Tag Archives: Friends of Ann Schwab

Chico Taxpayer’s Association meeting, Saturday, Chico library, 3pm – come get a sign!

19 Oct

When I got the “No on J” signs yesterday, I immediately reserved the meeting room at the library for 3pm tomorrow. I will be there until about 4pm, with some signs, and some “Vote NO on Measure J!” fliers.

So far I have given away 25 signs, with help from friends, and I’m hoping to get these signs up and around town by the end of this week.

Three things to know about Measure J :

  • Measure J will add a 4.5 percent tax to cellular phone services and every form of electronic communication service existing now, as well as those yet to be introduced to the consumer.
  • Measure J allows the city Finance Director to add new forms of electronic communication to the list of those services taxed, without voter approval.  
  • Measure J revenues will be directed to the General Fund, which means there is no guarantee they will be used to fund public safety as proponents claim, but could be used for any purpose determined by council.

Measure J will add a 4.5 percent tax to “cell phone services, meaning, $4.50 per hundred dollars of your bill.  According to the sample ballot, “‘Telephone communication services’ shall mean and include the transmission, conveyance or routing of voice, data, audio, video, or any other information or signals, to a point, or between or among points, whether or not such information is transmitted through interconnected service with the public switched network , whatever the technology used, whether such transmission, conveyance or routing occurs by wire, cable, fiber-optic, laser, microwave, radio wave (including, but not limited to, cellular service, commercial mobile service, personal communications service (PCS), specialized mobile radio (SMR), and other types of personal wireless service – see 47 USCA 332(c)(7)(C)(i) – regardless of radio spectrum used), switching facilities, satellite or any other technology now existing or developed after the adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter, and includes, without limitation, fiber optic, coaxial cable, and wireless. “

You’d think they’ve covered it here.  But wait!  There’s more!

“The term ‘telephone communication services’ includes such transmission, conveyance, or routing in which computer processing applications are used to act on the form, code or protocol of the content for purposes of transmission conveyance or routing without regard to whether such services are referred to as voice over internet protocol (VoIP) services or are classified by the Federal Communications Commission as enhanced or value added, and includes video and/or data services that are functionally integrated with telecommunications services. “

It goes on to include, “but not limited to…the following services regardless of the manner or basis on which such services are calculated or billed: central office and custom calling features (including, but not limited to call waiting, call forwarding, caller identification and three-way calling), local number portability (?), text messaging, ancillary telecommunication service, prepaid and post-paid telecommunications services (including but not limited to prepaid calling cards); mobile telecommunications service; private telecommunication service; paging service; 800 service (or any other toll-free numbers designated by the FCC); and value-added non-voice data service. 

“For purposes of this section, ‘private telecommunication service’ means any dedicated telephone communications service that entitles a user to exclusive or priority use of communications channels.” 

Is that, hmmm,  clear?  Basically, every service that is billed with your cell phone is taxed. If you have a basic basic basic plan like my family of four, you may get away with a tax increase of $4.50 a month. But if you have a bigger family and a social life, or if you have one of those new Smart phones with all the bells and whistles, I think you will probably pay more like $10 more a month.

I don’t even understand all these services, I don’t use them, but Mark Sorensen was saying that small businesses use a lot of “VoIP”. He calculated the cost for a small business to be hundreds of dollars a year, just for this tax. A shake-down, really.  That’s not very employer-friendly, as far as I’m concerned. 

It also includes Skype.  

This whole thing stinks, and we’ve got to move fast if we’re going to stop it. Come down to the library tomorrow and pick up a sign, or watch the blog and we’ll have at least another couple of meetings down there before the election. Or contact us here and we’ll get a sign over to you. 

The signs are in! And they look great!

18 Oct

This sign looks like a winner.

 

It’s official – there is an “organized” opposition to Measure J, the cell phone tax. Now we have some eye-catching signs to get the word out.  Let me know if you want one.  I am arranging to get the meeting room at the library for sometime this Saturday afternoon (October 20). I’ll let you know what time I’ll be there, with fliers and signs. There will be at least one more Saturday meeting, and at least one more Sunday meeting before the election. Or, you can contact me via this blog – look for the comments icon at the bottom left of this post. Leave your contact info, which will be confidential. We’ll get one to you. While supplies last – I only ordered 100, cause I never did this before, and I had no idea what I was up against. I wish I’d ordered more. That doesn’t stop you from copying it onto a pizza box and mounting it on rebar. 

Toby Schindelbeck responds to Mary Goloff

17 Oct
Hi all,
On Tuesday night, I addressed the comments made by Mary Goloff about me in the 10/11/12 issue of the Chico News and Review. She had made several inaccurate statements that attempted to discredit me. She also lied about my position on property taxes, and made a false claim that having a Facebook page for Economic Development in Chico would violate the Brown Act.

Click on the link below to read her unprofessional and inappropriate political smear ad:

http://www.newsreview.com/chico/speaking-of-na-iuml-vet-eacute/content?oid=8056374

Her attack was politically motivated, and the fact that she slandered my intelligence and character with lies and half-truths motivated me to respond to her claims at the October 16th City Council meeting.

Please see my response below, and please send her an email at dpresson@ci.chico.ca.us to let her know that this type of political slander and attack is not appropriate for a seated council member, nor is it conducive to civil discourse.

Political smears and attacks like this are what is wrong with politics. We need to work together to improve Chico, and the country. This type of personal attack is the exact wrong thing for a seated council member to do.

Here is my response. It is worth watching:
And please share it with everyone you know who has an issue with this pompous, condescending woman.
Toby Schindelbeck

The new buzz phrase – “budget neutral…”

16 Oct

I am really disappointed in the Chico Enterprise Record lately. I don’t know why – it’s not like the ER has ever been a great newspaper, but at least, it has  been more of a real newspaper in the past.

I don’t know where they got the gal that wrote the story on Measure J, but she needs to take a math class.

According to Miss Ashley Gebb of the Enterprise Record, “The rate change, if applied to an average cellphone bill of $50 per month would change the tax from $2.50 a month to $2.25.”

There she says, “an average cellphone bill of $50 per month…” She’s saying the average Chico cell phone bill is only $50. When I asked her about this, she said it was “an issue of semantics.  I wrote “an average phone bill” not “the average phone bill.” No, Ashley, there’s no “semantics” involved here – according to the dictionary, “average” means “constituting the result obtained by adding together several quantities and then dividing this total by the number of quantities.”  

Furthermore, she took the exact words out of Ann Schwab’s argument in favor, changing the word “the” for “an”, like she said, as if that makes some kind of difference.

She  insinuates that everybody already pays this tax. She says some carriers haven’t collected the tax – she means, only AT&T has and that’s been illegal for 30 years! 

Sorry Ashley, you wrote a propaganda piece. You didn’t bother to contact anybody in opposition of this measure. All she had to do was google “no on measure j chico ca” and the first thing that pops up is this blog.  Our blog was on the news the other night – seems like the tv news reporter went a little farther in her efforts to get the real story. Gebb’s piece comes off in favor of Measure J. I’ve run it below, pretty sloppy, but you can read it for yourself – it’s a propaganda piece, not news. 

That’s because, Dave Little wants it to pass. He believes “most” people do not pay enough taxes. He’s just bitter because his house is upside down.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/13-Stratford-Way-Chico-CA-95973/52456465_zpid/

The house he bought in 2007 is worth over $100,000 less than he paid for it. Of course, look at the tax history – he’s managed to get the assessor to cut his taxes by almost $1,000 over the last four years. Wow, I wish he’d shake down with that information – the “average” person would be afraid to go to the assessor – he can also assess your house for MORE! But I doubt he’d pull that kind of shit with the editor of the local “newspaper.” Gee, how nice for Dave! But still, his house is overtaxed, and he’s pissed about it. He wants a baseball stadium and all these bells and whistles for his public charter school kids, so he’s allowed Tom Lando to talk him into this Measure J bullshit – yes, you know Tom Lando is behind this, Ann Schwab is too stupid to come up with it herself. 

Little sent his brand new reporter out to do a little story about Measure J – why not a more seasoned reporter? Somebody who knows what’s going on in our local politics?  Because he doesn’t want a real story, he wants Measure J to pass. 

GEBB’S STORY FROM THE ER

Telephone users tax put before Chico voters

By ASHLEY GEBB – Staff Writer
Posted: 10/15/2012 12:35:27 AM PDT
CHICO — The jumble of taxes tacked on to phone bills may go unnoticed by
many, but one that provides revenue to the city of Chico may garner a little
more attention come Nov. 6.
Measure J is asking voters whether to amend wording to the city’s telephone
users tax to encompass modern technology, while decreasing the tax rate
from 5 percent to 4.5 percent. Revenue from the telephone users tax
supports the general fund.
Since implementation of a telephone users tax in 1970, the city’s existing
ordinance, like similar ordinances statewide, defines services subject to the
tax by referencing a federal telephone tax.
As phone technology has modernized, the outdated definition is being
challenged in many cities and some phone carriers have quit collecting the
tax.
To protect against losing revenues, many cities are updating their
telecommunications user taxes through voters. Nearly all the measures
have been approved, such as one in Oroville in 2010.
“It’s not a new tax, it’s just paying attention to the fact we have different technology than we had 30 years ago,” said
Councilman Jim Walker. “It’s not like we are trying to find a windfall for the city. The way our current tax law is written,
the city stands to lose $800,000 or $900,000 in revenue because we have antiquated verbiage.”
If Chico’s measure succeeds, the tax would apply to all users of telephone communication services, including
cellphones, voice over Internet, paging, text messaging and landline
services. The tax would not apply to Internet service,
pay phones and low-income residents.
The rate change, if applied to an average cellphone
bill of $50 per month would change the tax from
$2.50 a month to $2.25.
Council members Ann Schwab, and Andy
Holcombe and Mary Goloff also support the
measure, saying it is critical to prevent loss of tax
revenue that ultimately supports police and fire
services, road maintenance and park funds.
Rejecting it, they say, could keep Chico from
remaining solvent.
The city currently receives about $1.4 million in
telephone user tax revenue a year. It is estimated
$900,000 of that comes from wireless
telecommunications providers — revenue that could
be at risk if the ordinance is not updated.
In March 2011, Metro PCS stopped paying the tax,
causing a loss of nearly $80,000.
Measure opponents state the tax is one more opportunity for the “bloated Chico bureaucracy” to get more revenue
out of its residents.
“(City) taxes on water, electricity, natural gas and phone service are bleeding Chico’s citizens and businesses dry

12 Telephone users tax put before Chico voters – Chico Enterprise Record
http://www.chicoer.com/fromthenewspaper/ci_21775069/telephone-users-tax-put-before-chico-voters 2/3
Print Email Font Resize Return to Top
More
“City government must tighten its belt by cutting back on nonessential programs and services.”
As for arguments the measure’s failure will cause cuts to critical city services, “isn’t that what they always say?”
Sorensen said. “It’s up to us what we cut.”
“Another problem is it’s regressive, so it hits lower-income folks harder than it does higher income because it’s a
bigger portion of their allegedly disposable income,” he added.
It also remains to be seen whether the city would lose any revenue, said Sorensen, who predicts there could be a
gain.
Councilman Scott Gruendl disagrees.
“There is a lot of misinformation out there,” he said. “Part of the argument in opposition to the tax measure is it’s
more taxation on the people, when in reality, the existing tax ordinance is out of date … Something that never gets
said is the fact we will be taxing cellphones — we already tax cellphones now.”
Gruendl has also heard criticism the city lowered the rate to deceptively encourage voters to support the measure.
Yes, the city wanted to incentivize people, he said, but it lowered the rate to not boost city revenue when more people
begin to be taxed.
“We wanted to be as budget neutral as possible,” he said.
Connect with Ashley Gebb at 896-7768, agebb@chicoer.com, or on Twitter @AshleyGebb

Ann Schwab sold the airport to Northgate Aviation for $250

10 Oct

Last spring I did a couple of posts about the airport lawsuit – still in progress – and the other day I got a comment from a person who seems to be in the know about the situation. I don’t know who this person is, or if their information is reliable, but it is interesting, I’ll say that.

From “frequent flyer”:

Just a few facts as I understand them to augment your story:

1. Jay’s budget is hardly unlimited, and apparently the city can outspend him. I don’t personally know his finances, but this really stings. He also is paying one lawyer; the city has many fighting him.

2. Northgate Aviation used to reside in his building and left suddenly. However, that’s just business. It’s what happened after they left that went off the rails.

3. When Northgate moved into the hangar next door, I heard they did so without any permits. They eventually received permits I believe, although I heard it took two years.

4. When the city gave Northgate the lease on the hangar, they included the ramp space in front of Jay’s (privately owned) building, a building which according to the city can only be used for aviation-related business. Mr. Jay cannot park a plane in front of his aviation-only building, and to make sure no one else does, Northgate parks their fuel trucks in front of his building. This is like buying a house and finding out that the city gave the driveway access to your neighbor. BTW, Mr. Jay’s primary business is selling airplanes. Ever see a used car lot without any cars? Totally weird. Anyway, the lease should have been rewritten IMO, but has not been. It is a 30 year lease I believe.

5. Tycoons and small business folks alike visit FBOs, and I stand side by side with these guys when buying fuel. Some of us need 80 gallons, some need 2000, but we’re all treated like royalty. To give you an idea of the service differential between Chico and the rest of the world , Sacramento International’s Jet Center is like Nordstroms, Northgate Aviation is like buying a Gyro at the Thursday Night Market. Not swank. It’s embarrassing and frankly, if I were a corporate exec, I’d tell my pilots to get some fuel in Oroville at $1/gallon savings, fly to Sac and have a nap, and pick me up at 4pm. The worse part is not knowing is someone is going to show up. I’ve called for fuel at 6pm (they’re open 7am-7pm) and have been arbitrarily told that fuel stops at 6pm. Seriously? Then there was the guy who found out he couldn’t buy fuel on Thanksgiving. That’s not how pilots roll. We land, we need fuel, as we often carry just enough to get from point a to point b….weight considerations and all.

6. Apparently the City/Airport manager told Mrs. Maria Rock in a private email that was accidentally CC’d to someone else involved with the case that an exclusive deal to run the FBO could not be assured, but he did assure that no one else would be able to have an FBO. That’s actually illegal, since the city has accepted federal funding which specifically states that the city cannot limit competition. In other words it is not up to the city to determine who operates an FBO, as it is meant to be a capitalist, Darwinian Free-For-All. Could Chico support 2, 3, or 4 FBOs? Who knows, but it’s not up to the city to determine the fate of the service providers. Let me be perfectly clear: The city has no jurisdiction over who can open and run an FBO. If they don’t pay rent, that’s another story, but insofar as the application and approval process is concerned, it’s winner take all, may the best man win, and all that rut.

7. Finally, and this is just plain annoying, Mr. Jay registered the name Chico Jet Center on 11/19/2007, and the Rock’s did so on 1/7/2008 4 times: One for Chris, one for Maria, and twice for Northgate Aviation Inc as Northgate Aviation Chico Jet Center. Part of the lawsuit I believe (really I’m not sure but I’ve heard this come up) is a cease and desist order barring the use of the name. The problem is that Dan Jay was denied a “Jet Center” and the name will eventually wind up with whomever uses it the most.

Wow, what an earful of mismanagement.  I’ve talked to other people who fly fairly often out of Chico airport, and they tell me the same thing about the fueling station – Gomer and Goober could do a better job, apparently.

A friend of mine told me even the commercial commuter jet has problems with the fueling station – a  commute flight he was on was held up because the employee at the fueling station had fueled the plane incorrectly, dangerously so. The pilot had to get out of the plane and wander the FBO area, looking for the attendant. When the employee couldn’t fix it, the pilot had to sit on the tarmac running the engines until half the fuel was “burned off,” then re-fuel correctly. That’s absolutely unacceptable as far as I’m concerned.

In past the airport has been managed by Dave Burkland, city mangler. Now we have a new city mangler, with a new contract. I’m not sure what’s going on at the airport these days, but I bet Ann Schwab knows.

