Tag Archives: Tom Lando

Drawing a line on the editorials page

14 Mar

Below is Chico Taxpayer Association board member Casey Aplanalp’s letter to the Enterprise Record, run in this morning’s paper. 

If you haven’t seen the survey he mentions, look here:

https://chicotaxpayers.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/lando-releases-survey/

The survey isn’t just leading, and it isn’t just misleading, it’s downright dishonest, insinuating that certain people and groups support the tax without asking these folks for their permission – including Larry Wahl and the Bidwell Presbyterian Church, both of whom contacted me/this blog. 

Lando will use the dishonest survey results to write his tax increase measure for the council, and I’m afraid certain members of council will try to say that’s enough to put the measure on the ballot. We have to write letters to council – write more than one letter if you feel the need –  telling them we want a petition with the legal number of signatures. We should let both Ann Schwab and Bob Evans know that if they put this measure on the ballot without the signatures, they’re going down in flames in November. 

I believe my question regarding how a tax increase measure gets on the ballot, along with a general report regarding the upcoming tax increase proposals (that’s proposals, plural…) headed for the upcoming ballot is agendized for the first meeting in April, but you’ll have to wait for confirmation from the city clerk. I’ll keep you posted. 

In the meantime, read this letter from Casey and try to search for inspiration to write your own:

We need to know more about the sales tax hike proposed by Tom Lando and Jim Stevens. This needs to see the light of day.

I have a copy of the script the survey company is using, and it’s as crooked as a rubber cane. Biased and leading. Results should be scrutinized and dismissed upon presentation.

I’ve sent Lando an invitation to present and explain his proposition publicly, which has been ignored. What is he hiding? The Chico Taxpayers Association, Butte Taxpayers Alliance, Chico Tea Party, Butte Republican Party, Butte Libertarian
Party, Young Americans for Liberty, and the local Ron Paul Support team are all opposed to this sales tax hike proposed by Lando.

Where’s the tax hike support? And where’s the coverage?

 Casey Aplanalp, Chico

Tags: , , , ,

Get ready to make turnip juice! Or get ready to fight.

10 Mar

I bet you are as happy as I am to hear that the Butte Taxpayers Alliance has voiced their opposition to both the proposed sales tax increase and the phone tax coming before the city of Chico. We need to network to get the word out, and Jack Lee and friends are working hard to do just that:

http://www.norcalblogs.com/post_scripts/2012/03/bta-will-oppose-new-taxes.html

These folks are doing serious work, reviewing the city budget, going to committee meetings, asking the questions that need to be asked, and getting the answers out to the public. Their website:

http://www.buttetaxpayers.org/

I’m sorry, I attended neither the Finance Committee Meeting nor the Economic Development Committee meetings this past week. I didn’t even attend any Sustainability Task Force meetings lately. Sometimes I need to stay away from the bullshit factory, it starts to be a drain.

But, I don’t think I need to go to committee meetings to know the city is planning to sucker us out of almost $12,000,000 a year in additional taxes, and I’m not going to just stand here and take it. This council has ruined the housing market, lost large manufacturers and chased others away, and now they will ruin the retail sector? We can’t have that. Tell your friends, get ready, we’re all about to be squeezed. If you aren’t a turnip, you better say something.

Tags: , , , , ,

My name is Sue! How do you do!

7 Mar

I oftentimes get so frustrated with the cornmash that passes for public discussion Downtown, I’ll admit – I’ve avoided meetings because I just can’t stomach any more. 

You have to listen to people like Valerie Reddeman, owner of the flopped business Green Feet, lecturing about how everybody else should behave. You have to listen to the “Emily Latellas” –  people who obviously haven’t read the agendas or reports and don’t really understand the subject at hand but insist on blathering on for their three minutes of absolute attention – thank you singing bag lady! Last night we got our own local version of The Voice! 

If you’re lucky, you will be there when somebody gets up there and tells it like it is. Last night that was Sue Hubbard. Sue stood up against the bag ban, telling council and the assembled bag-ban groupies how sick she is of watching her town run into the dirt by a bunch of self-aggrandizing egomaniacs. 

