March 31, 2007

March 30, 2007 Hollywood fire started with Fireworks

Once again fireworks, Kids and a dry season all will add up to a fun summer. Just think how many baseball uniforms we could buy with all the money we spent to put this fire out.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-fire31mar31,1,4997143.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california

Hillside fire threatens landmark, fouls the air
The blaze quickly burns 160 acres in the Hollywood Hills but stops short of signature sign. Two teens admit starting it, mayor says.


By Rong-Gong Lin II and Hector Becerra, Times Staff Writers
March 31, 2007



Photo from LA Times and User-submitted photo by: PhotoMatt

A fast-moving brush fire cut a path through bone-dry terrain in the Hollywood Hills on Friday, churning massive plumes of smoke across the region that slowed traffic, jangled nerves and for a time threatened the Hollywood sign.

The 160-acre blaze, the largest in the heavily populated Hollywood Hills in nearly two decades, consumed brushland above the Warner Bros. Studio and Forest Lawn cemetery.

The fire occurred in what is usually Southern California's rainy season and comes as the region is experiencing its driest year on record. Firefighters warned that they expect the fire danger to remain high through the spring.

Witnesses told authorities they saw two teenagers setting off fireworks about 1 p.m. near the Oakwood apartments, a temporary housing village near several major studios frequented by people in the entertainment business.

Three hours later, two teenagers from Illinois who were visiting the Oakwood turned themselves in to police and admitted starting the blaze, L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said. The boys, ages 16 and 17, were detained by LAPD officers on suspicion of reckless setting of a fire and then released to their parents' custody, pending possible prosecution.

"They were old enough to know what they were doing," said Villaraigosa, adding that the boys first told their parents about setting the fire before together calling police.

Independence Day comes early for Whittier CA

LAAG congratulates the good folks of Whittier who were able to convince their city council (without the expense of an election) that they had lost their mind allowing fireworks money to taint their community. The Whittier folks had spoken with LAAG before the vote and quite frankly we were skeptical that residents could pull this off. But apparently they got the ear of the council before the "fireworks machine" did. Unfortunately for Lakewood getting fireworks out of the city is like getting the Mafia out of Sicily. Its too ingrained and there are too many people addicted to it like "Meth addicts". It never was about the fireworks, in Lakewood or Whittier. It was all about the money. That same fireworks money paved the way for an ad blitz that assured victory for the political party of "smoke and fire". Again, we hope that more cities stand up and add their names to those cities that think progressively. Soon fireworks companies will be viewed like the tobacco companies.

Fireworks ban applauded
Article Launched: 03/29/2007 08:16:58 PM PDT
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_5551562

WHAT could be more fitting than for the people to prevail in an issue involving Independence Day?

The people of Whittier did just that.

Tuesday night, four members of the Whittier City Council rescinded their action taken in February which legalized the sale of safe and sane fireworks prior to the Fourth of July and the use of those fireworks on the Fourth of July.

The council action in February ended a city fireworks ban that had been in force for 20 years.

Owen Newcomer was the only council member to vote against ending the ban from the beginning.

Once the 4-1 action to end the fireworks ban went into effect, 32 local organizations applied for the 10 permits to sell fireworks allowed by the new ordinance.

But, the council's action ending the fireworks ban sparked opposition among residents and fire officials who emphasized that Whittier is a community of precious hills and wildlife and this is one of the driest years on record.

Week after week, the fireworks opposition grew into a firestorm of its own, with hundreds of protesters, including former mayors and community leaders showing up at council meetings to urge repeal of the ordinance.

Suddenly, last week, the lottery for fireworks sales booths was called off and the issue was placed on the March 27 council agenda.

Prevailing logic told everyone that this meant that the council very likely would rescind its legalization of fireworks.

And that's precisely what happened.

After the long procession in Council Chambers of fire department executives and many others against legalizing fireworks, council members one-by-one announced that they would vote to rescind the ordinance making fireworks legal again.

Nordbak became our hero when he actually admitted he had been wrong and apologized to his constituents.

"In hindsight and listening to the comments, I apologize, I missed the boat," he said. "When I voted, I thought I was doing the right thing."

He said he had received 2,400 comments on the issue and only three were in favor of fireworks.

Councilman Joe Vinatieri, who put the proposal for lifting the fireworks ban on the agenda last October, voted to rescind also, but added, "I'd like us as a community to come up with some idea for doing something like an old-fashioned Whittier July 4th celebration."

Councilman Bob Henderson agreed with Vinatieri that some kind of Fourth of July event should be explored. He also emphasized that "the incredible dryness of the year," made this an exceptionally bad time to bring back fireworks.

We support the idea of exploring a future patriotic community event and believe it would be best for such an event to originate with a city department, commission or community organization and come to the council as a proposal for whatever action would be required.

Councilman Owen Newcomer should be thanked for his good sense and courage to stand alone from the outset against an obvious danger to local lives and property.

Finally, we echo the sentiments of Councilman Nordbak, who urged that youth groups and churches that now will not reap the anticipated funds from fireworks sales be generously supported by local businesses and individuals.


Council reverses stance on fireworks

By Mike Sprague Staff Writer

www.sgvn.com

WHITTIER - The Whittier City Council reversed itself Tuesday and voted unanimously to ban July 4 fireworks.

The council in February had voted 4-1 to legalize fireworks for Independence Day. But since then, many residents have gone to council meetings, e-mailed and talked to council members individually asking them to rescind that decision.

"In hindsight and listening to the comments, I apologize," Councilman Greg Nordbak said. "I missed the boat. When I voted, I thought that I was doing the right thing. I think in hindsight, I missed it."

The council still must vote again in April and approve a new ordinance reinstating the ban on fireworks.

Nordbak said he was looking for a way to help local nonprofit groups raise money, but he found that even those people didn't support legalizing fireworks.

About 100 people were present at the meeting, with most of them in opposition to fireworks.

Four of the five council members changed their votes. Only Councilman Owen Newcomer had opposed legalization in the February vote.

Nordbak said he had received about 2,400 comments about fireworks. But only three supported keeping fireworks legal.

"That's a lot," he said. A big concern of all five council members was the lack of rain this year and what that could mean to the hills.

"We have something unique this year - the incredible dryness of the year," Councilman Bob Henderson said. "We now have a moisture content that is equivalent to what we normally have in September."

Councilman Joe Vinatieri, who put the proposal to legalize fireworks on the agenda in October 2006, said he still wants to find a way to celebrate Independence Day.

"There is no independence celebration in Whittier, which is inconsistent with our patriotism," Vinatieri said. "I'd like us as a community to come up with some idea of doing something of an old-fashioned Whittier July 4 celebration."

A couple of residents asked the council not to change its mind.

"The people in the hills are controlling the rest of Whittier," said resident Michael Schmidt. "The majority of people have forgotten what it's like to be a kid. They don't like noisy kids or dogs. They're at the sunset age."

mike.sprague@sgvn.com

(562)698-0955, Ext. 3022

March 29, 2007

Wonder why there isn't enough money to fix city streets?

You just cant say it enough ways or enough times in enough places. The "driveby media" is slowing picking up the story and starting to see the "Emperors clothes". Most politicians are to blame and very few feel any responsibility to "fix" the problem. Public safety employees are really not worth the cost, especially for benefits. Most crimes (especially murders ans serious crimes) have no relationship to the numbers of cops on the streets in most areas. The same with structure fires. When was the last time you saw one in person. Aside from the occasional house fire most large buildings are sprinklered or have advanced fire protection. Its just fear mongering by greedy unions pounding the drums making us think that if we are short one fireman or cop, our house will burn down or we will be attacked on the street.

You schleps in the private sector making under $100,000 a year with no benefits, ironclad job security or lifetime pensions at 100% of your highest years salary, better wake up before you get one hell of a tax bill soon.

Breaking the bank
Wonder why there isn't enough money to fix city streets? It's because fat pay and benefits packages are sucking up the dough


http://www.newsreview.com/chico/Content?oid=302991
By Richard Ek
PHOTO BY MEREDITH J. COOPER

About the author:
Dr. Richard Ek is a retired Chico State University journalism professor and department chairman who contributes frequently to the Chico News & Review.
www.chico.ca.us

The city of Chico is in financial trouble because it spends more than it takes in, and Greg Jones wants everybody in town to know about it.

"It's important to admit you have a problem before you can form a plan of action to solve it," the city manager said.

This negative state of affairs has been going on for about four years. If allowed to continue unchecked for a couple more years, the operating reserve would be gone, and another five or six years without corrective action would erase the emergency reserve, Jones explained. Then the sky could fall.Root cause of the problem: The city pampers its 450 employees with costly pay and benefits goodies, which in turn limits the amount of money available for street repairs, parks maintenance--Bidwell Park especially--and development of creekside greenways, to name a few infrastructure needs.

In what amounted to a cry for help, Jones last fall put out a mass mailing to Chico residents at a cost of $7,000 to pinpoint the problem. In the glossy, four-page "citizen newsletter," Jones said in part:

"The cost of doing business for the City has outpaced revenue for a number of years, requiring the use of reserves. ... These cost increases are comprised of ... retirement system cost increases, health benefit costs ... pay increases, and other personnel related costs.

"These costs, if no changes are implemented, will continue to accelerate faster than revenues, causing continuing ongoing budget deficits and allowing no room for increasing levels of service which the community needs."

Jennifer Hennessy, the city finance director and the source for most of the numbers in this article, supplied specifics by revealing that 80 percent of the city's $46.9 million budget for 2006-07 went for people costs. That's almost $37 million, and of that amount $26.5 million went to public safety, meaning police and fire. Overall, public safety accounts for 71 percent of the general-fund budget, with police taking 45 percent of the total.

Retirement benefits for city employees as a group have gone up 379 percent since 2000, and pay rates have largely kept pace.

Just how sweet the benefits package has become can be seen through health and life insurance policies enjoyed by all employees. Health coverage ranges from an HMO policy that's free to the employee but costs the city $323 per month, to a "Cadillac" policy that covers 90 percent of anything needed for a family and costs the city $902 per month, compared with $170 for the employee. All city workers also enjoy a city-paid life-insurance policy--cost: 34 cents per $1,000--worth a dollar of coverage for every dollar earned. Thus an employee who earns, say, $75,000 carries a free $75,000 life-insurance policy.

On average, permanent city employees earn $68,022 annually.

"Government employees are extremely well paid ... compared to private-sector workers in Chico and the county," Hennessy said. Indeed, Chico has long been known as a minimum-wage town, and Butte County, whose median household income in 2003 was just $33,443, has long been a poor county.

Jones emphasized that people everywhere consider public safety and streets to be the most important factors defining how well their cities or towns are managed. Public safety measures up well in Chico, but the streets do not.

Indeed, the police and fire unions--plus other city unions and employees--dip so deeply into the money pot that there's little left for road repair and maintenance.

The most outspoken critic of the pending budget shortfalls is City Councilman Larry Wahl. He more than anyone has warned that the council must face these realities and take action to reconcile spending and income imbalances before it is too late.

Dan Fulks, the city human resources director, holds the demanding job of negotiating contracts with the city's several unions. He's now hammering out a new multi-year contract with a three-person team representing the local chapter of the International Association of Firefighters. He said he couldn't "sunshine" (reveal) details other than to say the firefighters got a raise in each of the past three years and want another raise this year.

In contrast, the Chico Unified School District, for example, must early on sunshine the demands of the teachers' union, which nearly always creates a public furor. The city process instead reveals terms only after the fact, when the City Council has already OK'd the contract. Fulks acknowledged there might be more negative reaction if bargaining details were publicized.

City figures show that firefighters have enjoyed pay increases totaling 40.1 percent since 2000. As for retirement benefits, the big goody came down in 2001, when public-safety workers statewide won what has become known as the "3 percent at 50" plan. That means a firefighter or policeman can retire at age 50 with each year of service worth 3 percent of salary at the time of retirement.

If a public-safety worker started on the job at age 20, for example, he could retire at 50 with 90 percent of his highest salary, presumably the salary he made during the final work year. If that salary were $75,000 today, such a retirement would be worth $67,500. After age 50, each year is worth 3 percent of salary. In contrast, California public school teachers work until age 60 to get 2 percent.

The retirement benefits are carried with the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) in Sacramento, and the "3 percent at 50" plum proved to be the catalyst--along with a stock market swoon in spring 2000 that hurt investment returns and thus tax revenues--that prompted Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to declare a state of retirement system crisis and call for the Legislature to rein in pension costs. The governor knew that, once granted, a benefit, just like a bond, must be paid, even if it means a taxpayer bailout.

Although the Legislature balked and forced the governor to temporarily back off, he took a different tack last month by tossing this very hot potato to his newly created bipartisan Public Employee Post Employment Benefits Commission to study retirement reform and quickly make recommendations for action to the Legislature. The commission is also supposed to right away find a way to educate the public about the magnitude of the issue.

At the commission's first meeting early this month, Marcia Fritz, a CPA and pension expert from Citrus Heights, outlined the scope of the problem over the next decade, when hundreds of thousands of state and local government workers will retire and begin collecting benefits. She said the pension "fiscal time bomb" represents the biggest issue facing the state.

Just how well the 69 firefighters at six Chico stations are doing is reflected in the fact that they enjoy benefits worth 53 percent of payroll. That means if a firefighter makes, say, $75,000 dollars a year, his benefit package--defined-benefit pension, health insurance, life insurance, etc.--is worth $39,750.

New firefighters start at a hefty $57,551, and the average salary is $81,630. With benefits, total compensation is $124,894. Fourteen of the 69 firefighters earn salaries in excess of $100,000.

There has never been a time in the American private sector when any occupation group enjoyed benefits as rich as those enjoyed by city employees. Today even 5 percent looks good, and in the past 30 years the number of workers covered by defined-benefit pension plans has decreased by half.

Indeed, Hewlett-Packard is the latest corporate giant to announce it will no longer offer defined-benefit pensions. Others, like United Airlines, enter bankruptcy and dump their under-funded pension obligations on the federal Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp., which then kills all secondary benefits like health and life insurance and pays some 60 to 70 cents on the dollar for the remaining pension, depending on how seriously under-funded it was at dumping time. This federal rescue agency, which is many billions of dollars in the red, may well soon be a candidate for a taxpayers' bailout.
Click on the image for a larger version.

All city of Chico employees are required to contribute 9 percent of their salaries toward their pensions, but the firefighters pay only 2 percent because the city picks up the other 7 percent. The city then pays another 25 percent of the firefighter's salary into his or her pension fund, for a total of 34 percent of salary. The city pays at least 25 percent of salaries toward the pensions of all its 450 employees. This is on top of their free life-insurance policies.

Bill Hack, president of the local firefighters' union chapter, didn't see any problem with asking for more money because he said any pay increase is tied to an increase in the general fund and the city's being able to afford it. But the city manager's point is that the city is balancing the budget by using its reserve.

The city has added three new firefighters this year.

Fulks will sit down with the Chico Police Officers Association when he wraps up a contract with the firefighters, and he said he doesn't know what the 93 badge-carrying cops will want.

There are a couple of important things he knows for starters, however. First, the city picks up the entire 9 percent pension salary personal contribution for the police, and, second, the police benefits package is now worth 62 percent of payroll. That means if a policeman is earning $75,000, his benefits are worth another $46,500. The police have won a 37.4 percent increase in pay since 2000.

Starting salary for police officers is $49,795; the average pay is $70,777.

A different perspective on the matter of public-safety compensation can be seen in the fact that 64 of the 159 cops and firefighters earned more than $100,000, including overtime, in 2006. Hennessy said the city paid $2,435,479 for public-safety overtime last year, which was 5.5 percent of the city budget.

The police are unique in having a trust fund for health care that will carry on into retirement, not stop at retirement, as other city benefits do. Detective Terry Moore, the police union spokesman, said officers contribute $200 per month to the trust. The city matches that with another $200, and the total buys a health insurance policy that "partially offsets" costs for officers in retirement.

Just how many cops would it take to make Chico residents feel safe? It's hard to say. Police spokesman Capt. Mike Maloney revealed that work has been done on the national level to partially quantify the question. He said a formula carried in the annual FBI Uniform Crime Report shows Chico, with 1.83 officers per 1,000 population, is a little above average for the three states of California, Oregon, and Washington.

The city manager, however, doesn't feel comfortable with formula staffing and wants more officers so he can get into community policing with foot patrols.

Police Chief Bruce Hagerty said that last year his department fielded more than 26,000 emergency calls to 9-1-1, and in the great majority of cases a crime had already been committed or was in progress. In many cases there was already a victim.

"Our No. 1 goal is to prevent crime, and we can offer no statistics on how we are doing there because we obviously have no way to count crimes that didn't happen," the chief explained.

Hagerty added that police made 54,000 responses last year to calls, in addition to 9-1-1 calls, where the calling party wanted a police officer.
North Cedar Street
PHOTO BY MEREDITH J. COOPER

The department has just added two officers to the traffic division by redeploying two officers and is now starting the recruiting process for two replacement officers. All this is being paid for at present by state/federal grant money that will run out in a few years. At that time, Jones said, the city will pick up the positions on its regular payroll.

The 2006-07 budget calls for six new police positions, four of which have been filled. The other two will be filled when new grads emerge from the Butte College Police Academy in May, according to official sources.

The public often hears that police officers and firefighters need extra compensation because they "put their lives on the line every day." While providing public safety certainly can be dangerous, records show that only one police officer and one firefighter have died in the line of duty in the history of Chico--the policeman in a downtown restaurant incident in 1938, and the fireman in a post-fire downtown roof collapse in 1970.

Fulks also bargains with the service Employees International Union (technical, clerical, trades, and craft workers), and its 300 workers do very well, averaging an annual salary of $47,867. The top for an SEIU member is $37 per hour with benefits worth 52 percent of payroll and yearly total compensation worth $118,686.46. Union members' pay has gone up 37 percent since 2000.

The fourth and last union Fulks sits down with is the Chico Public Safety Association (dispatchers and community service officers). This small group has also done well in pay since 2000, with raises ranging from 30.8 percent to 40.8 percent, depending upon position. Average annual salary is now $47,607. The highest-paid member earns $29.03 per hour with benefits worth 56 percent of payroll and total compensation worth $94,196.54.

In addition to these recognized unions, the city also has three "unrepresented" employee groups: public-safety management (fire chief, police chief and captains), who have benefits worth 55 percent of payroll; confidential employees (certain clerical staff who have confidential-information access), who have benefits worth 47 percent of payroll; and management (city manager, department heads), who have benefits worth 39 percent of payroll and pay increases totaling 35.3 percent since 2000.

The police and fire chief each earns a salary of $165,939 and total compensation of $251,439.76.

Tracking of all groups shows their pay increased roughly 6 percent per year, except fire, which is closer to 7 percent. Union workers occupy lifetime positions.

The city manager personally negotiates terms with the unrepresented employees and makes compensation recommendations for them to the City Council. Since Jones makes recommendations on all groups--represented and unrepresented--and makes a pitch for his own pay, does he indirectly benefit from his own raise recommendations and thus have a conflict of interest?

City Councilman Larry Wahl didn't answer yes or no but asked, "How would you deal with that?" He went on to say, "We negotiate our contract with the city manager, and the city manager is free to pay those people under him what he thinks they are worth, and he's got to make more than his underlings."

Official records show Jones started work on Jan. 1, 2006, at a yearly salary of $190,259 (it has since gone up to $200,533). Tom Lando, the previous city manager, who served from July 1, 1992, until Dec. 31, 2005, started at $84,000 per year and retired at $233,516. Thus his pay improved by almost $150,000 over 13.5 years, increasing $11,075 per year on average. Based on his age at retirement (55), he is making about $145,000 annually in retirement.

The city also paid for Lando to earn a Ph.D. in public administration through the University of Southern California, an expensive private university (tuition today is almost $34,000 per year), which further qualified him for teaching at Chico State University.

It remains to be seen what princely package Jones will develop in the future.

Roads are the starving waif of the city. Although that is the last thing Chico motorists want, they don't have a powerful union to help change the situation. It's one of those "everyone knows" kinds of things. Everyone knows that traffic is increasing in Chico all the time, with popular SUVs and heavy pickup trucks much in evidence. Heavy garbage trucks with an extra pair of wheels in back for bearing additional load pound the pavement, as do buses.

Chico State student and letter-to-the-editor writer Kristen Thengvall expressed the public's general frustration when she wrote recently about the awful condition of North Cedar Street that she and other Chico State students must use as their main route to campus and downtown. "We pay the price as our vehicles need to be serviced more often due to the wear and tear of potholes and uneven road surfaces," Thengvall wrote, also criticizing the lack of sidewalks and lighting. She wants the city to give the street higher priority and do something about it other than talk.

The city manager lamented: "I need six to eight million dollars a year to put the streets in proper shape, and I don't have the money." He added that the city tries to keep potholes repaired, but "it's like chasing your tail to keep up. I want preventive maintenance. If I've got potholes, it means the preventative maintenance system is failing. My goal is no potholes."

He pointed out that Chico streets were not built for high-use urban traffic. Further, if the present winter had brought a lot of heavy rain, the streets now in bad condition would be in terrible shape.

The city manager said it would take "a number of years" to fix the streets. He didn't quantify a more specific timeline or specifically describe a program to do it.

Official records show that slightly over $4 million in general-fund money was allocated in 2006-07 to the General Services Department, which has responsibility for street maintenance, street cleaning and sweeping, parks operation and sewer-line maintenance.

Another $2 million in what's identified as "gasoline tax transfer" money is available, according to official records, but only $1.2 million was transferred into general services for road improvement and maintenance. Note that's improvement as well as maintenance. The other $0.8 million goes to pay working crew members. Gas tax money also hired a maintenance worker whose job is to abate the growing graffiti problem.

It's clear that, as Jones said, the money for road repair falls far short of the $6 million to $8 million per year needed.

It's a different story with big roads. Bond money from the Chico Consolidated Redevelopment Agency (RDA) paid for "the lion's share"--almost $8 million--of the cost to do all the major renovation work last fall on Mangrove Avenue, Cohasset Road, the Manzanita corridor, Vallombrosa Avenue and the Skyway, said Bob Greenlaw, a senior engineer for capital projects. Gas tax money paid for about $1.2 million, which is the yearly allocation.

All the work done last fall on these heavily traveled arterial roads--as opposed to neighborhood streets, minor traffic feeder streets, and major feeder streets--cost $9 million, Greenlaw said.

Overall street conditions further suffer because Chico gradually and incrementally annexes more and more of the many county "islands" that have long existed within the city, and no annexation fee exists to help pay for the transition or to improve the bad roads that usually come with the deal.

The county never took care of the island roads, Wahl said, and when annexed they represent an added maintenance expense burden for "a long time." Official records show the city has gained 18,151 residents through annexation from 1992 through 2006. Wahl explained that Chicoans are paying "for the sins of their fathers," who never drew a line around the city in, say, 1910 to define the difference between its limits and the county's.

Larry Wahl
PHOTO BY MEREDITH J. COOPER

Jones, who has been on the job only 15 months, takes an optimistic view of Chico's financial problems and does not think the sky will fall. City leaders will work out one or more solutions, he said.

His first forward step was to project the city budget 10 years out to bring revenue and expenditures into long-range view for perspective. He thinks seeing liabilities stretched out will hopefully lead to a better and more pragmatic financial approach, whatever that might be.

Jones also spoke hopefully about building a stronger stream of sales tax revenue, the biggest single source of general-fund money for the city. He pointed to the Costco expansion and its potential to bring the city an additional $300,000 per year, but did not go on to other specifics. He also drew attention to the fact that Chico is a regional shopping hub that had in the past delivered well on retail sales tax and should be able to build more such tax revenue. Jones thus hoped the city could at least partially grow out of its money problems.

Since city employees represent more than 80 percent of the city budget, Jones was asked, why not hold the line on raises for this financially pampered group until income and outgo come into balance? "This financial correction should not all be on the backs of city employees," Jones replied emphatically.

Why not, he was asked, since he had identified their pay and benefits as the root of the problem? He replied that the problem is "paternalism"--treating employees with the generosity a parent gives a child--and it's not unique to Chico. He said some local governments give their workers even more than they ask for.

Mayor Andy Holcombe said he "didn't buy into" the idea that lucrative total compensation packages are handed over by the Chico City Council or other local governments because it's just OPM (other people's money).

On the same question, Councilman Steve Bertagna replied that giving away OPM was not the case. He added that the council wants a certain high level of service and is willing to pay to get it.

Wahl, a small-businessman known for his outspoken views, said using OPM is part of the generosity problem with public employees. Another is that the city wants to ensure that its workers are paid as well as those in comparable towns elsewhere. He then stressed that employee compensation represents a huge problem the City Council must face.

"I have asked that the City Council have a discussion ... about how we can rein in the costs of paying employees. It's something we must do because we just have to get a handle on knowing, say, five, 10, 20 years down the road where we are going to be if we keep paying what we're paying ... when most of the people who are there now are retired, and we have a new crop [of employees] that is being compensated as well or maybe better than the folks now."

The councilman said he hadn't been able to win over a majority "because it will be a hard [discussion] to have, and it's going to hurt." He added, "The feeling is that it's always been that way. Yeah, but--you know? It doesn't mean it always has to be that way. You'd be out of business in the private sector in any kind of business ... with employee overhead costs like that, but we accept it in government. It starts at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. [the White House] and works its way down." He then suggested possible solutions to get costs down.

"One is letting people go, but I don't foresee that happening. Another is increasing revenues. That means some kind of tax, but I certainly don't support that notion. Another is to let the revenue grow without letting the salaries grow. We could also have a tiered approach where newer people don't get the same level of benefits the current group is getting.

"Now, you know that [having tiers] would create major angst among the unions, and they would fight it," Wahl said, but he insisted it be part of the discussion the council must have "before some point in time when it may be too late. I don't know any other ways you can do this." Wahl emphasized it would be better to plan for an outcome now rather than be forced to "an outcome we may not like."

Asked what it would take to give street repair a higher priority, Wahl replied, "It would have to be a council discussion, and I asked for it at the State of the City meeting [last January]. We need to sit down and decide which are the worst [roads] and then make a start by taking maybe a half a million or a million dollars a year so we take a little whack at it year by year to do something."

Wahl's current plan of action involves writing a letter to the mayor asking that road repair be put on the agenda for the upcoming spring budget discussions, but "I don't know that it will go anywhere."

As for Jones, he appeared reluctant to speak in specifics about the future and possible solutions to city financial problems. That may be his way of saying that it's up to the City Council to make such policy decisions.

Union facts web page

click here to read about the firefighters union.


click here to read about the police union.

Maps: San Gabriel River issues

This is the perfect way to spot issues on the bike path!

click here to see the SG River map. Use the contols in the upper right to zoom in on any problem areas

March 25, 2007

CA cop earned $175,000 in a year...not including pension and healthcare costs

How a San Jose cop earned $175,000 in one year
`SPECIAL PAYS' PUTTING BIG BUCKS IN POCKETS OF SOME CITY WORKERS
By John Woolfolk
San Jose Mercury News
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_5517589

Article Launched:3/25/07

The top annual salary for a San Jose police officer is $86,000. But one officer last year more than doubled that figure, earning a total of nearly $175,400.

How? Welcome to the world of "special pays," a combination of overtime, on-call work and other extras that put this officer among the 100 highest-paid of the city's 6,800 employees.

While the average Silicon Valley worker might marvel at such opportunities to boost one's salary, for a public employee it's all perfectly legal and above-board.

And the officer was hardly alone - one firefighter with an $84,000 salary was paid more than $163,000 last year, according to city records. While those are extreme examples, they show that for many city employees - in civilian as well as public safety jobs - their salary is just the beginning of their take-home pay.

San Jose's compensation structure includes 135 categories of extra pay, though no single employee can get them all.

The city's average employee salary and benefit costs have risen 45 percent since 2000 and recently come under heightened scrutiny. Mayor Chuck Reed, elected last year on a platform of fiscal responsibility, has noted that employee costs account for almost two-thirds of the city's nearly $1 billion operating budget.

And with a vow to eliminate recurring deficits, Reed has asked the city to look for ways to slow those growing costs as labor contracts come up for renewal.

Health care a factor

Employee Relations Director Alex Gurza said the various pay categories aren't primarily responsible for soaring employee costs, noting that most have been part of the compensation package for a decade or more. The biggest culprits, he says, are health care costs, steep pension payments and salary increases.

Still, the menu of salary extras illustrates the complexity facing city officials as they attempt to tackle runaway employee costs. Each uptick in the base salary rate can be magnified by special pays, which are often based on percentages of that base figure. City officials say those costs are tracked and taken into account when new labor contracts are negotiated.

Special pay beyond basic salary isn't unique to San Jose. Other cities offer similar provisions to their employees. Mountain View, for example, offers an extra $100 a month to bilingual officers and $50 a month for civilian employees who speak a second language. Mountain View canine officers get an additional 5 percent of salary to cover care for their police dogs.

But neighboring Santa Clara doesn't pay police extra for canine duty - their cops just get time off to spend on animal care and training. Santa Clara also doesn't offer extra pay for anti-terrorism training or higher levels of certification from the state Peace Officer Standards and Training organization, as San Jose does.

While extra cash for overtime, specialized training or foreign language skills might not raise many eyebrows, San Jose administrators have questioned the justification for at least some of the special pay.

City Manager Les White has asked that the city no longer pay a stipend to deputy managers for attending meetings of an advisory committee that oversees the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant. That stipend added $800 to one deputy city manager's $160,000 base salary and $100 to the $189,000 base salary of the other who qualified for the payment.

"That's ending," said Tom Manheim, a spokesman for the city administration. "It didn't seem to make sense that city employees are paid extra to do their job."

Many of the pay categories, however, have been negotiated in union contracts and can't be so easily eliminated. Still others are recent additions. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the city council approved a new 5 percent pay booster for all police to attend an annual in-house anti-terrorist training. San Francisco later adopted a similar program.

No names divulged

Apart from a handful of top administrators, it's unknown which employees are making what in salary and pay extras. The city, citing privacy concerns, has refused to release employee pay information by name unless the California Supreme Court, which is weighing lawsuits seeking disclosure by the Mercury News and other newspapers, orders otherwise.

By far the costliest special-pay category is overtime - usually one-and-a-half times the regular pay rate. It cost San Jose a total of $21.5 million in the last fiscal year and has been controversial for years. Particularly when it comes to the city's thinly staffed police and fire departments, where extra hours often are required.

City officials have argued it's cheaper to pay overtime than to pay the salaries and benefits of additional cops and firefighters. But union leaders say that strategy leads to costly injuries in a city with the state's highest proportion of big-city public safety disability retirements. They'd prefer a bigger staff to big overtime paychecks. The city has recently begun adding small numbers of police and firefighters to ease the staffing shortage.

But not all overtime is tied to overwork. Firefighters, who work multiple 24-hour shifts in a 56-hour week, are automatically paid overtime for three of their 56 hours. What's more, those who take on "administrative assignment" roles while working regular business hours are paid an additional $36 a day to make up for the loss of overtime pay.

Toward top of list

"Premium pays" for special skills and assignments are another big source of income, particularly in public safety jobs. The city's $175,000 officer, whose base pay is $83,400, wouldn't have cracked the top 100 highest-paid on $47,864 in overtime alone. It took special pay for extra training, on-call premiums and the extra compensation for having a police dog to help bring the officer near the top of the list.

While most of those categories are unique to public safety jobs, certain skills or circumstances also allow civilian city employees to boost their paychecks. City employees who decline the city's health and dental coverage get paid the money the city would have spent on it. For housing director Leslye Krutko - who is married to another city official and could get coverage under his health plan - that was worth an extra $5,350.

Some employees also can cash in their unused vacation. So for the city's busy redevelopment manager, the top overall earner of 2006, that contributed $8,648 toward his total pay of $254,000.

And in increasingly multicultural San Jose, bilingual ability is a big plus. There's extra pay for those who demonstrate fluency in another language - that's worth $754 a year - and $286 more for those who can read and write as well in another tongue.

Employee union leaders bristle at the suggestion that any of their members' pay is unreasonable, noting for example that public employees aren't eligible for Social Security retirement or perks like stock options that are available to their private-sector peers.

Police and firefighters say that even in the self-proclaimed Safest Big City in America, their jobs are dangerous. Five firefighters and an officer were hurt in December when a burning downtown house exploded, and a rookie officer was fatally shot making a routine traffic stop in 2001.

Erik Larsen, president of the city's largest employee union representing 2,900 librarians, janitors and other workers, said many struggle to pay the bills in high-priced Silicon Valley. Top base salary for a senior water meter reader is $59,000 in a region where $59,400 qualifies as low-income.

"Let's not demonize public employees that live in a region that has the highest cost of living in the country," Larsen said.

Contact John Woolfolk at jwoolfolk@mercurynews.com or (408) 975-9346.

March 24, 2007

UNfunded liabilities $205,000 per employee in one district!!

Again the you know what has not yet hit the fan... Wait until the all the government entities have to comply within the next four years with a new accounting standard of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement, aka GASB 45...The taxpayers are going to get a serious prostate exam...

http://cbs5.com/localwire/localfsnews/bcn/2007/03/24/n/HeadlineNews/NEWS-ROUNDUP/resources_bcn_html
SATURDAY NEWS ROUNDUP
CBS 5 - San Francisco,CA,USA

A Marin County grand jury this week said the county has a long-term health care liability of $378 million because of health care payments to retired employees.

The county likely won't be able to make the payments without raising taxes or cutting services, the jury found.

The civil grand jury questioned whether the health care benefits for retirees are vested and can't be taken away, or whether they are subject to change or elimination.

The panel also asked whether managers and elected officials who are eligible for retiree health care benefits are in a conflict of interest position when making decisions about those benefits.

The $378 million liability "is only a little less than the county's entire 2007 annual budget of $400 million, the grand jurors said.

Towns, cities, special districts and school districts are expected to report their un-funded liabilities, including present and future costs of pensions and retiree health care benefits, within the next four years under a new accounting standard of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement 45, GASB 45, the panel noted.

"They (the unfunded liabilities) will be substantial,'' the panel reported. "One of 36 special districts, for example, estimated its liability in 2005 at around $8.6 million, or $205,000 per employee.''

The panel recommended the county, towns, cities and special districts determine whether the benefits are vested and inform employees of their findings.

Trash: city councils just dont get the run off issue

HELLO....can you read? The reason trash ends up in the rivers is two fold:

1. Most people are slobs and feel no guilt in chucking any kind of trash out their car window; (do you think paper cups just blow out of peoples hands? duh)

2. Cities refuse to understand that unless ALL cars are removed from ALL streets before sweeping (parking control issue) and ALL streets are swept ONCE per week, the trash problem will persist. Not only trash but toxic chemicals (oil, anti freeze etc.) that leak from crappy junk cars

Just look at the gutters in Lakewood on major streets near shopping centers. Major streets (or where trash is an issue) should be swept 3x a week.

WAKE UP CITIES!! This puzzle is easy to solve. You (ie the taxpayers) have to clean up after the slobs!!

Long Beach officials talk trash
Environment: Litter in the L.A. River is ending up in L.B.

By Tomio Geron, Staff writer
Article Launched: 03/23/2007


Tons of trash littered in the Los Angeles River end up in Long Beach. Here, the river is shown as it passes downtown. Long Beach City Council members met with Van Nuys officials and environmental experts Friday in a bid to address the issue collectively.(Steven Georges / Press-Telegram )

LONG BEACH - Tons of trash that wind up in the 51 miles of Los Angeles River all end up in one place: Long Beach.

To address the problem, Long Beach Councilwoman Suja Lowenthal and Assemblyman Lloyd Levine of Van Nuys held a forum Friday with local officials and environmental experts to search for solutions.

Lowenthal is interested in working with other municipalities along the river to assist them in their litter prevention efforts.

"If we strengthen other cities, it'll strengthen Long Beach," Lowenthal said.

Many residents have a willingness to stop littering and help clean up, said Melinda Barrett of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works.

What works to decrease litter, Barrett found, are community-based approaches, including putting up billboards, working with community groups, and educating children through schools.

Many children often educate their parents to the problem, she said.

Lowenthal said the city of Long Beach plans to involve six of its eight comprehensive high schools for two weeks around Earth Day to promote an anti-litter message and incorporate that into science classes and other school activities.

However, a statewide initiative is also
Advertisement
necessary make a strong impact, said Steven Aceti, executive director of the California Coastal Coalition.

"The state needs a comprehensive, highly-funded litter education program," he said. "Cities aren't going to be able to do it \."

Lowenthal emphasized the benefits of partnering between "unusual suspects" to achieve larger gains in stemming the trash tide.

Lowenthal cited the city's partnership with the Aquarium of the Pacific on anti-litter campaigns, which draw on the aquarium's expertise in environmental issues.

In addition to residents who litter, companies that produce packaging and other materials that end up in the water also bear responsibility, said Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste.

"Certainly there's a behavior component, but that's not the primary problem," Murray said. "It's a materials problem. The majority of packaging is paper, but the main litter is plastic. Producers of materials need to bear greater responsibility for it."

Some small changes could help, Lowenthal noted, such as a dry cleaners accepting old hangers or giving cartons for customers to collect the hangers.

Levine said everyone bears responsibility. He said three sources of litter in rivers all need to be addressed: "pre-litter," or source reduction, such as compact disk "long boxes" that were successfully eliminated; consumer level waste, once people buy something, to prevent them from littering; and litter actually in the water.

Levine noted that he proposed a bill last year, which goes into effect this year, to force large stores to collect and recycle plastic bags.

Tomio Geron can be reached at tomio.geron@presstelegram.com or at (562) 499-1292.

March 23, 2007

Fireworks law change in Indiana

What is most interesting about the story below is that once again TNT Fireworks is right in the thick of things. Of course in Indiana they are arguing that they want a universal state law covering fireworks. Here in California the so called "patchwork system" created by hapless city counsels (which are quire easy the pander to) suits the fireworks companies just fine. I think the fireworks companies are soon going to be like the tobacco companies...no one needs their smoke.

Posted on Fri, Mar. 23, 2007

Fireworks change sets off hot debate
Industry worried about piecemeal laws


By Niki Kelly
The Journal Gazette
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/fortwayne/news/local/16959375.htm

INDIANAPOLIS – Residents weary of fireworks popping day and night might get relief under a bill passed Thursday that gives some local control to cities, towns and counties wishing to restrict the pyrotechnics.

The House Local Government Committee amended Senate Bill 9 Thursday and then approved it 9-3. It is now eligible for consideration by the full House.

Under Indiana law passed last year, Hoosiers can set off fireworks every day of the year until 11 p.m.from their own properties or properties they have permission to use. On many holidays, the festivities are permitted to continue until midnight.

The new law is a major departure from the old system of making Hoosiers promise to set off fireworks out of state, and included a tax on fireworks to pay for firefighter training and state disaster relief.

Under Senate Bill 9, the state law would be in force unless a county or municipality passes a local ordinance restricting when and where residents can use fireworks.

Even under a local ordinance, though, the state law protects the absolute right of residents to use fireworks eight days a year – July 2-7, Dec. 31 and Jan. 1.

The hours on those days would differ slightly, from 5 p.m. until 11 p.m., except on July 4, Dec. 31 and Jan. 1, when the hours would be from 10 a.m. to midnight or 1 a.m.

The measure also makes it clear that local police can enforce their own noise ordinances year-round. This language is in response to questions about whether the state law preempts local ordinances.

Those representing the fireworks industry complained about a patchwork of regulations the bill would create – as many as 700 if every single county, city and town in the state passed an ordinance.

“Talk about mass confusion,” said Tom Fruechtenicht, lobbyist for the Indiana Fireworks Distributors Association. “I think this law deserves time to work before you undo and restrict these things.”

Some speakers also noted that many of the problems experienced last summer are covered under the existing law if local police enforce it.

Examples include the use of loud cherry bombs or M80s (which are illegal under state and federal law) and shooting off fireworks at 3 a.m. Both violations could result in at least a citation.

But Rep. Win Moses, D-Fort Wayne, said police have other important duties.

“They are out trying to find burglars and murderers and rapists,” he said. “To divert them to fireworks is a difficult choice.”

Fireworks industry supporters also were unable to answer a crucial question from Rep. Jon Elrod, R-Indianapolis, who asked how he proves who burned his garage down when multiple neighbors are shooting off bottle rockets.

“That’s an evidentiary problem,” Fruechtenicht said.

Lisa Hays Murray, who represents TNT Fireworks, said that people tend to use more fireworks immediately after they are legalized and that she expects the novelty to wear off this summer.

But lawmakers were insistent that those living in dense urban areas be given some sort of tool to combat the problems of noise, garbage and danger.

nkelly@jg.net

March 20, 2007

Verizon March 2007 press release does not tell the whole story

Well LAAG pressed the verizon people on where our Lakewood Fios Fiber was and guess what. Only a small portion of Lakewood will get Fios fiber out of a Long Beach central office (the one near clark st. and carson st.). The Bellflower CO (our CO) will not get FIOS until 2008!! That is according the woman at Verizon in charge of fiber build out schedules. The Verizon FIOS rep. said that if we can get the city council to write a letter to Verizon that may speed things up in terms of getting things wired.

Kind of let down after being told being told we were going to get it in 4 weeks. You would think the Verizon people would have known or at least asked what Central Office LAAG was out of before giving me false hope!

Verizon Petition needed!

For Lakewood CA and Bellflower CA residents that would like to speed things up send us an email at UPDATES@LAAG.US and we will use your name (and address if you give us permission) to put together a sort of petition to the City to write to Verizon to see if we can get Verizon to put the Bellflower CA Central Office (which serves northern Lakewood and parts of Bellflower) on the early 2008 Fios upgrade list instead of late 2008 or 2009. LAAG is doing this at the suggestion of the Verizon people in the main Huntington Beach FiOS scheduling office. There is nothing stopping Verizon now on permits (as they obtained the statewide franchise rights in March 2008) and they told us they prefer areas (like Lakewood) with aerial as opposed to underground wiring (speeds up FIOS wiring) and areas with lots of single family homes as large multiple family dwelling units like apartments bog down the installations as they often require permits or private ownership consent for placement.

For more up to date Verizon FiOS news go here and do a search for Bellflower or Lakewood CA


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™