See, Maria and Chris Rock, the owners of Northgate Aviation, are Big Dicks in the Democratic party. When I did a casual google search, besides contributions to the Democratic party and  Democrats like John Edwards, I came up with a $250 contribution from Maria Rock to Ann Schwab’s 2008 campaign. That may sound like peanuts, but it was one of Schwab’s biggest individual contributions. And, as I scanned the contributions reports, I found there are many ways to contribute to various organizations and keep your name completely out of it. I’m guessing the Rocks are heavy hitters among the local liberals.

But here’s the real reason. Money might get you some attention, but you better be ready for the push and shove of politics too. People like the Rocks who open their checkbooks for politicians always expect something in return. And Maria Rock apparently gets what she wants, not so much with her checkbook as her nasty temperament.  I talked to two different people who don’t know each other, but know Maria and Chris Rock, and both used the same word to describe Maria Rock – “bitch.” One said, “horrible bitch,” and the other one used “awful bitch.” I was shocked, neither of these people use profanity with me, but wow, they sure called Maria Rock a bitch. All I did was ask them what they know about it, and that’s what they said, Maria Rock is a bitch. She makes phone calls that could skin a cat, and will confront people and humiliate them right in front of others.

So that’s why Ann Schwab is allowing this lawsuit to parole along – she’s afraid of Maria Rock. Our mayor, toothless hound dog, lackey to the rich. Thanks for nothing, Ann.

“NO on J” signs will be delivered soon – let me know if you want one!

8 Oct

I’m sorry I forgot to post this month’s “First Sunday” meeting – I was so excited about the signs I ordered, I wasn’t thinking. I just notified the usual suspects and we had a quick meeting to compare notes. We’ll have another meeting or two before the election, watch the skies. 

We have all been working in our own way to spread the word about Measure J. Sue and Stephanie walked out at the closing night of Thursday Market to hand out fliers about Measure J. They reported what I had suspected – people don’t know about Measure J, and when they find out, they are angry about it. “What?!!!!” was apparently the general reaction. 

It is always dumbfounding to me how little the public knows about their government. I’d bet my last five dollars most Chicoans couldn’t name the Mayor if they were given a shot of Vitamin B6.  In fact, some council candidates I’ve spoken to have demonstrated an alarming ignorance of the city code, the employee contracts, salaries and pensions.  One candidate I spoke too actually believed it was necessary to close Station 5.  

That’s why the only candidate I’ve endorsed or asked the other members of the CTA to endorse is Toby Schindelbeck. Schindelbeck has worked hard, familiarizing himself with the city charter, going to all the committee meetings for months now, finding his way around the maze Downtown. I know I won’t always agree pointblank with Schindelbeck, but he’s not going in there just to heat a seat cushion two nights a month. 

Another candidate asked for our endorsement, but I haven’t got any solid support from the rest of the members, and this candidate has not done anything lately that I can endorse him about. I’m not campaigning against anybody but Schwab – she’s the stinking fish head in this basket –  but if you want my endorsement, or my support in any way, you need to work for it. Schindelbeck is the only one I’ve seen consistently at meetings, and he’s spoken forcefully on our collective behalf to get finance records and other murky city affairs out in the public eye.  For example,  Scott Gruendl was on the committee that was to lay out the guidelines for  choosing a new city manager, as well as, the guidelines for replacing a council member when they stepped down before their term was up,  when he was himself a candidate for city manager. Schindelbeck pressured Gruendl to either step down from the oversight committee or remove himself as a candidate for city manager, and Gruendl was forced to do the latter. If it hadn’t been for Schindelbeck, Scott Gruendl would likely be our city manager right now, hand-picked by himself, and we’d watching his anointed appointee led to his chair on the dais. 

I’m still waiting for the signs to come back from the printer – sorry to wait til the last minute, but they will look really nice, I’ll promise you that! Let me know here if you want one – I won’t print your response, but I’ll keep track. Give me some address to deliver the sign, one per customer, as long as they last. I’ll post a picture of a sign when I get them, some time in the next couple of days. 

What can you do about Measure J? Please talk to one or more of your neighbors today. I know, it’s tough, neighbors aren’t as friendly as they were 10 years ago. But, for every asshole you encounter, I swear to gawd you’ll meet a nice person. 

Here’s the kind of butt-kissing that passes for “work” at the city of Chico – Linda Herman gets paid over $85,000 a year plus benies and pension premiums to pass around these back-scratching e-mails

3 Oct

I’m busy this morning, I check my mail, I get the stupidest kind of crap from the city of Chico. Here’s a snatch of a coversation between $85,000 a year plus Sustainability Task Force $taffer Linda Herman and Audrey Taylor of  Chabin Concepts – a consulting firm that bellies up to the bar for city funds.  This is what the city $taffers call “work”, and YOU pay for it. 

<div “”=”” id=”mp0_recip”>To Linda Herman, Shawn Tillman, Ann Schwab, Ruben Martinez, Crystal Torres, Dwight Aitkens, falexander@csuchico.edu, Hannah Hepner, Jill Ortega, juanita sumner, Nichoel Farris, Scott Wolf, Stephanie Taber, Steve Rodowick, Tino Nava, Tom DiGiovanni, Toni Scott

Thanks Linda – Ann had asked me a while back if I could join the task force but we all agreed I might have a conflict of interest since I was contracted with NoRTEC at the time, I should have kept up on it better.

I look forward to any help I can provide and leveraging these opportunities for our businesses – it is all good and I think the time is right for greater collaboration and outreach on all fronts to assist our local businesses.

And thank you, Rubin and Erik for attending the Alternative Fuel & Vehicle meetings – that too is a key part of this which we may want to discuss further of how to leverage.

Audrey

From: Linda Herman [mailto:LHERMAN@ci.chico.ca.us] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 8:23 AM
To: Audrey Taylor; Shawn Tillman
Cc: Ann Schwab; Ruben Martinez; Crystal Torres; Dwight Aitkens; falexander@csuchico.edu; Hannah Hepner; Jill Ortega; juanita sumner; Linda Herman; Nichoel Farris; Scott Wolf; Stephanie Taber; Steve Rodowick; Tino Nava; Tom DiGiovanni; Toni Scott
Subject: Re: Great job

Thank you Audrey for your comments for I believe that they are spot on and exactly what the Sustainability Task Force and Ad-Hoc Committee have in mind.  We would love it if every business in Chico were recognized under this program and want to help them achieve this goal.  I also very much  appreciated your help last night.  I didn’t get a chance to say it, but we, too, had thought about possibly the Chamber taking this program on and Ann had approached Jolene Francis about this concept early on in the process.  I also agree that we should join forces with the Economic Development side of this and something we need to pursue. 

Attached is a copy of the Council agenda report with the Sustainable Business program materials.  Please note that due to the length of the staff report I only attached a copy of the Energy resource guide as a sample.  Please let me know if you would like to see the guides for the other five categories as well.  We also welcome any comments or suggestions you may have and it occurred to me last night that we should have solicited your input on this earlier.

Thanks again and I am sure we will be in touch in the future about this program.

Linda

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Linda Herman
General Services Administrative Manager
City of Chico
phone:  (530) 896-7241
fax:       (530) 895-4825
email:    lherman@ci.chico.ca.us
web:     www.ci.chico.ca.us
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>>> Audrey Taylor <audrey@chabinconcepts.com> 10/3/2012 7:20 AM >>>

Linda

Very good job on the sustainability program..I think it is a good thing and more and more is a great part of economic development which I think is a good thing.   

Certainly understand some of the concerns from business perspective – I certainly hope my comments were taken in the right context – I was not suggesting we move the program to the Chamber (I certainly cannot speak to them) but in many areas I know they are starting to take leadership roles in a collaborative setting to take pressure off of  cities.   

After I thought about it I should have commented that this might be just a positioning opportunity –  this as an assistance program to help those businesses interested in triple bottom line to get there through the guideline and resources available and which the City would recognize those businesses and working with partners would provide technical assistance to reach those goals.or something like that.    I think that is the intent and totally support the effort as it is shared value to everyone.   Know though that a lot of businesses react to “govt” as being received as “regulations” before even investigating…

With this and the PACE program think these are good tools for the Outreach program that Shawn was discussing – possible opportunity to collaborate and leverage the outreach for more impact utilizing the outreach team to deliver messages on tools and then referring interested companies to any of the sustainability team that could help a company.   Shawn’s team has been working on a Chico Business Services guide which would be a leave behind..the last page could be used to promote this assistance program.

Just my thoughts and if I can be of help more than glad too.   I recently had opportunity to work with City of Benicia  on the Sustainability Program and ran into some of the same issues brought up last night…they are fortunate though to have a Valero fund to tap to really assist businesses 

Audrey

 

PS Can you send me copy or link to access the full report/guide – thanks

Audrey Taylor, President & CEO

Chabin Concepts & CR Group

Audrey@chabinconcepts.com

TEL: 530.345.0364 Ext 27

MOBILE: 530.520.2521

2515 Ceanothus Avenue, Suite 100

Chico, CA 95973

www.chabinconcepts.com

twitter.com/AudreyCHABIN

 

Ann Schwab’s mismanagement – 21 top-paid retired employees get over $2 million a year in pension payments, plus benefits and COLA

2 Oct

 

Sometimes a bad thing is so bald-faced, so blatant, so obvious that you can’t believe it’s true. This is what I have found as I’ve dug and delved at the pension mess. It’s so simple it took me forever to figure it out.

In Sacramento there is a tug-o-war playing out between Governor Jerry Brown,  the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).  The subject of this wrestling match is the billions – yes that’s BILLIONS –  promised to former and current public employees, and whether they should be paid now by the public entities (like the City of Chico) who signed their contracts, or whether the state should borrow money to pay them and hope that the stock market will recover enough to pay the money back.

State Controller John Chiang says we have a projected deficit of over $38 BILLION over the next 30 years. The interest to borrow the money to pay this is projected at $149 million.

“Thirty-eight BILLION?” you say. Well, let me explain how we got there.  In Chico, we have 21 retirees who make more than $100,000 a year,  in pension, including a former fire chief who makes more than $200,000 a year! 

Name Employer Warrant Amount Annual
ALEXANDER, THOMAS E CHICO $8,947.23 $107,366.76
BAPTISTE, ANTOINE G CHICO $10,409.65 $124,915.80
BEARDSLEY, DENNIS D CHICO $8,510.23 $102,122.76
BROWN, JOHN S CHICO $17,210.38 $206,524.56
CARRILLO, JOHN A CHICO $10,398.98 $124,787.76
DAVIS, FRED CHICO $12,467.78 $149,613.36
DUNLAP, PATRICIA CHICO $10,632.10 $127,585.20
FELL, JOHN G CHICO $9,209.35 $110,512.20
FRANK, DAVID R CHICO $14,830.05 $177,960.60
GARRISON, FRANK W CHICO $8,933.56 $107,202.72
JACK, JAMES F CHICO $9,095.09 $109,141.08
KOCH, ROBERT E CHICO $9,983.23 $119,798.76
LANDO, THOMAS J CHICO $11,236.48 $134,837.76
MCENESPY, BARBARA CHICO $12,573.40 $150,880.80
PIERCE, CYNTHIA CHICO $9,390.30 $112,683.60
ROSS, EARNEST C CHICO $9,496.60 $113,959.20
SCHOLAR, GARY P CHICO $8,755.69 $105,068.28
SELLERS, CLIFFORD R CHICO $9,511.11 $114,133.32
VONDERHAAR, JOHN F CHICO $8,488.07 $101,856.84
VORIS, TIMOTHY M CHICO $8,433.90 $101,206.80
WEBER, MICHAEL C CHICO $11,321.93 $135,863.16

That’s 20 pensions over $100,000 and one over $200,000 – over $2 million dollars a year, just those 21 pensions. These pensions were based on 70 – 90 percent of the employee’s highest year’s salary. We have over 100 city employees who make over $100,000 a year, meaning, they will retire at over $70,000/year-plus, many of them over $90,000, even over $100,000/year.

What pack of absolute ninnies would sign contracts with employees that guaranteed these pensions while requiring not one penny in premium payment on the part of the employee? Our city council, that’s who. They just signed another police contract – the city even pays the “employee share” of the pension premiums. Ann Schwab, your mayor, signed that contract.

So, am I the only non-public employee who thinks this is crazy?  Public employees get pensions based on their salaries. These pensions are  administered by CalPERS. But instead of requiring realistic pension premiums for these superCalifragilistic pensions, CalPERS and the SEIU hatched a plan to gamble on the stock market. CalPERS will tell you, without any shame, that they expect to fund our pension machine almost completely through gambling earnings, without any input from the recipients.  According to an article on their website,  Calpensions.com, “Most pension funds expect to get about two-thirds of their revenue from investment earnings, not annual employer or employee contributions,’ but they admit, “critics say the earnings forecasts are too optimistic.”

Yeah, way too optimistic – they’ve gotten dunked time and time again since 2003, including just this past couple of months. They’ve already lost over half their fund, a couple of times.  A July CalPERS press release reported a 1 percent annual gain – they need to make around 7.5 annually to stay on top of their, our, obligations.

So Governor Brown wants a premium rate increase, now!, meaning cities like Chico would be hit hard. Look at that list again.  But the SEIU says NO! Here’s the thing, again according to CalPERS, “Unions asked the [CalPERS] board to spread out higher pension costs mainly caused by a lower investment earnings forecast. Paying part of the new rate over two decades, instead of the full amount now, makes an extra $149 million available for worker pay and other programs next fiscal year.”  But it will cost at least that much to borrow the money to pay pensions we are already paying right now. See what a mess this is? 

The SEIU knows that if cities and counties had to pay more toward their pension obligations, things would change remarkably. First of all, Chico – along with towns all over the state – would have to lay off current employees in order to make those payments  – and those people would of course be union members. The union would lose those dues, and the union would start to shrink, and it’s power would start to diminish.  If you think our salaries are wild, you can just imagine what they get paid at CalPERS. Those people have not even begun to be laid off yet. 

Second, cities would be less eager to write the contracts that got us in to this mess in the first place – contracts that guaranteed overtime by which people could spike the salaries on which the pensions were based, and then allowed the employee to get out of paying for any of it.

Look at that list again – the red names are people I’m certain were either with the police or fire department. There are a couple of others I suspect to be retired “public safety” workers. The pensions they are receiving are more than the salaries they agreed to – they got them by spiking their regular salaries with overtime.  You’ll note, the biggest pension goes to former Fire Chief John Brown. I sat in at least three meetings listening to Brown declare that paying overtime was cheaper than hiring more firefighters, but he never had any proof, no figures, nothing. He just declared it as the truth and the idiots on council ate it up and rubber stamped contracts with structured-in overtime. Same with the cops – right now Chico Police Officers Association President Will Clark is hammering council for more structural overtime written into the city budget – he wants overtime budgeted for every three day weekend. Publicly Chico PD makes big talk about wanting more officers, for “public safety” –  but behind closed doors they’re howling for more overtime for themselves and their pensions.

The “public safety” contracts are the biggest problem. We need to get structural overtime out of the budget, completely. We also need to make employees pay their own benefits premiums. Look, if you paid all your adult children’s expenses, you’d look like an ASS, wouldn’t you? Why do we pay the “employee’s share” of benefits for people who make as much as four times the median income?

Ask Ann Schwab – that’s aschwab@ci.chico.ca.us.

The CalPERS disaster: A housewife tries to make sense of it

25 Sep

 

I’m still reading about how we ended up in this pension mess. This time I found a more recent article that confirmed suspicions I’ve had since I read that last article  from 2003.  The essential problem is, the California Public Employees Retirement System gambled pension money on the stock market, and got eaten alive by their own handlers.

CalPERS has to achieve stock market earnings of at least 7.75 in order to ” to keep its funding levels high enough to avoid further forced taxpayer contributions.”  For awhile last year, during a “volatile” market, they managed to achieve an outrageous 20 percent gain.  Of course  they did a little end-zone dance – “This is a great one-year achievement that powerfully affirms our strategy and the skills of our investment team,” said Chief Investment Officer Joseph Dear. “While we can’t assume that we’ll sustain this high level of earnings, we have averaged a net return on investments of 8.4 percent for 20 years.”

But you  know how that works. They just ripped off a bunch of people, triggering the “Karma Factor.” See, that’s how the stock market works, your gain is somebody else’s tragedy. I met a lady once who had got a handsome retirement payoff, and she wanted to turn it into a college education for her grandkids, so she bought Disney stock. Wow, who woulda thunk it – Disney lost their ass that year, and so did my old lady friend.

When that happened to some stocks my cousins and I inherited – mutual funds that had performed well for my family for a couple of generations – we read months later that the agents had ripped us off. It was a huge scandal, you know, that big pre-911 market melt down. It was found that agents were trading their clients’ mutual funds, without their clients’ (one of whom was me!) knowledge.   They were using their clients’ funds  as their own  – a scam know as “late trading”  – and raking in big amounts of money. That can only last so long, before the stock starts to be devalued, as were mine. I lost thousands of dollars over the span of a week, before I was able to get my agent on the phone ( he just wouldn’t return my call) and dump those funds. I got out of the stock market with what was left, but those people were never investigated or charged with anything, even though the whole scam quickly became common knowledge. They nailed Martha Stewart to the cross, she paid for their sins, and everybody went home and forgot about it.

I learned my lesson, but you can’t teach greedy people, they think with a part of their body that resembles an eyeless fish.  There was CalPERS, sitting pretty on a 20 percent gain like there’s no Tomorrow! And then Tomorrow came, and they too lost their (well, our, really) asses.   According to Cal Watchdog, the  fund lost over $17 billion dollars in just five weeks last August. But don’t worry, our loss was most certainly somebody else’s gain.

With my mutual funds, I was helpless. Like Barack Obama, I inherited a mess. I acted quickly, at first on just “women’s intuition”, then I heard the news. I told my agent what I knew, and he was all helpful all the sudden!  I was able to save over 80 percent of my fund.  But CalPERS walked right into that market and laid all their dough on that table. “These strong returns are a testament to our commitment to our long-term investing principles,” said Anne Stausboll, CalPERS Chief Executive Officer. “Our members, employers and California taxpayers all benefit from our disciplined approach to investing.”

They lost over half the fund, in a system that seems to me not much more sophisticated than a dice game. Former Orange County treasurer/tax collector and current county supe John Moorlach calls it the “’Peter Pan Portfolio’ that led to Orange County’s bankruptcy in 1994. The meaning: If you just believe, the fund will be all right.”

That’s what I’d call Dave Burkland and Jennifer Hennessy’s accounting style –  Jennifer Hennessy keeps “predicting” that sales and homeowners’ tax revenues will go up – when one call to a local retailer or real estate agent would set her straight, she’d rather believe she’s Tinker Bell.  She doesn’t “predict” she “wishes”. Like I’ve said before, if wishes were horses around here, we’d all be hip-deep in horseshit. 

The city of Orange rode their wish horse right into bankruptcy – geez, way back in 1994!  They were surfing interest rates, and a pack of sharks ate them.  

CalPERS can’t go bankrupt. We have guaranteed them with our taxes. In the event that they can’t pay, we are on the hook for billions in pension payments, many of those payments going to people like Tom Lando – who makes over $140,000 a year in pension, plus health benefits. There’s also a yearly cost of living increase. 

All because of the outrageous pension packages promised by elected leaders like our Mayor Ann Schwab and her council – who just signed off a new cop contract through which we continue to pay all their pension premiums, including “the employees’ share”.  And, they still get 90 percent of their highest years’ salary, including overtime, in pension, at 50 years old. That is how a cop who agrees to $65,000 a year salary ends up retiring at over $100,000 a year.  And, ex-police chiefs Mike Efford and Mike Maloney have both gone on to public salaries at Butte College, in addition to their pensions. All agreed upon and signed by Ann Schwab and council. 

Reform is coming, slowly, but the public pensioners fight tooth and nail. All we ask is that they pay more of their own pension premiums, and that CalPERS stop gambling on the stock market. Here’s what Steve Maviglio, spokesman for the union-backed Californians for Retirement Security, says to that – “My point was that the pension-bashing crowd used the depths of the recession as the reference point to sound an alarm about pensions instead of the long term returns actuaries use. And given the last two days on the market [August 5 and 8], the alternative that reformers are pushing — 401(k)s — are looking even worse than before.”

Maviglio accuses “pension bashers” of poor logic – he bases his claims on one short period of volatility on the market – any idiot knows, when you get a 20 percent gain, you are riding a short-lived high, and you better be ready for the come-down. CalPERS was apparently asleep at the wheel.

But, their handlers were there, like prowling sharks. Handlers they didn’t even need. According to CalWatchdog reporter Wayne Lusvardi, “An index fund is a passively managed fund designed to match the performance of the whole market or mix of funds.  So whatever commissions CalPERS paid all its external fund managers to invest in public stocks apparently could have been saved just by passively investing in the S&P 500 Index.”

That’s what I said last time – there was a little pack of sharks that fed off this whole mess, the “fund managers.” And the folks at CalPERS, confident that they’d continue to get their five and six-figure salaries and their 70 percent at 55 retirement packages, went right along with the scam – you scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours! 

But the real villains here are your publicly elected leaders, at the city, county and state level. They’ve approved the contracts, the salaries, the pensions and the pension payments, every damned one of them. In Chico, most of our council members – with the exception of Jim Walker, somehow – are on the public dole. They all get public pensions, and you know, that doesn’t exactly put them on  very good footing to demand pension reform of their, our, employees. That’s exactly why we need more “regular” citizens on council – a small business owner like Toby Schindelbeck would at least be different. Schwab calls herself a small business owner, and she’s done everything she could during her tenure to promote that business – a bike shop. She’s used her position to promote her private business while making decisions that hurt businesses all over town. I’d like to see a person in there who has everybody’s business interests at heart, and I think that’s Toby Schindelbeck. 

I must say, I don’t like being in bed with Chico Firefighters, who have also endorsed  Schindelbeck.  But, Schindelbeck has told Chico Taxpayers Association that he would like to see the  “public safety” workers  PAY MORE OF THEIR OWN PENSION. We haven’t heard that from Bob Evans or any of the others, including Sean Morgan, who is also expected to get the public safety endorsement.  We’ll be holding Toby Schindelbeck to his word, and I think he will make some welcome changes on council.

CalPERS – how we got here

21 Sep

 

As we hear more about how pensions have taken down our economy and Jerry Brown’s feeble attempts to leash train his SEIU pitbulls, I have been doing some reading, trying to understand this whole mess, how it happened, and exactly what we, the taxpayers, are on the hook for.

I found an article from 2003, from the California Job Journal, that explained how it started. You can read the whole thing here:

http://www.zoominfo.com/CachedPage/?archive_id=0&page_id=523523781&page_url=//www.jobjournal.com/article_full_text.asp?artid=919&page_last_updated=2004-08-17T12:28:33

Right away you see that this is an article about finding lucrative jobs, and it’s steering people into the world of pension management.  “With baby boomers retiring at an escalating rate and becoming more concerned about their financial future, careers in institutional investing are likely to become hotter than a half-price sale at a Lexus dealership.”

As a baby boomer myself, I feel like I just picked up a menu that described ME as the main course.

This article, “Careers in Finance,” directs the job seeker first to the California Public Employee Retirement System. Apparently, CalPERS is a great jumping off point for those who want to make a bunch of money.    According to recruitment manager Linda Miller, the pay is low (stop laughing!), but the experience is money in the bank.   “Many return to million-dollar jobs in the private sector after learning about institutional investing with us,’ Miller reports.”

Here I have a question: do these people get public pensions? I’m pretty sure they do. You only have to work for the state for a few years at full time before you are eligible for a pension.  She says, they “return” to the private sector…” So, was that the whole point? Get a job at CalPERS to learn, then return to the private sector with your nice fat public pension? And benefits? And everything you need to know about ripping off the taxpayers?

What I really found interesting about this article:

  • in 2003 there were over 140 employees of CalPERS. Miller says people make more money in the private sector, but admits they’d work longer hours. And, she says, “We offer sick leave, retirement and lots of holidays, and that is a plus. In addition, there is stability and training available.” All paid for by US, the taxpayers.
  • in 2003, CalPERS had “assets totaling over $137.8 billion.
  • nine years later they’re flat broke and costing us millions in interest to pay off their obligations

And if you want to work in the private sector, you will not be trained, you will need either a Bachelor’s degree, subsidized by the taxpayers,  or experience in the public sector, provided of course by the taxpayers.  According to Maripili Tovar, of Bear Stearns in San Francisco, “”We look for people with a strong background in finance and business and a bachelor’s degree in either of those two fields.”  She adds,  “We are not hiring at this time because we are still feeling the effects of 9/11. But slowly I feel the market and the economy getting healthier.”

But, at  the same time,  CalPERS was recruiting, offering training,  benefits, pensions and “lots of holidays”?

Here we have the story of an agency that has been embezzled by it’s former employees. These people went to CalPERS, not necessarily for training, but to find out what they need to know to get over $137 billion in assets.

How would you explain what happened?

The article goes on to describe how ANYBODY can make a killing in the world of high finance. There are the “third party administrators,” or as my grandma would say, “another layer of fat you don’t need.”

“In a nutshell, we’re third-party administrators and we don’t sponsor or write investments plans,” explains consultant Bob de Montigny. “We do the accounting, tax-form preparation and consulting for long-term retirement. We rely solely on the information from the plan’s administrators.”  

So, here’s a guy who doesn’t even write your package for you, he just takes care of it.  This hound is full of fleas.

We are looking out for the little guy in the retirement plan to make sure the business owner isn’t getting all the money,” states de Montigny. “We do 100 percent of benefit consulting and administration, and take care to see that all the deadlines and deduction limits are met. It’s a very detailed job.”  Wow, I had no idea – how does the business owner “get all the money”? Sounds like the world of finance is a regular snake pit, doesn’t it?  Or, at least, it behooves some people for the pensioner to think that way.

The article says, “Prerequisites for this career include a strong accounting background, knowledge of investments, and proficiency in math. You have to know your way around monthly balance and income statements and understand what money is going in and out of a trust, and why. You also need a fairly strong background in composition and business English.”  Frankly, I’d think if you were competent to do the job that got you the pension, you’re competent to administer your own pension, but hey, we’re talking about public workers here. As we ascertained above, public workers don’t need as much skill to do their jobs as do private workers, so maybe that lack of skill is also at play in their personal lives? They can’t do their own bookkeeping, but they can do ours, that’s just great.

Furthermore, “The field (of third party administrators) is a niche business and there are job opportunities if you have the qualifications. The ups and down of the stock market has little effect on the business.”  Oh, that’s great, these people can send their clients down the market toilet, but the same market “has little effect” on them.

My, oh my, have I learned something about the CalPERS disaster. We have an industry that uses a taxpayer supported agency to train their workers. These workers took  knowledge they gained in their public trough experience through the revolving door to the private industry and then proceeded to rip off their former employers for over $137 BILLION.