Sue goes to the meetings regularly, so she knows what she’s saying. These meetings are frustrating. Certain council members don’t listen to the public, and make no bones about that. Andy Holcombe has actually admitted that he makes his mind up previous to a meeting and nothing the public has to say is going to affect him. Last night he tried to derail a conversation I had requested be agendized, regarding the placement of tax increase measures on the ballot, by pretending not to understand what I was asking for.

Thanks to Sue, who stood up during “Business from the Floor” and asked them to honor my request. And I stood up. And then the crickets chirped. I thought we were dead. 

But then Mark Sorensen came roaring in, reminding everybody, there’s THREE possible taxes coming round (like some rough beast) on the June ballot – including that phone tax I was talking about – and Sorensen suggested there should be some kind of public discussion regarding the nuts and bolts of deadlines, etc. 

And, along came little Ann – butter wouldn’t melt in her mouth! – to agree with Sorensen!  

So, while they aren’t agendizing any big to-doo about it, the city attorney is going to write up a little “informational” ditty to be included on an upcoming agenda explaining the process we are about to watch unfold. I’ll get that as soon as I can. 

I’d like to dedicate this blog to Sue. Here’s one of my favorite songs by Johnny Cash:

This is from San Quentin, and the song is so new you can see him reading his notes as he sings. 

“I tell you I’ve fought tougher men, but I really can’t remember when…” Go Sue! 

Tags: , , , , ,

Lando releases survey

5 Mar

Here is Tom Lando’s sales tax survey, apparently conducted at some point within the last couple of weeks:

Chico Sales Tax Survey

(1/18/2012 Version 7)

 Methods:

 Field Dates: • January, 2012

Sample Size: • 400 completed interviews within the City of Chico

Sampling Error: • Less than +/- 5.0%

Unit of Analysis: • Voter Households

Population: • All parties

Propensity • + 40

Questionnaire • 40 data points, plus sample demographics

Interview Length • 12 minutes

Sample Vendor • Political Data Inc.

Field Vendor • SSI

 

Hello, this is _____ of _____, a public opinion research company. We are . . .

 • Right Track – Wrong •

 1. Would you say that city government in Chico is on the right track, or is the city going in the wrong direction?

 01) Right track

02) Wrong direction

03) Undecided / Neither {VOLUNTEERED}

99) Refusal

 • 1st Ballot •

 2. Business leaders and other members of the Chico community are considering placing a locally controlled one-cent sales tax measure on the ballot. The sales tax would last for 20 years and then sunset. The sales tax would fund a variety of community improvements in areas such as public safety, high school sports, community facilities, libraries and local traffic improvements. If the election were held today, would you vote for or against the locally controlled one-cent sales tax measure?

 01) For {GOTO 4}

02) Against {GOTO 3b}

03) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED} {GOTO 3b}

99) Refused

• Follow-UP Ballot •

 3b. If the election were held today, would you vote for or against a locally controlled three-fourths-cent sales tax measure?

 01) For {GOTO 5}

02) Against {GOTO 3c}

03) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED} {GOTO 3c}

99) Refused

 3c. If the election were held today, would you vote for or against a locally controlled one-half-cent sales tax measure?

 01) For

02) Against

03) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED}

99) Refused

 • Name Identification & Impression •

 4. Let me read you some names of people who are active in the community. For each one, please tell me if you have heard of that person. Then, if so, please tell me if you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of them..

 CATEGORIES FOR CODING:

01) Heard/Favorable

02) Heard/Unfavorable

03) Heard/No Opinion

04) Not heard

99) Refusal

 {RANDOMIZE ORDER}

 4a. Councilman Bob Evans

4b. Councilwoman Mary Flynn

4c. Councilman Scott Gruendl

4d. Councilman Andy Holcombe

4e. Mayor Ann Schwab {MAYOR}

4f. Councilman Mark Sorensen

4g. Vice Mayor Jim Walker {VICE MAYOR}

• Item Block •

 5. Now let me read you a list of items that could be partially funded by a locally controlled sales tax measure. For each item please tell me if including that item on the list would make you much more likely, somewhat more likely, somewhat less likely, or much less likely to vote for the measure.

 01) Much more likely

02) Somewhat more likely

03) Somewhat less likely

04) Much less likely

05) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED}

99) Refused

 {ROTATE ORDER}

5a. Up to 25 new police officers and fire fighters.

5b. A new community and recreation center

5c. A new high school football stadium

5d. Restoring high school sports, theater, music, and industrial arts programs

5e. Chico Library operations.

5f. Bidwell Mansion operations

5g. Bidwell Park Maintenance.

5h. Repairing roads and filling potholes.

5i. Supporting local non-profit organizations.

 5j. A new competitive-level community pool.

• Endorsement Block •

 6. Now let me read you a list of organizations that might endorse such a sales tax increase. For each organization please tell if their endorsement would make you much more likely, somewhat more likely, somewhat less likely, or much less likely to vote for a sales tax increase.

 01) Much more likely

02) Somewhat more likely

03) Somewhat less likely

04) Much less likely

05) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED}

99) Refused

 {RANDOMIZE ORDER}

6a. The Chico Chamber of Commerce

6b. Chico Democratic Club

6c. The League of Women Voters

6d. Friends of Bidwell Park

6e. Chico Esplanade League

6f. Former Supervisor Jane Dolan

6g. Supervisor Larry Wahl

6h. Supervisor Maureen Kirk

6i. Sierra Nevada Brewery Owner, Ken Grossman

6j. Former Mayor Michael McGinnis

6k. former City manager Tom Lando

6l. Bidwell Presbyterian Church Pastor Steve Schibstead

6m. Chico Police Officers Association

• Opposition Block •

 7. Now I’m going to read you a list of organizations that might oppose such a sales tax increase. For each organization please tell if their opposition would make you much more likely, somewhat more likely, somewhat less likely, or much less likely to vote for a sales tax increase.

 01) Much more likely

02) Somewhat more likely

03) Somewhat less likely

04) Much less likely

05) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED}

99) Refused

 {RANDOMIZE ORDER}

7a. Butte County Republican Party

7b. Butte County Tea Party

7c. Butte County Taxpayers Association

 • Push Block •

 8. For the next couple of minutes please listen to some arguments that have been made for and against the measure. For each argument please tell me if it makes you much more, more, less, or much less likely to vote for the measure. If the argument makes no difference either way just say so.

 01) Much more

02) More

03) Less

04) Much less

05) No difference / undecided

99) Refused

 {RANDOMIZE ORDER}

8a. Supporters argue that government works best and is more accountable to taxpayers when decisions are made locally. Funds generated from a locally controlled sales tax would receive local independent citizen oversight.

8b. Supporters argue that budget cuts have weakened local police and fire staffing and services. Funds generated from a locally controlled sales tax would allow Chico to hire up to 25 new police officers and firefighters to protect our streets and provide essential emergency services to our community.

8c. Supporters argue that years of budget cuts to our schools have led to the elimination of important school programs like art, sports, theater and shop. Funds generated from a locally controlled sales tax will restore and protect many of these important programs for our kids.

8d. Supporters argue that there is no end in sight to future budget cuts. A locally controlled sales tax would generate local funding to protect many of Chico’s most important priorities, including public safety, libraries, and youth and high school programs.

8e. Opponents argue that even local governments have a poor record of providing accountability. We don’t really have any guarantees that revenues from this tax increase will be well spent.

8f. Opponents argue that Public safety and emergency services are essential, but during tough times we need to find more funding for our police with money from non-essential programs. Just like a family living on a budget, we need to move money from non-essential programs to those most critical.

8g. Opponents argue that funding for school programs like art, sports and theater need to come from parents in times like these and should not shouldered by someone without any school-age children who could already be on a fixed income. A sales tax hike will cost everyone more, and while we’d like to replace lost funding, we just can’t afford it.

8h. Opponents argue that Taxpayers are taxed enough already. The taxpayers simply can’t endure more taxes, at least not until the economy improves. For the moment government needs to tighten its belt along with taxpayers.

 • 2nd Ballot •

 9a. Having heard this information, would you vote for or against the one-cent sales tax measure?

 01) For {GOTO 11a}

02) Against {GOTO 10b}

03) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED} {GOTO 10b}

99) Refused

 10b. If the election were held today, would you vote for or against the three-fourths-cent sales tax measure?

 01) For {GOTO 11a}

02) Against {GOTO10c}

03) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED} {GOTO 10c}

99) Refused

 10c. If the election were held today, would you vote for or against the one-half-cent sales tax measure?

 01) For

02) Against

03) Undecided {VOLUNTEERED}

99) Refused

• Demographics •

 Just a few more questions for statistical purposes . . .

 11a. Do you consider yourself {ROTATE ORDER}liberal, somewhat liberal, middle-of-the-road, somewhat conservative, or conservative?

 01) Liberal

02) Somewhat liberal

03) Middle-of-the-road

04) Somewhat conservative

05) Conservative

99) Refusal

 11b. Thinking about how you vote, do you usually vote {ROTATE} mainly Republican, mainly Democrat, or about the same for each party?

 01) Mainly Republican

02) About same for each

03) Mainly Democrat

99) Refusal

 11c. Please stop me when I read the age group that contains your age…

 01) 18-34

02) 35-44

03) 45-54

04) 55-64

05) 65-74

06) 75+

99) Refused

 11d. How long have you lived in Chico: less than 5 years, 5 to 10 years, 11 to 20 years, or more than 20 years?

 01) Less than 5

02) 5-10

03) 11-20

99) 20+

 11e. Do you own or rent your home or apartment?

 01) Own

02) Rent

99) Refusal

 11f. Do you have any children that attend Chico public schools?

 01) Yes

02) No

99) Refusal

This has been a confidential interview conducted by… Thank you very much for your time and have a good evening.

 11g. Sex {BY OBSERVATION}

 01) Male

02) Female

 11h. Vote propensity {FROM SAMPLE}

 11i. VBM – poll voter {FROM SAMPLE}

 11j. Median neighborhood household income {FROM SAMPLE}

 11k. Cell phone – land line {FROM SAMPLE}

Tags: , , ,

Let’s increase revenues without increasing taxes

4 Mar

We had a great meeting at the library today and again I want to thank everybody who came down.

Something that really impresses me is the diversity of this group, people who have had disagreements in the past, who take time out from their personal schedules to work together toward a common goal. These people are hard workers.

Today we had a great discussion about ways in which the city could address our current deficit without raising the sales tax.

First, there’s the need to reduce expenditures. We all realize we need certain staff services, but we also know there are problems with the current contracts. We’d like to see to see more employees, at lower salaries, who pay a bigger share of their own healthcare and pension premiums, instead of a few highly paid individuals who constantly complain that they can’t serve us adequately because they are short of staff.  There is an opportunity coming up this year to re-negotiate the generous contracts that were made behind closed doors during the boom years, before the “sunshine” laws required sharing the contracts with the public. We’d like to see some “flexibility” in dealing with these contracts, instead of being held off by the forehead by our elected leaders and staff and told that renegotiating  our way out of this mess, created by salaries and benefits, would be “reneging on our promises…”

We also discussed ways in which the city could raise revenues without putting the squeeze on taxpayers. We believe they could go farther to promote business and therefore generate more sales tax through increased sales instead of increased tax. I’ve seen the regulations and fees – yes, the city can come off as being hostile to business. This is a basic attitude problem.  Remember the WalMart conversation – Scott Gruendl asked WalMart for a million dollars, to be put toward swapping out woodstoves – in exchange for permission to expand on their own property in order to increase the amount of merchandise they could carry and therefore the amount of sales tax they could generate. The expansion would have allowed WalMart to carry a larger grocery selection, bringing in more customers who would also be exposed to more taxable goods. Our city staff and council need to adopt a more practical attitude toward promoting business instead of exploiting the very people who are willing to take risks to stimulate our local economy.

We’re planning another meeting next month, and we’re trying to line up some guest speakers. In the meantime, we’re trying to make council aware that we do not support this  tax, while trying at the same time to be part of the solution.  Keep writing those letters to the council and the newspaper, talk to your neighbors and friends.

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Pension Bomb is ticking – Chico Taxpayers Assoc meeting this Sunday, 11:30am, Chico Library

29 Feb

Tom Lando is being quiet about his tax proposal – that doesn’t mean he’s given up. Currently he’s conducting a “survey”, supposedly in order to gauge public support, but more likely intended to mold his proposal into something the public will support. He’s just trying to find out what rainbows he needs to promise in order to get it past the uninformed.

That’s why I’ve tried to keep people informed to what’s really going on here – the city is broke after 10 years or more of absolutely reckless and irresponsible spending and Lando has been tapped (because he doesn’t have an elected position at stake) to sell the voters  a tax increase. 

Last night council wasted another two hours on a rambling bullshit session regarding the budget.  It wasn’t a “work” session like you’d see if you attended a city council meeting in Red Bluff or Gridley. In those towns they actually fix streets and get money for school projects.Here they sit and babble for hours and come up with NO SOLUTIONS.

They’ve got to start cutting the upper level staffers. Dave Burkland should not be allowed to retire at 50 years of age, taking over $130,000 a year in pension.  He should be told that he’s going to get a 50 percent salary cut and if he doesn’t like it, there’s the door. Same for Assistant City Manger John Rucker, who is instead getting ready to insert himself as Police Chief, and I’m guessing his new salary will be within $5,000 of the big 2-0-0-0-0-0! Same for at least 20 upper level employees, and those are just the cockroaches you can see.

Ann Schwab won’t fight the union – she IS the union.  She works for the university – SEIU.   Same with Holcombe, Gruendl and Flynn-Golom.  These people are loyal first and last to their benefactor, the union. They know boat rockers get the pitch overboard.

They don’t want to “fix” the budget, they want more money to pay the pensions, including their own. They want a higher state sales tax, and they want a higher local sales tax, you can bet on that.

When I spoke to Ann Schwab at her “Meet the Mayor” event Saturday at the library, she assured me she would not support a sales tax “for a ballfield.” That was it. She won’t support a ballfield? Well, at the regular city council meeting last week she said she’d dip into the reserve fund to hire new people. She ‘s already used the RDA like a credit card to pay salaries and pension payments, that’s bad enough. Hiring new hires without getting your finances in order is like putting out a fire with gasoline.  Or in this case, putting out the Pension Bomb by throwing some more flaming pensions at it.

If you’ve already written a letter to council, I’d certainly like to post it here. Sometimes it helps if they see the conversation going public, makes it harder to ignore us. You can also post your thoughts here anonymously, as long as they are on subject (Chico sales tax increase) and within the legal boundaries (don’t knowingly spread misinformation, and if you make a mistake, please be sure to retract quickly). Just click the “leave a comment” icon at the bottom left of each post.

Also, don’t forget, Chico Taxpayer’s Association meeting this Sunday, 11:30, at the Chico library. We have the room for about an hour before the next group comes in.

Tags: , , , , ,

How we got into this financial mess

25 Feb

Looking for information about Chico sales tax revenues, I came across a 13 year old article from the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy – “a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land.”

Using Chico as one of his illustrative models,  Arizona professor Jeffrey L. Chapman discusses “the effects of fiscal stress on local governments in California as they attempt to maintain their autonomy…”  In other words, how cities finance their operations without being taken over by the state.  It’s interesting to read this little prelude to our current predicament.

You can read the whole thing here:  http://www.lincolninst.edu/subcenters/property-valuation-and-taxation-library/dl/chapman_2.pdf

In his opening notes Chapman acknowledges the input and cooperation of then city manager Tom Lando.

In 1999, new housing development was in full swing in Chico.  Hammers were swinging, people were moving to Chico to take advantage of the relatively cheap housing, and construction workers were enjoying a newfound wealth.  The economy was on the way up, and the mule was the construction boom. So, an enterprising Lando decided to milk it for what he could get – he talked council into raising developer fees dramatically.

According to Chapman, “Over time, fees on new development have moved from basically non-existent to now very high. ”

By “very high”, Chapman meant, “Prior to the increases, they were about $2,000 per dwelling unit (for sewer connections) to now about $18,000 per dwelling unit.” This might sound like alot, until you consider “they cover everything from streets, parks police facilities, and bike paths.”

Some people pointed out at the time that this essentially added $16,000 to the price of a new house – I  have to laugh now – that’s chump change compared to the amount houses went up – a house just east of mine sold for $90,000 in 1998. In 2005, a  house just the other side of mine, with one more bedroom and bath, but  on the same size lot, went for over $500,000.

The housing binge provided another revenue opportunity for the city of Chico – increased property taxes.  The housing inventory was increasing as the price was going through the roof. The city was swimming in developer fees and property taxes, not to mention a surging increase in the utility and sales taxes. “If you build it, they will come…” … people were flocking to Chico. Meanwhile, the city was annexing “county pockets” all around the core, dragging in more property taxes, utility taxes and  sales taxes.

At some point in the late 1990’s, Lando had swung a deal to annex Courtesy Motors. Just Courtesy Motors. They wanted an expansion, and a  sewer hook-up, Lando told them they’d have to agree to annex. I’ll never forget the way he grinned as he talked about the sales tax revenues the city would be taking at a Finance Committee meeting. As an added bonus, this annexation created a county pocket of the neighborhood just to the west of Courtesy, which was annexed despite the protests of many of the residents a few years later.

So, if that was the picture in 1999, you might ask, what the hell happened by 2007 that led Lando’s protege and immediate successor Greg Jones to declare we were teetering on the brink of bankrupcty? Where in the heck did all that money go?

It’s funny, already in 1999, Chapman says, “services are increasing, but not in proportion to the population growth, so therefore, slight deterioration.” Meaning, services weren’t keeping up with the burgeoning population.

But why not? Chapman reported, having got his information from Lando,  that development was paying for itself – “Processing fees for new development utilize full cost accounting and include indirect costs. Enterprise funds are fully self-supporting and also include indirect costs. Thus, the fees set by the funds for homeowners are including these indirect costs.” Meaning, the cost of extra cops, street sweepers, more employees Downtown?

No, apparently not. Chapman lists “the police department no longer investigates traffic accidents if there are no injuries…” among other  city policies changes, such as, “The City used to trim trees every 7-10 years; now it will be trimming trees every 27-30 years.”

What can account for a city cutting services just as it is enjoying a boom in revenues? In 2003, the city of Chico, at the direction of City Manager Tom Lando, signed a memo of understanding with it’s employee unions that attached city salaries to revenue increases but NOT decreases.  Is that starting to make sense to everybody yet? Lando’s own salary went from the $90,000 range to over $180,000.  They took huge raises, 14, 19, 22 percent, raising the upper level salaries so quickly that they even created a pretty sizeable disparity between management and workforce. Soon, over 100 employees Downtown  made over $100,000 a year, but the folks that kept the records, tended the public, mowed the ballfields, repaired the sidewalks, paved the streets and collected the parking meter money were still in the $22 – 35,000 range.

Now, at this time, would you believe, we only owed about $120,000,000 on the RDA. I know, “only,” isn’t that a hoot? But now that we how hundreds and hundreds of millions, $120 million seems almost reasonable.

“The first redevelopment project,” reports Chapman, ” started in 1980. Today used quite a bit as is important source of funds. Together, the redevelopment money, the fees and charges from enterprise funds, and the capital funds take a $20 million General Fund budget and turn it into a $50 million city budget.”

Gee, sounds rosy – but get a load of this – “over time, the City Manager predicts that redevelopment may have become less important, since much of the service provision burden is being shifted to new development.”

There’s a glitch. What happened to Lando’s prediction that development was going to “pay for itself”?

Yes, that would be the little matter of the MOU attaching city salaries to revenue increases but not revenue decreases.

Now we find, not only did Lando NOT stop relying so heavily on the RDA as he said he would, but  he started at some point after 2000 paying salaries and benefits out of the RDA.

To me, this article, with the information provided by Lando himself, chronicles Lando’s gutting of our city finances to pay the huge salaries, including his own. I’d call that embezzlement – “the fraudulent appropriation of funds or property entrusted to your care but actually owned by someone else.” Wouldn’t you?

But now this character, with help from at least a few of our city council and, who else but $taff, is trying to shove a sales tax increase up our butts. For what purpose? To pay off the millions in pension promises he made to his $taff – to stave off the Pension Bomb. Cause see, when the Pension Bomb goes off, Lando and all his friends will just stop getting checks. They will have to get lawyers and sue a turnip for their paychecks. I think that’s going to happen anyway, but Lando is trying to hold it off as long as he can, because as former city manager, his name will be on on the poop end of  a few of those lawsuits.

Let’s not forget where the money went:

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 L 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
Please write to Chico City Council and ask them to agendize a discussion of how a tax increase can get on the city ballot.
And don’t forget – Chico Taxpayer’s Association meeting, Sunday March 4 at 11:30, Chico branch of the Butte County library. 

Tags: , , , ,

Oh, come on, you’re NOT THAT DUMB!

8 Feb

Last night I acted on an impulse and went before city council to ask them to agendize a discussion regarding how a tax increase measure is placed on the local ballot.

As I said, our city clerk informed me that a tax increase measure can be placed on a ballot with nothing but a simple majority of council – 4 of 7 members. Or, council can call for the proponents to carry an approved  petition and gather 10 percent of the registered voters.

So I thought I’d get this discussion going by asking council to agendize it for a near future meeting.  This issue was brought up last November, just kind of leaked around, no real details were given about the measure itself or the people who are backing it.  Since then it has been treated like some kind of state secret. I think a tax increase is something that needs the star treatment, lots of publicity, lots of public attention., lots of yap-yap.

So I asked. What I got was surprising. Two of the seven acted as though I was asking for a discussion of the measure itself. That’s not what I said. I made my self point-blank clear – I had written it down on a piece of paper aforehand, and practiced reading it to my family. My husband and teenage son were able to tell me what I was saying, but when I read off that piece of paper at council, I got dumb stares and one councilor’s opinion that  “it might be premature to discuss this proposal…”

I stood back up and  asked council if they understood my request – at this point I was feeling pretty perplexed. They aren’t stupid. They knew I was asking to discuss the procedure by which such a measure is placed on the ballot, not the measure itself. So, why play dumb? Ann Schwab tried to flat ignore my request, while Scott Gruendl said it should be agendized, but immediately launched into his own tour de force rant over the assault at Burger King. I never got an answer.

Well, I think we know why, given this morning’s Enterprise Record:

“City now operating at a loss: Chico to lose millions for redevelopment, thousands more from main fund”

Last night they came right out with it – they’ve been paying salaries with the RDA, and benefits, and pensions.  Not to mention, the bond payments on the RDA debt. Yessiree, they been buying groceries and making the credit card payment WITH  the credit card.

So, I can see why they want the tax increase, oh sure. But I don’t appreciate the way they’re going about it, kinda dishonest, using that dumb act, as if.

I have a very smart dog. Her name is Biscuit.

Yep, that's the blue ball alright.

She has her toys she likes, among them, six lacrosse balls – three white, one red, one yellow, and one blue.  And she’ll play with all of them, but if you ask her for the blue one, that’s the one you get. She’ll search the entire back yard, through brush piles and weeds and gopher holes, under cars and behind sticker bushes. She’ll bring back that blue ball every time.  She never tries to hand me a stick, or a bone, or even a white ball or a yellow ball. She never acts like she doesn’t understand.  If she can’t find the blue ball, she tells me, and we go looking for it together. But she never plays dumb, or refuses to answer.

Maybe we should give her a stint on city council, see if she’s a better listener than Ann Schwab.

 

 

 

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Chico Taxpayer Association meeting – We are not alone!

5 Feb

I’d like to thank the folks who came to the library today, thanks very much.  We had a good “think tank” session and I feel like I have more direction with this effort. The meetings I’ve been having lately have made me feel good about  this.  I found out there are others,  I’m not the only one who doesn’t like this tax increase idea, and I’m not the only one who is willing to do something about it. And how!

We’ll have another meeting March 4, same place, same time. Thanks to Casey Aplanalp for setting that up with the library folks. Casey is right, we need to get ourselves organized, dole out chores and responsibilities.

In the meantime, I will ask Debbie Presson if this measure can be placed on the ballot without a petition. This is an important question, I’ll get on it and have a report asap.

But the first wave of defense in an effort like this is e-mails and letters, saying we will NOT support this tax.  I hope people will write to council. Write early and write often.

Thanks everybody, this is going to turn into something.

 

 

Tags: , ,

Make them carry a petition

4 Feb

In an e-mail I received January 30, ex-Chico city manager and sales tax increase proponent Tom Lando told me, “yes, we are funding a community survey.”

The question is, is this survey intended to “test the water” and tell him whether or not he wants to spend the money to float a petition, or will he try to use this survey to get council to go over the collective public head and place the issue on the ballot without a petition?   City Council makes that choice.

A typical survey, such as the General Plan survey conducted on behalf of the city of Chico, contacts between 400 and 600 residents, by phone, supposedly chosen randomly by “experts”.  A survey depends on the skill of the person(s) making the phone calls – the dialog and the questions are often times leading.  There have been complaints about the recent “business climate” survey conducted fairly loosely by the city, saying some of the questions were leading and inappropriate.   The Diversity Action survey was just “brainstormed” by a $taff member and a group of volunteers, including ME, and they used that survey to shove through items like mandatory diversity training for $taff and board members.

Council is also allowed to simply ignore the results they don’t like or agree with – such as an overwhelming finding in the General Plan survey that residents want big lots – the council chose to ignore this finding in favor of high density.  Council outrightly ridiculed a survey brought forward by the group Concerned Citizens of Chico,  even though CCC used students from the same department at Chico State that the city uses do to alot of their surveys. Council is allowed to interpret a survey any way they want, and use it to validate their vote whichever way they go.

Petitions, on the other hand, are required to be signed by a certain portion of the fixed population – in Chico that amounts to over 6500 signatures, I’m not sure of the exact number.  Petitions are approved by the city clerk, so that people are allowed to know what they’re signing and whether it’s legal.  Petitions are not subjective – it’s  a legal matter of math.

I’d like to believe Mr. Lando is just testing the water before he spends as much as $50,000 on a petition. That seems intelligent and prudent.  We need to let him know that.

I’d say, contact Mr. Lando, and ask him how you can participate in his survey. Ask him who is conducting this survey.

And then let him know, that regardless of the results of his survey, you will expect him to carry a petition and get the required number of signatures.

That’s Tom Lando, at Lando and Associates, 111 Mission Ranch Blvd, Chico, 95928, or tlando@landoandassociates.com

E-mail is convenient, but don’t forget to write those letters, get them in the mail. There’s something about snail mail that says, “I mean it, dammit.”

Katy Sweeny at the Enterprise Record is also conducting a simple poll – you can contact her at Twitter@KatySweeny or ksweeny@chicoer.com

And don’t forget – tomorrow at the Chico library, 11:30, hope to see you there.

Tags: , ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →