Comparison of City Council Compensation BY LIONEL EMDE
http://www.pacificariptide.com/pacifica_riptide/2009/10/riptide-exclusive-a-closer-comparison-of-city-council-compensation-news-analysis.html
Lionel's
findings from his text:
In San Bruno, a council member who doesn’t take advantage of city health insurance receives no in-lieu cash payment. In San Mateo, in-lieu cash is $100 a month if no health benefit is taken. Pacifica has quite a different plan; any council member who already has his/her own health insurance and does not need city health insurance can take up to $920 of the $1,020 benefit amount as in-lieu cash—taxable income.
In San Bruno, a council member who doesn’t take advantage of city health insurance receives no in-lieu cash payment. In San Mateo, in-lieu cash is $100 a month if no health benefit is taken. Pacifica has quite a different plan; any council member who already has his/her own health insurance and does not need city health insurance can take up to $920 of the $1,020 benefit amount as in-lieu cash—taxable income.
Comments:
In private industry Cafeteria Plans (health and other benefits) are offered on a "use it or lose it" basis and clear-out after the end-of-the year; there are no cash-out provisions on any of these plans that I'm aware of.
In private industry Cafeteria Plans (health and other benefits) are offered on a "use it or lose it" basis and clear-out after the end-of-the year; there are no cash-out provisions on any of these plans that I'm aware of.
City
council voted themselves into the City executive Cafeteria +
Cash Plan benefit from 7/06. This addition to their benefits occurred
about the
same time city council was doing what it could to block advancement of
economic
development of the 38-44 acre mixed-use redevelopment in the quarry,
which
would have brought this city a balance city economy.
There are 3 reliable data spreadsheets in archives of this blog which show Pacifica #1 at the bottom of each economic list, substantially below East Palo Alto:
There are 3 reliable data spreadsheets in archives of this blog which show Pacifica #1 at the bottom of each economic list, substantially below East Palo Alto:
2. Redevelopment revenue http://fixpacifica.blogspot.com/2009/10/guess-whos-at-bottom-of-another.html
Also
view Chamber of Commerce vs. Daily City. The Pacifica
economic plan became recreation over the past 8 years. http://fixpacifica.blogspot.com/2009/10/chamber-of-commerce-pacifica-vs-daly.html
With
every opportunity and 8 years in office this city council
from my view has been neither responsible nor accountable, and there
has been
ongoing transparency problems. Also, the people of this city did not
vote
for "no growth", it seems that has just been the "crony back of
the house plan". Being careful
with city money is important, more so in a self-inflicted "no growth"
city.
Posted by Kathy Meeh
3 comments:
Hmmm.....Thank You, Kathy. I will bring this info to the attention of everyone that comes into my home.
Kathleen, I find Lionel and Vi's findings of council members voting themselves a benefit's raise with a periodic cash-out more serious because this city has been "robbing Peter to Pay Paul" during the entire 8 year tenure of this city council. At the same time the state of this city's economic dilemma has been understood by city council, including implications of systematic budget financial failure.
Multiple development opportunities have been available to "fix Pacifica" and bring-in needed tax generating revenue. The reason the quarry redevelopment property was important, other than services and jobs, is because a redevelopment zone pays the city about 80 cents on the dollar tax revenue, whereas the usual tax collection return to a city is about 15%.
Sorry about the jumping frog, if was still initially when I wrote the text.
Lionel,
You da man! Have you thought of doing a spreadsheet with Council total compensation breakdown, including monies received for Redevelopment Agency participation, auto, etc.? It would be interesting to juxtapose that against City Council Meeting attendance hours for each Councilmember. Absenteeism is much higher than one would expect, especially with respect to certain Council fence-sitters when controversial issues are up for a vote.
Post a Comment