”, without any input from the public.

Gruendl complained again about the failure of Measure J in an August article in the Enterprise Record. “Two cents actually makes a difference these days,” he complained to the reporter. “We are so cash poor, every dollar counts.“

Then why did they promote a guy who’s going to retire in less than a year? So that he could collect pension at that amount for the rest of his life? Because “we are so cash poor, every dollar counts“?

The reporter continues, “[Gruendl] also noted the measure’s failure has not caused changes in city salaries and benefits that opponents of the cellphone tax had argued for, saying they wanted the city to extract funds in other ways. Changing employee compensation continues to be a challenging and ongoing discussion, Gruendl said.”

I’d like to make double note of that fact. Here he actually seems to be bragging that he ain’t going to knuckle under to the citizens who won a majority decision over his measure, that he just won’t listen. He’s just not going to do his job as our elected representative, he’s just point blank refusing to deliver the will of the people over this special interest group. I’d also like to mention, as an employee of Glenn County, he is a member of the very same special interest group – a member of the public employee unions.

But  neither will I forget the way Mark Sorensen held me off by the forehead when I complained about Nakamura’s salary and terms of his plush contract. Sorensen insisted that Nakamura would prove himself worth the money when he wrestled the employee unions to the table, kicking and screaming, bluster, bluster, bluster.

 Now Nakamura is the one doing the kicking and screaming, or more appropriate, whining and squirming. Wiggling out of his job.  Flaking on his promises to get our employee expenses under control. Why would anybody be surprised? The first thing he did was give himself an out-of-control salary, and a contract guaranteeing a lifetime of paychecks for only four percent of his bloated salary. 

Sorensen is no better himself.  Remember, he’s was the one who wrote the opposing arguments for Measure J. I think Stephanie Taber or even I could have done a much better job, but it fell first to the council member who wanted it, and Sorensen snatched that opportunity, within the narrow time limits given by the clerk’s office, to write a pretty lackluster argument that lacked sincerity. As if anybody would believe that Mark Sorensen and his friends give a rat’s patoot about low income people.  I have never been fully convinced that Sorensen didn’t want J to pass, even while posturing for it’s defeat. I’ll bet he was surprised it lost. If it had won, I’m absolutely certain he’d be standing aside while the revenues were poured into salaries and benefits, including his own $21,000 insurance policy. 

 Gruendl told the Enterprise Record “I don’t think (Measure J) really changes how we bargain and negotiate.”  That seems to be true. They still negotiate these contracts as though they’ve got a money tree out back of City Hall. They don’t get it, they won’t get it – Measure J’s defeat was about more than excessive taxation, it was about what they’re doing with the money. But they ignore the will of the people, they never intended to pay attention.  They’re not up there to serve us, they’re up there to serve themselves and their friends. 

Cellphone tax rebate applications start to slow down

By ASHLEY GEBB-Staff Writer

POSTED Chico Enterprise Record:   08/10/2013 01:19:22 AM PDT

CHICO — Six months have passed since cellphone tax refunds became available to Chico residents, and the city has since issued $9,550 to taxpayers who want their money back.Chico accounting manager Frank Fields said 191 individual refunds had been issued since February to both residences and businesses, for an average of $50.

The city began offering the refunds in the wake of the failure of Measure J. Nearly 54 percent of voters struck down the proposal to update the city’s phone user tax to include modern technology such as cellphones.

All wireless phone companies have stopped collecting the tax on the city’s behalf. The 5 percent phone tax equated to about $2.50 of a monthly $50 bill or $5 of a monthly $100 bill.

The city will continue to issue rebates one year past the date of any cellphone taxes charged to customers but the number of applications is already starting to dwindle. Only eight applications were submitted in July.

“At this point, somebody could claim back through August of last year,” Fields said. “The one year window is sort of closing every month that goes by. Somebody might have August through January-February. Next month, it will be September through January-February.”

As for the volume of rebate requests, it wasn’t something the city could anticipate, Fields said.

“I don’t know if there was a way to predict what kind of response we would get,” he said. “We had no preconceived ideas about how many refunds we would issue.”

The refund money comes out of the general fund, which is also experiencing the impact of the overall tax loss.

The last three months have been the best indicator of the impact the loss of Measure J will have because only small amounts of tax have been paid to the city, Fields said. Compared to the previous year, the lost cellphone revenue tallies $217,000.

If multiplied to represent the entire year, the loss looks to be about $870,000.

“That’s general fund revenue that’s no longer available to pay for general city services,” he said.

The loss of revenue related to Measure J was noted during the June budget study session, as councilors cut $4.8 million from the 2013-14 budget.

Councilor Scott Gruendl said he remains disappointed by the measure’s failure, especially as the magnitude of the city’s financial situation continues to be realized.

“Two cents actually makes a difference these days,” he said. “We are so cash poor, every dollar counts.”

He also noted the measure’s failure has not caused changes in city salaries and benefits that opponents of the cellphone tax had argued for, saying they wanted the city to extract funds in other ways. Changing employee compensation continues to be a challenging and ongoing discussion, Gruendl said.

“I don’t think (Measure J) really changes how we bargain and negotiate,” he said.

Recently, while walking through Bidwell Park in an area now shuttered to citizens because of budget-related park closures, resident Siobhan O’Neil said she sees a direct link between the city’s cuts and the failure of Measure J.

‘You get what you pay for and what you don’t pay for,” she told the Enterprise-Record. “For pennies a month, we gave up a source of revenue to help with services in an economy that’s still struggling.'”

To obtain a refund, residents must provide documentation, including their cellphone bill and proof the bill was paid. Applications are available online and at City Hall’s Finance Department counter.

Fields acknowledged some people have complained about the amount of necessary documentation but said there is no other option.

“We have to have documentation to show that it was paid,” he said. “Unfortunately, those are usually phone bills. There is no way to bypass that part of the process.”

Since November, any phone tax revenue that has come in has been placed in an account earmarked for refunds. As of Monday, about $286,450 had accumulated.

Whatever remains after the one-year mark of not receiving any cellphone tax revenue will go into the general fund, likely in spring 2014.

Reach Ashley Gebb at 896-7768, agebb@chicoer.com or on Twitter @AshleyGebb.

Tags: , , , , ,

Brian Nakamura under attack? Fears for his personal and family’s safety? Apparently he’s talking about the police and fire employees

7 Nov

Last week I attended the Tuesday night Tea Party meeting, and by Thursday morning I’d sent off a letter to the Enterprise Record about it. On Sunday I realized I had not received the usual response from David Little, so I resent. Little himself has told me, and other regular letter writers, to resend if I don’t get that “it’s in the cue” response directly from him, so I always do. He responded a day or two later complaining he had a lot of letters. My letter finally ran yesterday, Wednesday. Today it’s gone, fuckyouverymuch!

I also can’t help but notice – other letters that ran yesterday are still up.  I hate to be a sour apple, but that’s how I feel when I get the short end of the stick. Especially from a guy who takes the sticks in his hands, measures them up, and then looks around the room and says, “you again – you get  the short stick.”  I’m used to that from him, but it makes him smaller and smaller every time until some day I expect him to disappear and suddenly some new, fresh-minded young person will be standing there, ready to hand over a clean new deck of cards. I  can dream.

I spend time writing these dam-ned letters. In this case, I wrote to the ER instead of writing a blog about this meeting because I was short on time and figured it was important to tell other people. Fat lot of good it did to write the the Enterprise Record! 

I also wrote a letter to the News and Review, about another aspect of Nakamura’s chat at the Tea Party meeting – that ran with the first send, and will appear on the website into perpetuity. Read that here:

http://www.newsreview.com/chico/letters-for-november-7-2013/content?oid=11973038

I don’t write letters to the editor to see my name in the paper, I write because I know the general public doesn’t make it to these behind-closed-doors ass-kissing sessions, isn’t privvy to this information – even though we all should be. Here’s my letter about Nakamura’s fear of Chico PD and Fire. Why are we letting this guy negotiate our employee contracts? 

Brian Nakamura and Chris Constantin were featured speakers at a recent Tea Party meeting. I was shocked at what Nakamura related about dealing with the police and fire departments. 

 

The city of Chico is currently negotiating contracts with employee unions. I asked if Nakamura, who serves as city liason, was having any luck getting city employees to pay their own benefits and pensions costs.  He said he could not give us specifics of the contracts, but described the talks as “turf wars.” The police and fire unions he said, bring in “legal resources” from out of town to fight “any changes” in the contracts. 

 

When asked if he had considered contracting Cal Fire, Nakamura warned, the council chambers would be packed with people wearing red Chico Fire shirts, and he’d be run out of town.  “It happened in Hemet!” he exclaimed, and described himself as a “target” at least five times. 

 

When asked about a sales tax hike to fund the police department, Nakamura wouldn’t support it – “you can write whatever you want into the measure to try and protect the money, but the complexities of the General Fund…” allow the money to be moved to other funds by Staff without public oversight. 

 

Constantin agreed, adding, “I’m not going to advocate paying more when police don’t pay a dime toward their own benefits…”

 

Chico Fire and Police departments are apparently the biggest threat to public safety, both physical and fiscal. 

 

Juanita Sumner, Chico

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Good Old Boy Network is alive and well in Chico

6 Nov

This afternoon I attended a meeting I had never attended before – the Local Government C0mmittee, made up of representatives from county and city elected officials and staffers. This was easily one of the worst meetings I have ever attended.   I sat there looking at a group of trough slickers, people who’ve grown comfortable getting paid to sit  in meetings  for endless hours, their mushroom-shaped asses molded right into those chairs. They don’t have any sense of time anymore, they just sit in these rooms breathing their own gas until they’ve all dissolved into a slurry of communal back-scratching.

That would include the ones we may or may not have voted for – Randall Stone, Scott Gruendl,  City of Chico;  Maureen Kirk, Larry Wahl, County board of Stupes; Cory Honea, Butte County Sheriff. Excuse me if watching these morons in meetings has left me without an ounce of respect for any of them. They’ve all completely lost touch with what they’re supposed to be doing, and WHO they’re supposed to be serving. Then there’s the usual collection of ass-sucking bureaucrats who go whichever way the wind blows – Chico City Manager Brian Nakamura, representatives from the police department, and then those drip-lickers from agencies like Butte Environmental Council and “park volunteer” Susan Mason, of Fiends of Bidwell Park.

Again, I’ll say, these people have made a life of sitting in meetings on our dime. While we’re out hustling to survive, these soft-handed help-themselvers are sitting in a gorgeously appointed room with a brand new H/A system and fancy furniture, pretending to work for a living. They’re no better than the freaks who hang around the outside of the building. 

The meeting didn’t start until 3:45. That sucks for me, I’m not a professional mushroom ass, I have other responsibilities. And, I like to use my bike to get around – it sure beats the hell out of going everywhere in a conga line of cars – but that limits me to daylight hours. It now starts to get dark at 5 pm, and I don’t feel too secure running around alone in what this council has done to my town after that hour. Lights don’t help, unless we’re talking about a Maglite 6 cell D, or how about a set of nunchucks strung with LED’s?

I also notice, the afternoon and evening meetings are not that productive. I’m not the only person who’s been up all day. Jennifer Macarthy, the county Economic and Community Development Manager  who was supposed to be running this meeting, seemed to forget what she was doing, and let the first topic run off subject a number of times. This was particularly annoying when people insisted on addressing the next topic on the agenda, and then expected to make the same remarks during that conversation as well. Every now and then, sometimes with a nudge from Mo Kirk, Jennifer seemed to remember that she was supposed to be keeping people on subject. This discussion of cleaning up homeless camps ran at least 20 minutes long, at least, with people asking to make just one more off-subject remark after another, and Jennifer allowing them. When one woman’s off-subject comment was ignored, gadfly Emily Alma raised her pudgy little mitt to insist somebody answer the woman. At this point, I wanted to re-enact these old bits from “All in the Family”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kkue1ns4XvU

I went to hear the report on the garbage franchise contract now being stitched together in a cooperative effort between Butte County and the city of Chico. This deal will give either Waste Management or Recology,  or both, exclusive franchise zones in Butte County and in Chico. This means you no longer pick your own hauler, and there’ll be no more incentive for these companies to keep our costs down. There will also be admitted but as yet undisclosed increases in costs for the city of Chico, as well as liability issues. 

Given remarks I’ve heard lately and again at today’s meeting, this is already a done deal in both the county and the city. Right now they’re playing the haulers against each other, nudging them into giving up as much as possible. Today I again heard mentioned the idea that whoever gets the permit should be willing to do all kinds of free services for the city of Chico, like pick up trash in city parks for free, provide free dumpsters for community clean-ups, free street sweeping, etc.

Brian Nakamura has also been running around town saying that we need some kind of prod to make our haulers abide by the laws – during last night’s City Council meeting,  Recology manager Joe Matz finally took exception to this trash talk Nakamura has been spewing. Nakamura said to a Tea Party gathering recently that the garbage companies would use Butte County as a dumping place for their old substandard trucks, that they’d cut recycling services to save money, and all kinds of other fear mongering if we don’t have this franchise to hold over them. Matz reminded everybody last night that all of California has the same air quality laws and vehicle standards. What is Nakamura trying to pull here?

Well, that’s a rhetorical question, you know the answer, I know the answer – he wants the hugely increased fees to pay down the UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY. What does he think, that like Herman Goering, he can just keep repeating his Big Lies until they become the truth?

I didn’t have to stay for the rest of the meeting to  tell you what when on – Good Old Boy network. They allow women in now, but it’s all the same stuff that’s always gone on. Our county and city are run by the talking heads, and they run things to their advantage. Your elected officials are just as bad as staff  – city councilors get a small stipend and a big health insurance policy, and last time I checked, county supervisors were being paid almost $60,000 in salary, plus benefits. None of these people are going to rock their little boat. You have to rock it for them every four years, and it’s time for Gruendl, Wahl and Kirk to take a little swim.

Tags: , ,

Ground Hog Day predictions

5 Nov

Here we are, Second Tuesday – council meeting tonight. I keep getting the weirdest sense of Deja-vu – am I using that correctly? I mean, I feel like this town just keeps circling around the same carcass – “Sit and Lie”.

Everybody loved that movie with Bill Murray, Ground Hog Day, where he wakes up every day, stuck in time, doomed to repeat the same day over and over again. You thought that was just a movie, didn’t you?

The news stories they’ve done, both print and broadcast, have been almost word for word repeats of stories run in August. The council hashed over this ordinance in a well-attended meeting and threw it out, too many problems. I thought it was weird at the time that Chief Trostle seemed kinda wishy-washy. The police department had been asking for the ordinance, but Trostle wasn’t very enthusiastic about presenting it. I realize now, he didn’t like the ordinance as written.

This newer version adds specifics regarding “sitting”, and drops the provision requiring a warning before arrest. That’s what they wanted for the Disorderly Events ordinance, permission to cite people for disturbing the peace without the usual number of complaints, without any signed complaint, and without any warning.  The cops are also pushing a “Social Host” ordinance that likewise circumvents due process, allowing cops, fire or hospitals, etc, to bill the owner of a property who didn’t even know his tenants were having a party. Now they want to be able to arrest people for sitting on any sidewalk for any reason short of a medical emergency or a parade without giving them any sort of head’s up before they start slapping the cuffs on. Hmmmm.

First of all, like Randall Stone says, why have another ordinance when you can’t enforce the laws that are on the books? I wonder if Stone read the same article I saw in the News and Review, describing the citing of a man for sitting on a sidewalk  too close to the crosswalk.  

http://worldofjuanita.com/2013/10/20/wow-headline-news-cop-does-his-job/

The city code includes very specific rules about where panhandlers are allowed to ask the public for money, as well as where anyone is allowed to sit. The “aggressive panhandling” ordinance has been on the books for almost exactly 10 years, but until now,  it’s rarely been enforced. The N&R article covered officer Peter Durfee’s recent attempts to enforce this law, and I had to wonder, “why just now?”

Last week, as I was doing some errands,  I saw officers in various parts of town rousting people who looked like transients – shopping carts, bed rolls, blue tarps and blankets.  First I encountered a team of Chico PD rounding up belongings and throwing away trash from a parking lot Downtown, right near Christian Michaels.  Then I saw a few squad cars rousting people over on the 20th Street overpass. I realized, they been camping in those bushes in the medians around the off-ramps, behind Petco.  I always wondered about that, having seen the kind of trash that indicates Hobo Camp.  Once I even saw one bold fellow camping, bright blue tarp staked out for a tent,  with his shopping cart full of bagged recyclables siting next to it, in a field laying along the west side of 99.

Camping is prohibited pretty much anywhere but registered camp grounds.  Neither the police or park employees have enforced the camping law for a year or so now.  I watched the Mangrove Plaza turn into some kind of homeless center, with the US Post Office buildings serving as a make-shift outdoor shelter area. People who live along the freeway have told me they see transients camping along the freeway at night, even with the widening going on.

But now suddenly the cops are rousting them? This is because of pressure they are feeling from the public complaints, and now the private security force that’s been hired Downtown. The cops are negotiating their contracts right now, which are up in January. They are finally realizing, their critics are starting to outweigh their supporters.

I don’t know why they need a more aggressive law to get rid of this bad case of fleas. We already have laws that allow these folks to be cited for the very offenses that citizens are complaining about.  If they fail to appear or pay the penalty, the cops can arrest them without warning and they go to jail. Sit/Lie seems like a quicker rout to incarceration, but is that really the answer? Take them off the streets and stuff them into our over-crowded jails? Wake up – it will happen here just like it happens in San Francisco, where the bum that was arrested two hours ago, swearing at your customers while seated in a puddle of his own urine, is right back in front of your store, swearing at your customers while seated in a puddle of his own urine.

At least Phil the Weatherman finds his way out of his Ground Hog Day. Here’s my prediction for Chico: Whether or not they pass Sit/Lie, this idiot council will sign the cop contracts, giving them raises as well as leaving completely untouched their fully paid benefits and pension.

And around and around she goes, where she stops, noooooobody knows!

Tags: , , , , , ,

CTA discusses impacts of Obamacare, changes meeting schedule

4 Nov

At yesterday’s Chico Taxpayer’s meeting we decided to take a short hiatus  until January, and then in January we will try a new schedule – instead of meeting the First Sunday, we’ll try Third Sunday. I finally realized, the city committee meetings are mostly at the beginning of the month. In past I’ve almost forgotten about them by the time we’ve got to the library.

We also talked about Obamacare – one of our members admitted, he will actually get a pretty good  deal, we’ll keep an eye on that. I hadn’t wanted to discuss national issues, but we can see all around us how Obamacare is negatively affecting the local economy and screwing up people’s lives.  The most concrete example I have is a public agency – Chico Area Recreation District. Obamacare is a topic at every monthly board meeting, and management long ago made the decision to cut all part time workers – which is most of their work force – down to 27 hours or less. These aren’t kids, many of these people have their own kids – imagine trying to get along in this town on 27 hours at minimum wage.   And they’ve had to cut services to the public as a result. They get more in tax revenues every year with the incremental increase on our homes, but every year they offer less in the way of programs, this past summer cutting over 300 children from just one understaffed program. (I think she said 500 but I don’t have time to look).

So, we continue to discuss Obamacare even though it’s a federal mandate and there’s not much we can do on the local level. Write your legislators, write John Boehner a thank you note – 

http://www.speaker.gov/general/boehner-problem-obamacare-isn-t-just-website-it-s-whole-law

No, I’m not crazy about Boehner, I don’t agree with a lot of what he says, but we’re copacetic on Obamacare.  I will keep an eye on as many public meetings as I can catch and post my reports here. If you have something you’ve written about a meeting you’ve attended, please contact me via “Contact us here!” and I’ll get back to you.  If you have a topic for a special meeting. let me know. Otherwise I will be down at the library January 19, time to be announced. 

The analysis is in – proposed garbage franchise will NOT be good for rate payers or taxpayers!

1 Nov

Here are some excerpts from an analysis by city-paid consultants R3 Consulting Group, available in next week’s city council agenda:

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?meta_id=36629&view=&showpdf=1

The only clear advantage of the City’s existing system over the alternatives is the
potential for lower rates and lower administrative burden. If the potential for lower rates
and lower administrative burden are of primary importance to the City, it should maintain
and enforce its current regulated open-market permit system. If increasing
diversion/environmental services and generating fees to cover expenses incurred by the
City related to the impacts of solid waste collection are of primary importance, the City
should implement an enhanced permit or closed-market system.

Potential Impact on Ratepayers

Rate comparisons between exclusive and non-exclusive systems are complex. Customer rates
are affected by many factors, including the competitiveness of the marketplace, the services
required, the lines of business included in the franchise or open-market system (e.g., residential
versus commercial or roll-off/debris box), and many other factors. Perhaps the most important
of these factors is the competitiveness of the marketplace. If there are several haulers
competing for business in the same marketplace, rates will tend to be driven lower. However,
the competitive nature of the marketplace also puts pressure on some companies to save
money by reducing truck and bin maintenance, reducing recycling services and/or
underreporting required franchise fees.
Alternatively, exclusive agreements are often initiated through a competitive bidding process,
whereby the City releases a request for proposals (RFP) and a selection is made based on a
range of criteria. One of those criteria is customer rates, which the City can weigh heavily as
part of the evaluation process to ensure the City’s residents and businesses receive competitive
rates. In addition, the City has the option of freezing rates for an initial period and establishing a
specific rate setting process (e.g., rates escalated by the Consumer Price Index or Refuse Rate
Index). Finally, it is important to note that rates can be driven lower in an exclusive system with
one or multiple haulers due to a guaranteed revenue base and a guaranteed market share,
respectively.

Administrative Burden
With respect to the structure of the solid waste collection system, one consideration is the level
of City staff time required to administer the system. In the case of a regulated open-market
permit system with limited permit requirements, regulatory requirements are minimal. Enhanced
open-market system and closed-market system options, on the other hand, can have greater
administrative requirements that commensurate with the requirements of the enhanced permit
or franchise agreement (e.g., confirming reported diversion, managing franchise fee payments
etc.). However, language can be included in a franchise agreement to require the franchisee to
compensate the City for cost incurred for performing certain contract obligations, such as rate
reviews and hauler audits.
Time and Costs Associated with Implementation
As discussed earlier, current unrestricted permits will not expire until June 30, 2016. While this
allows for ample time to plan for enhanced permit requirements or a closed-market system, it
restricts the City from actually implementing a new system prior to the expiration of the permits.
However, the City could consider exploring opportunities to implement an exclusive franchise
system prior to current permit expiration by evaluating whether the current haulers are in
compliance with all permit requirements (i.e., reporting requirements). If the haulers are found to
be in non-compliance with any of the permit requirements, the City could pursue an exclusive
franchise system immediately.

Chico Taxpayers Association regular meeting this Sunday, November 3, Chico library, 9am

1 Nov

This Sunday November 3 we will have our regular Chico Taxpayers meeting, 9am, Chico library on Sherman Avenue.

I will bring my little computer and we’ll see if we can pick up the tape of the Tea Party meeting on the free wifi.  

I’d like to talk about the constitutional amendments that are still kicking around (ACA 3, SCA 4) in our state legislature, and hear what other people have been hearing around town. 

Looking forward to some productive chitter-chatter, see you there.

Tags: , , ,

cell phone tax update – almost $300,000 accumulated, only about $10,000 refunded

1 Nov

Back in August, the ER did an update on cell phone tax rebates, saying applications were starting to slow down. At that time they reported a rebate total of $9,550, to 191 customers. Frank Fields told me at one point, most of the applicants were residential, but a few businesses had come in.

Since the beginning, Chico taxpayer Jim Matthews has been suggesting an electronic application, so that victims of the illegal tax could claim their stolen money without having to carry a pile of dead trees down to City Hall during their work day. I personally forwarded that suggestion to Brian Nakamura and staff, who oftentimes answered the e-mail but wouldn’t discuss our suggestion.

For weeks now, I’ve been getting searches here – the cell phone thing is the top search right now, even with all the cops in a titter over other stuff I’ve said about them. It’s even a top search on worldofjuanita.  So, I e-mailed the finance department to ask for an update. I got this reply from Chris Constantin.

“I’ve cc’d Frank to provide the latest numbers.  From the last report I received, unfortunately, not many took advantage of it.  The totals are pretty low.”

I like Constantin, he’s an honest guy – but you know me, I’m an honest gal, Compulsively honest. I found his e-mail offensive, and I had to tell him so. See, the city kept collecting cell phone taxes beyond the November 2012 election wherein we told them to STOP IT! They amassed a tidy $286,450, according to the ER. They will keep this money when a full year passes after the last taxes were collected, which was Spring 2013 (NOTE: meaning, it took them about six months to stop taking it!)   So, you have a few months to make your application, or tell your friends, co-workers, anybody you see standing there holding a cell phone – go Downtown and get your stolen money back!

Constantin purported surprise that more people had not come to claim their stolen money, but I had to call him on that. They made the process so onerous – come down to City Hall, during your work day, don’t forget every cell phone bill you ever got…   I won’t directly blame Constantin but I won’t stand for his pretending to be sorry. He could still change the process to make it electronic, make the phone companies send people their bills electronically, or just send them an annual total for their cell phone tax. That’s all in the records, but Constantin stands by while we are forced to bring a stack of paper Downtown on our lunch break if we want our stolen money back.

Let me repeat that – our stolen money.  $286,450, ill-gotten gain.

I’ll get back to you with that update, and watch for it in the ER, they’ll probably send it there too. 

Tags: , , ,

Mau mauing the Flak Catchers – it’s just not as fun as you’d think!

30 Oct

I get frustrated dealing with bureaucracy and bureaucrats. I just spent a couple of days, during breaks from my job, to check over that list of tax-related amendments that have been circulating the legislature like a bunch of flies over a carcass, It was a pain in the ass, okay?  I’ve been all over that stupid legislative website – like most public websites, you know it costs a zillion bucks to run the damned thing, and it’s just not what it could be.  Sometimes it pops right up with info, other times you’d think the elves who were running it had gone out on strike. 

It’s not just the website, it’s the ridiculous complexity they’ve manufactured to make it look like legislators and their $taffers earn their money.  Here’s one reason it’s so confusing – I went in search of an amendment titled “SCA3” –  “introduced by Senator Mark Leno on December 3, 2012 to authorize school districts, community college districts, and county offices of education to impose a parcel tax on real property by a 55% vote of the voters in the district or county under specified circumstances…” I could not find it on the California Legislature’s website, but I found it analyzed on other sites, including “Legislative Intent Services” at http://www.legintent.com/california-legislative-and-administrative-research/?gclid=CJX3tNm_v7oCFQZyQgod5A4AFw

So, I contacted Legislative Services, asking about “SCA3, which lowers the voter threshold for tax measures from 2/3’s to 55%.” I don’t know if the gal who responded had read my simple e-mail. She came back with another SCA3 – “This measure would require each local agency to comply with the CPRA and the Brown Act, and with any subsequent statutory enactment amending either act, enacting a successor act, or amending any successor act which contains findings demonstrating that the statutory enactment furthers the purposes of the people’s right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business. “

So, how do I respond to her? “Sorry Hon, that’s real interesting, but where does it say anything about lowering the voter threshold?” I don’t know how to respond, so instead I’ll assume – the SCA 3 I was looking for has died and been reincarnated as another amendment. 

That is pretty interesting though – read the new SCA 3 here – http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SCA3  –    something about providing records of meetings!  “ access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business. “

But, the gal from Legintent did send send me this good link – telling us what has been approved for the next ballot, at this point, June 2014  – including the new SCA 3 – take a look, and keep this link handy:

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/qualified-ballot-measures.htm

Tags: , , , ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →