| Kabuki leadership economics, "Trust me!" |
Pacifica Riptide, "Shall we dance? What's behind Pacifica's tax increase?"
Submitted by Jim Wagner
Posted by Kathy Meeh
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Pacifica's Economic Plan
Submission and comment policy
Want to share an article or opinion? Unlike some other Pacifica blogs, Fix Pacifica won't bury viewpoints we disagree with. Send your submission, along with your name, to fixpacifica@gmail.com.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
Search This Blog
Recent Comments
Get this Recent Comments Widget
Historic Sharp Park Golf Course
Blog Archive
-
▼
2013
(754)
-
▼
June
(63)
- City Calendar July 1 - July 7
- Should I stay in Pacifica?
- 4th of July festivities in Pacifica
- What to do next Thursday, July 4th, 2013
- Latest beach water pollution report, we're good
- CHP Closure: SR-1 Lantos Tunnel: Sat 7-7:30 AM
- Nothing unifies Pacificans more than a whole serie...
- Pacifica Fees and Charges for Permits and Actions
- Latest news from Pacifica Five-O
- Fireworks will be allowed in some beach areas
- Is the long awaited economic plan for Pacifica mor...
- Shark bites kayak at Pacifica - man safe
- Full Godbe UUT survey
- Parking fees may be coming to you soon
- Pacifica City Council to Consider Measure to Prote...
- Pacifica Employee Salaries
- Pacifica City council to Address Potential Update ...
- UTT Questions
- Homeless numbers way up in Pacifica
- City calendar this week, June 24 - 28, 2013
- City game plan to sell you several new, additional...
- Too old to paraglide, man seriously hurt
- Appointment of the new Planning Commission, Counci...
- False kidnap attempt, no charges, moving on
- City Council term limits, look back at the Measure
- Path to a city selling a new tax to its residents
- Pacifica PD Attempted Child Abduction ****UPDATED ...
- City Council meeting, Monday, June 24, 2013
- City meetings tonight - Redevelopment Successor, P...
- 2013 Community Survey of UUT Measure, City Service...
- Student photography from IBL's photography class
- Pacifica Five-0 Efficiency Meeting, 6/19/2013
- Millbrae, another city with a balanced budget
- Planning Commission meeting, Monday June 17, 2013
- N.S.A. tracks e-mails to fathers yesterday
- Possible Attempted Child Abduction
- City calendar this week, June 17 - 21, 2013
- Happy Father's Day, June 16, 2013
- Pacifica School District letter to PH1A
- PH1A letter alternatives to Highway 1 widening
- Latest Fresh & Easy rumor
- Daly City to put garbage and recycling contract ou...
- Vote for additional utility user taxes?
- Highway 1 widening is the traffic bottleneck solution
- Fun at the San Mateo County Fair, June 8 through 1...
- 4th of July fireworks issues considered at city co...
- City calendar this week, June 10 -14, 2013
- Bohner/Loeb vs. Route 1
- In San Carlos, a commission that has "not much to ...
- Highway 1 widening is an economic opportunity
- PACIFICA: Scientists find way to improve effective...
- Measure A highway 1 and other city infrastructure ...
- Odwalla headquarters has lost its cool Half Moon B...
- San Mateo County Harbor District appointment, the ...
- New Planning Commissioners soon appointed
- City Council meeting, June 10, 2013
- Public - private partnership converts landfill gas...
- Marin County voter approved desalination plant mov...
- Government in San Mateo County peninsula, week of ...
- San Mateo County Harbor Commission replacement int...
- City calendar this week, June 3 - 7, 2013
- Measure A sales tax may help build our new library...
- San Mateo County voting districts accused of sirin...
-
▼
June
(63)
Visitors:
76 comments:
Great letter. Glad it's been re-posted here. Ought to be required reading for every Pacifica voter and taxpayer. The Trib and The Times?
There really are more important issues than money involved in this tax controversy. Some members of our City Council have clearly lost sight of that, but we must not. Staring us right in the face are issues of openness and due process (the real thing not council's Kabuki version), good government, and the arrogance of elected officials with what appears to be situational ethics and an out-of-control sense of entitlement.
This letter should give pause even to those good people who agreed to help with this travesty. I'd like to think they just need their eyes opened to the less than admirable methods used by some members of council.
Mighty good work, anonymous. Thank you!
As Anonymous 7:48 said this is a great letter and I also hope that it reaches more people the Tribune and the times would be a good start.
Elaine told me they don't print anonymous letters. Too bad this letter really sums uo this whole piece of crap.
Sad to hear that Hutch. What a shame. Sometimes newspapers make an exception when the letter is of great general interest. We can hope it gets passed around and becomes of great general interest.
Why doesn't someone paraphrase the letter, sign it, and send it to the trib as a LTE?
Senior exemption! I resent that! Most 62 year olds I know are a vibrant part of the work force. Even if retired, many are still working at a second career or are active in the community. What kind of arbitrary number is 62? Some relic from the days when life expectancy was 65? Not fair to the rest of this town to pander to the "senior's" in search of easy votes. It would be much more fair to gage it to income level. The single mother barely making it with help of the Resource Center is more worthy of this largesse than the majority of seniors here.
Better yet, scratch this hair-brained pocket reach. Not thought out and regressive.
After much thought I have come to the conclusion that the UUT if placed on the ballot should have a five year sunset, a $500.00 cap [not just for businesses] and a means test for any reduction in the tax for individuals [like the Life line rates for PG&E] Being a senior does not mean you are living below the poverty line. Just encase you think I have it in for the old farts I am 67.
I agree with Tom. We need something to replace all the money that Sacramento has stolen and the much more that the hippies have kept from us through obstruction of development. Now that we finally have a decent council, let's see what they can do with a limited amount of additional revenue.
Tom, I'm sorry that the council didn't keep you on the PC, but if you ever run for council, you have my vote.
8:43 is another Godby shill for the tax.
Don't blame Sacramento for our not controlling our own expenditures. We spend too much. We don't need to throw more money at it and punish poor Pacificans in order to pay fat cats $200,000. And NO, I won't give this council a penny until they make some real reductions in wages. Look right over the hill to Millbrae for what to do.
Tom Clifford said...
"After much thought I have come to the conclusion that the UUT if placed on the ballot should have a five year sunset, a $500.00 cap [not just for businesses] and a means test for any reduction in the tax for individuals [like the Life line rates for PG&E)"
Agree that there should be a sunset, however 5 years seems too limiting to be able to have a real impact. Somewhere between 7 - 9 years seems like a good idea.
A shorter sunset clause is critical to me, too, so I checked around. They vary and 5 years is not uncommon. The City of Hercules passed a UUT Modernization with a 5year sunset clause in a special election on 6/4/2013. Voter turnout was just 25.91%.
Hercules' Measure A was a hike in rate from 6% to 8%. The measure also included the addition of cable tv and other video technology to the list of utilities to be taxed.
During the Measure A campaign Hercules city officials warned that failure of the measure would lead to the disbanding of the Hercules PD with future police services to be provided by the CoCo Sheriffs Department.
"another Godby shill"
Paranoid much, 9:02? Some of us don't view life through your simplistic, Fox News, us vs them lenses. We need to move on and fix this city, and stupid rock throwing is not the way to do it.
9:35 nobody here provides stats like that. You aren't a regular here are you? Another UUT professional campaigner?
Oh Please Please let then County take over OUR PD.
958 Oh relax. I happen to like facts and research when making a choice. We may have some things in common with Hercules...small town with money problems, perhaps trying to hold on to its local PD, modernizing and changing the rate on its UUT, using a low turnout special election. And, a 5 year sunset clause--something several of us on here are in favor of.
The info isn't for or against the proposed UUT, and neither am I, yet.
Yes, how dare you use actual numbers and statistics as opposed to just tossing out what "feels right"?
Sorry Tom, this tax is horribly regressive and to say the $500 cap should apply across the board is to say $500 in NEW taxes is OK. This is fundamentally wrong. It originated in secret, it has been carefully word-smith'ed to lead us to believe we're "modernizing" something. There is nothing modern about new taxes. All BS. Council, show me something you have accomplished. I see a finance committee that met for three years and magically came up with what the city wanted in the first place, a tax. Sure they were given the option of outsourcing the cops. After that debacle, the only other option was tax. Just, which one. The EDC, lots of talk but never fully supported by the city. Do something, council. Something positive. What's going on with Beach Bl.? Throw the citizens a bone. Show you have some economic balls. Fast track remodels. Cut the fees in half for these projects. Tax revenue long term would be a boon. Do Something?
Larry at 7:44am said, "Sorry Tom, this tax is horribly regressive and to say the $500 cap should apply across the board is to say $500 in NEW taxes is OK. This is fundamentally wrong. It originated in secret, it has been carefully word-smith'ed to lead us to believe we're "modernizing" something. There is nothing modern about new taxes. All BS. Council, show me something you have accomplished. I see a finance committee that met for three years and magically came up with what the city wanted in the first place, a tax. Sure they were given the option of outsourcing the cops. After that debacle, the only other option was tax. Just, which one. The EDC, lots of talk but never fully supported by the city. Do something, council. Something positive. What's going on with Beach Bl.? Throw the citizens a bone. Show you have some economic balls. Fast track remodels. Cut the fees in half for these projects. Tax revenue long term would be a boon. Do Something?"
Moving forward a revenue generating measure was hardly done in secret. The need for revenue in the city has been discussed for years. As you mentioned, the Financing City Services Task Force made recommendations, all part of public conversation and open dialogue. It's been discussed at council meetings over the years too. Private citizens have come together requesting that the council move this forward. Thankfully, council seems to be receptive.
Beach Boulevard continues to move forward with the mitigation work required to turn the site over.
From Councilmember Mike O'Neill's recent presentation to the Chamber of Commerce and other organizations:
"Beach Boulevard Redevelopment/New Library
Cost: $32 million
Funding: Bond measures, grants, and public-private partnerships
What: Redevelopment of the Beach Boulevard property with mixed use buildings that will include a new library, town homes, restaurant and hotel. When complete, the project is estimated to generate revenue of $500,000 a year from hotel, property, and sales tax. This project will kickoff the Palmetto streetscape project that will create a Main Street for Pacifica.
When: Beach Blvd development and the library are two separate projects —one can happen without the other. Currently in process with the library under construction end of 2014 and completion date end of 2015."
Palmetto undergrounding is underway. Also from Mike's presentation:
Palmetto Streetscape/Undergrounding
Cost: $4.5 million
Funding: The Palmetto Streetscape project will cost $2.2 million paid by Pacifica’s City Capital Improvement Fund and grants. The undergrounding, $2.3 million is paid for too, by Rule 20A funds from PG&E, which is money set aside from ratepayers for this purpose with no cost to City of Pacifica.
What: The undergrounding will take place first and will underground utilities along Palmetto with $100,000 from the ARRA Federal program for new streetlights. Then the streetscape project will follow and will include planters, street parking enclosures along the sidewalk, trees and overall enhancing the area for more of a Main Street feel.
When: The Palmetto Streetscape project won’t begin until early 2014 with an estimated completion date end of 2015. Palmetto undergrounding began in 2013 and will be complete Spring 2014.
The city has also recently commissioned and received an economic development plan. Consideration is being given to hire staff to focus on this area.
Yes, these long term projects will have considerable benefit to Pacifica. The construction won't be completed over night though. A revenue generating measure will get Pacifica from now to the time these projects are completed and revenue from them begins to come in.
I will vote a big NO for this burdensome tax regardless of any sunset clause or cap. The city needs to cut expenditures much more than they have. The more money we give them the more they waste. How many millions in studies have they spent? We need to cut now.
We don't need to cut services or lay off more employees.
I really don't care how much our employees are being paid as long as you don't come ask me for more money to cover it. No reason to hurt Pacifica residents, many of whom struggle to keep food on the table and pay rent. Go back to the bargaining table and get some real concessions like Millbrae just did (5%).
I think the belligerence shown above by ProUTTtaxanon@ 10:10 AM is what we'll only see more of. It's a godsend actually because if any of you have tried to get info from the city in recent years and hit a wall it's obvious this UTTmembers club is being fed whatever it needs to suppress this discuss.
The hubris of posting anonymously does not distract from the identity or authorship such posts. That they are obsessive, long and drawn out is also a blessing. Who but themselves are going to bother to read any of it?
Please UTTmembers club and ProUTTtaxanons, don't change a thing. You are doing our work for us.
If you give council more money, you give them another excuse to avoid making the real wage cuts they need to make. This business about the UUT bridging the gap til development revenue kicks in is ridiculous. It's nothing but speculation. Bring that payroll expenditure down. Cut wages 5%, not jobs or service.
Hey, anon 10:10, know where the funds for the capital fund came from? the refinance and cash out of the police building. So we all get to tout what we are doing but we don't say we are doing EVERYTHING with borrowed money.Probably a better use for it than a Taj Mahal council chamber like the one proposed some years back. It's still debt.
And when did "revenue generating" become a new catchword for TAX?! Orwellian double speak. How convenient. We "modernize" our "revenue generating" modus to pickus the public poketus. Still BS.
Anon 1010 (UUT Committee) said "Moving forward a revenue generating measure was hardly done in secret."
Really? Then why is it nobody knew about this plan to hire Godby, Pay $30,000 and to push a UUT tax of people onto the Nov ballot?
Where was this all decided? Certainly not at a public meeting. I call that pretty secret.
Funny you anonymous shills for the tax aren't posting on Riptide because you actually have to use a name.
Oh, you mean like Clifford?
People dreaming up paranoid conspiracy theories need to turn off Fox News and realize that sometimes people disagree and have different viewpoints. That doesn't mean they're evil, and it's actually healthy in a normal democratic environment (normal meaning that people discuss their differences as adults, rather than accusing everyone who disagrees with them of all sorts of bizarre, childish garbage).
@728 Are you actually saying Tom Clifford is a shill for the UUT measure? I'd expect you folks to swing a wide net, but that's ridiculous.
Most of these UUT measures pass. In CA 8 of 10 in the Nov 2012 election passed. Of those 10 it looks like 5 were basically of the modernization or update variety that's being proposed for Pacifica. 4 of those 5 passed, Berkeley, Downey, Los Alamitos and San Luis Obispo. In Chico, where the measure was to reduce the rate and modernize/expand the list (actually resulting in more revenue), the measure was defeated.
Take a look at the ballot language for many of these 10 measures and you'll see how a regressive, consumption-based tax so often passes. Fear. The ballot language panders to the fears and concerns of that group of voters most likely to vote...senior citizens... particularly true in this upcoming off-year election. Pollsters have been busy! It links passage of the measure to preservation or restoration of neighborhood police patrols, crack downs on vandals and gangs, graffiti removal, pothole and street repairs.
Clearly, safety sells, so why not a parcel tax that would restrict those funds to public safety? It would pass, but it would mean the funds don't go in the general fund. City Councils get a bigger bang this way...scare the voters into a yes vote, establish a simple majority threshold for victory, and get the measure passed in a way that guarantees Council can use these funds any way they please.
No matter who's in City Hall, haven't we learned what happens when any politicians get their hands on unrestricted funds? It's a bad idea.
8:00, who is "you folks"?
If 728 isn't a member of the UUT campaign committee he/she will do til one comes along.
Why and when did Bray become the mouth piece pro bono for the "gang of no"
Why don't any of the other members post?
"Sneaky" Pete used to blame everything on you you you people.
Did Pete, even finish high school.
What a pathetic embarrassment when the mayor calls opposition "gobbledygook"
Let's see, the city just "modernized" the city fee list, looks like the State just "updated" the gas tax, and don't forget our "improved" increased sales tax structure in the county.
When will we get to "remodel" all our other taxes, fees, impounds, and all the other costs? You know, cable, internet, water, garbage (of course, the franchise fee is different) and sales tax.
Double-speak BS.
Speaking of public union employees: Spoiled BART workers don'r feel health coverage for their entire family is worth paying a total of $92 a month so the went on strike. Oh yeah also 71K average pay, 42K pension and 28% increase is not enough.
It should be illegal for these people to strike and cripple the Bay Area costing billions. They should fire them all and hire replacements from out of state who would love compensation like this even considering cost of living here.
P.S.: went down to Linda Mar Sat and there was heavy traffic from Vallemar to Rockaway.
Sat traffic was the heat and people hitting the beach and coast to cool off. M-F people drive to Bart from out here. Still driving, just not taking Bart. Just our usual commuter mess.
When will they add CATV, etc to the UUT? Looking at other cities there seems to be a pattern with this thing. First it's just your basic utilites, then the UUT is modernized to include cell phones and such, and then they lower the rate while adding CATV and other video technologies because it sounds good and they actually end up collecting more money.
Of course, that will never happen in Pacifica because we're going to be swimming in revenue from all that dreamy development. You watch.
In New York and many other metropolitan area's it IS illegal for transit workers to strike. A poll this morning shows 58% side with BART and only 20% with the BART union. San Jose voters approved 10% cuts for city employees. Californians are fed up with these greedy unions. When is Pacifica going to wise up?
Taxes. That's Pacifica's future. Odds are we are soon going to pass a UUT measure giving this City another Million dollars a year for 8 to 10 years. These funds will be unrestricted money for the General Fund to be spent at Council's discretion. Allegedly, these funds will bridge the gap until revenue from Beach Blvd. development kicks in. That revenue is a completely speculative $500,000 per year. Any revenue from fixing up Palmetto is even more speculative. The loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars in ERAF money each year will not be speculative. Real loss. The bills for this city of 40,000 will continue to be real and full of nasty surprises that really shouldn't be very surprising.
Pacifica's usual economic development of nail salons and take-out joints with the occasional in-fill house or two is looking more and more inadequate. If this is Council's big plan for Pacifica, we're in more trouble than usual. We're going to need a bigger bridge.
If the below link works properly it will open on the state comptrollers web page for the city of Pacifica. If you can scroll down the page and continue on for 4 more pages it should, if you can be honest about it, be clear we don't have a revenue problem, but rather a payroll problem
http://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/Cities/City.aspx?entityid=437&fiscalyear=2011
Not if they're being paid at or under market rate. Some people complain that baseball players are paid too much, but those people are fools -- they're being paid what the market has decided they are worth.
With all due respect to Todd Bray, as you scroll through those pages of city salaries, keep in mind that Pacifica pays less than nearly all other SMC cities. Quite a bit less. And, yet, our payroll is too big a part of the budget. Not a new situation, but one that has defied council's half-hearted attempts for control.
How'd this happen? If you're honest and fair, you must ask what happened to the other side of the balance sheet, the revenue side? Why didn't it keep up? What vision of Pacifica were we pursuing? Was that the right decision for Pacifica? No need for a rehash of that disaster, but it sure looks like the answer is no.
Today, we're left with a payroll that dwarfs the rest of the budget and will grow. It has to be cut. Not by eliminating jobs which will run up OT and cut service, but by an across the board cut to real wages of 5%. Anything less gets lost in the nooks and crannies of labor contracts, just like all these 3% cuts the City claims to have made.
This and the UUT measure will be necessary.
I agree we nee more development. But that will take years to start generating money.
The old argument that Pacifica pays less does not matter. We can not afford it. I agree with Todd on this one. We need to make more substantial cuts in wages and benefits. Every city is doing it. Better to cut 80 people 5% making 100 - 200K than to put a burdensome tax on 10's of 1000's of people.
So if you look at the market no cities are hiring much, the unemployment rate is 8%, and plenty of other local cities pay less or around the same as us. Most cities are reducing wages, Millbrae just cut 5%. Those were real cuts. We need to do the same before I'll consider yet another tax.
To Rantanons at 2:31 and ProUUTtaxanon at 3:26: the Pacifica public employee "market is set by our city employees in closed session. Hardly a real world free market model.
Having said that our city employees that make north of 100k a year, know what the revenue is, and if they were behaving as a real world company or market they would, for the health of the company/city/their jobs, curtail compensation to fit revenue, not cut the jobs of underlings as has already happened to maintain their lifestyle.
Sorry , but our city's 100k club needs to figure out a way to pay themselves that doesn't bankrupt the city or it's residents.
That would be a real world, free market thing to do Rant anon and ProUUTtaxanon.
Todd, your vision of how city employees should respond to this payroll problem will work about as well as your vision of Pacifica has worked. Setting aside the pure propaganda nonsense about a balanced budget, the mess we're in will require a 5% across the board pay cut and the UUT to keep this town going. The taxpayers are the only revenue source in sight for many years, perhaps forever, if we don't change our ways.
"The taxpayers are the only revenue source in sight for many years, perhaps forever, if we don't change our ways." Let's let it slide that the above statement comes from an Anon poster.
The statement above highlights the delusion of the 100k club and their supporters. It highlights the delusion of the entire public sector, at least in CA.
A simple one percent pay cut for every $10,000 would solve this whole issue.
The only way that needs changing is the way our public employees decide to pay themselves in closed sessions. That and they need to figure out how to work with what they got.
4 years wasted now and counting.
"Hardly a real world free market model."
I'm going to try and condense it to the simplest of terms for you because you don't seem to understand what should be a very simple concept:
If you don't pay people what they can easily get elsewhere, the ones who are worth a damn will leave.
Yeah, Bray, you should definitely let that comment slide. Your 1% for every $10,000 of salary would save us a whopping $1,000 on a $100,000 salary. Your scheme would have even less impact than the token cuts council made. Useless. It's going to take more than that. The only way to reduce that payroll number is for city employees to really make less. Not the same, not a difference that can be offset by OT or cafeteria cash, but actually less. 5% will make a difference. Other cities and the unions know that's where it gets serious. With this council it would take a public referendum to do this. Put it on a ballot. Those are happening with pension reform in cities, so who knows what a really fed-up public could do?
Hey Anon 759 you say "If you don't pay people what they can easily get elsewhere"
I'm going to state this simply so you understand. THERE ARE NO OTHER JOBS OUT THERE.
Here look at the San Mateo and SF Job website. There are only 9 full time jobs in all of San Mateo and San Francisco counties https://www.calopps.org/results.cfm?start=33&sort=8&jloca=1&JobInterest=&SeekSal=&SeekSalAmt=&SeekSalQual=Hrsal&JobType=&keyword=
And as far as the private sector they don't pay anything near what government pays and there's no jobs there either.
ANON 8:24 check your calculator again. 1% for every 10,000 would be 10% of 100,000, or 10,000 (not 1,000)
That's funny, Hutch, because all our best PD seem to have moved on to greener pastures, so apparently in the heart of high unemployment good people still seem able to find good jobs.
Your ingenious plan seems to be working! Pretty soon, we'll end up with the local tweakers standing outside the 7/11 as our as street beat! Awesome! Great plan!
Thanks 856, of course, my error. Honest, I did read it. So, Bray advocates a 10% cut across the board? Aggressive move. IMHO 5% will do it, and actually has a chance of being done since it's been done elsewhere in SMC and beyond.
IMO there'll be no pressure on labor in the near term because they've announced a balanced wink, wink budget w/a reserve. The UUT will probably pass simply because of the language of the ballot measure and the anticipated low turnout with lots of worried and exempt seniors voting for it. The City will go though that unrestricted money like crap through a goose. Give it a year or two at the most and we'll be worse off than before. robably at the same time we're under pressure from the unions to play catch-up for those "cuts" the City bragged about making. Around and around we go.
759 That's the attitude that helped get us in this mess and keeps us from getting out. You should be on council. You already think like them.
So what? Cops leave here all the time for greener and busier pastures. Some stick around, live here, later look for better opportunities with other police depts. That's been going on for years. Pretty typical in suburban depts. Hasn't led to chaos or jobs going unfilled. Weren't we just on some safe cities list? Even with all the departures?
Thanks for your input Anon 959 SEIU member. Pacifica got along just fine in the 80's when they actually WERE the lowest paid in the Bay Area. So I don't think we need the "cream of the crop" in our little beach town.
BTW, I still have at least 2 meth dealing houses down the block (for 10 years) that our "cream of the crop" PD can not do anything about because they don't have the recourses. I think the sheriff should be seriously pursued for better protection at much less cost. And it will also give our valued officers more job security.
So sorry 10:05 but Todd said 1% for every 10,000 not 10% across the board. So 50,000 would be a 5% cut, 100,000 would be a 10% cut, 150,000 a 15% cut, 200,000 a 20% cut. It is a little aggressive but I would love to see it and it is more fair to lower paid employees.
Yeah 1118 We are one of the safest cities in the country despite the fact we are one of the lowest paid police departments in the Bay Area. So much for high pay equating to better service.
Yes we really go after the cream of the crop. Here's a current police job offering from our beloved town.
Salary: $6,189.00 - $7,809.00 Monthly
inimum Qualifications:
Must be at least 21 year old at date of hire;
Felony convictions and disqualifying criminal history are not allowed; U.S. citizen;
Able to read and write the English language;
Must successfully pass a Police Department background investigation, polygraph examination, psychological examination and medical examination;
High School graduate or GED. Preference given to those applicants who possess a two-year community college degree.
https://www.calopps.org/ViewAgencyJob.cfm?ID=13442&kw=
Not to throw cold water on the balanced budget claim but every council has had to have a balance budget it is the law. What is important is how they get there. Some Councils have sold property, some have reduced reserves, some have sifted employee cost to parcels taxes [remember the Firer assessment],sift money from one account to another [transfer of sewer fees to general fund],place new taxes on the ballot Etc. etc. etc.
This Council Has arrived at a balance budget by cutting employee cost by 1. contract negotiations 2. sifting employees to the waste water treatment plant [a separate fund]or 3. staff reductions.
By stopping all but the most pressing maintenance. A move that will ultimately cost use a great deal more. [Think full replacement Vs. a coat of paint.]
And by receiving a windfall of about $600,000.00 from the ERAF fund. The City on average gets $800,000.00 from this fund but this time they got $1,400,000.00
That is the good news the bad news is that the ERAF as a funding source will be gone in about two years. leaving An $800,000.00 hole to fill.
So you're saying the already low wages need to be slashed? When those people leave, you'll really be looking for "recourses" to shut down those meth dealers.
Isn't council selling the UUT as getting us ahead of the game? Building a reserve and all? The loss of ERAF funds alone will more than wipe out any gain. What then?
What a mess. We'll be begging the county to let us outsource the cops. On their terms.
@1144 Oops. Now, I get it. Good grief, no wonder he doesn't go into the details. Has the chances of a snowball. Let's leave Rube Goldberg to his inventions and keep it simple. 5% across the board and the UUT and we'll squeak through another 5 years.
@827 When and if those people leave, their jobs will be quickly filled by someone else who sees Pacifica as a good place to work. It'll be ok.
"Not to throw cold water on the balanced budget claim but every council has had to have a balance budget it is the law." Thanks to Tom Clifford for pointing this out. It annoys me when the Mayor says we have a balanced budget as if that's some sort of accomplishment. We HAVE to have a balanced budget. It's required by law.
Two patrol cars parked discretely by my house last night trying to catch the nimrod setting off big boomers. How much is that costing us? But they leave the crank dealers alone down the block.
So with a GED and ability to speak english you can get a job in the Pacifica Police Dept "starting" at over $93,000 a year plus benefits? You gotta love America.
"Two patrol cars parked discretely by my house last night trying to catch the nimrod setting off big boomers"
I wish they'd come to my neighborhood near Oceana HS and nail the boneheads setting off M-80s at 2 AM.
If you think that's all that's needed to join the PD, 11:32, you shouldn't be allowed to play with firecrackers.
Head's up: city council is looking to declare a fiscal emergency at monday's meeting in conjunction with a TEN year uut increase.
Funny cuz just 4 weeks ago everyone was sore from all the back-patting over how awesome the budget was.
None of this passes the smell test.
Tell me what job in the real world pays you $92,000 to start and all you need is a high school diploma or a community college degree and a few months training?
That's right there are none.
I know people with Masters degrees who can't even get a job much above minimum wage.
Time are tough. Good jobs are scarce. These spoiled greedy government unions are out of control. Don't come asking me for more money to pay these outrageous compensations. Get a grip on it. Negotiate some real cuts not the fake ones you lied about.
2:20
A realtor in a good year and commissioned sales.
2:20
I know a girl with a masters degree from Sanford and she can not balance the check book. Genius in the medical research department but dumb as a stump walking around us.
M-80's my azz. Those are M-100's
Artillery barrage under way in Linda Mar. Cheering can be heard after each detonation. Not a cop in sight.
@1242 How about a two-fer? Declare one fiscal emergency to cover both the UUT and a real pay cut for all city employees. No less than 5%. This council of 2 has really raised the bar on spin and manipulation. They're getting the best advice that money can buy on grinding every dollar out of us. Our money.
Tom Clifford's post from early today should be on the front page of the Trib. Nailed their slippery little hides to the barn door in such a reasonable, just-the-facts ma'm, way. Wish I could vote for you for council, Tom, but I think the job would make you sick. Better for us, and you, that you remain free, un-muzzled and not brain-washed.
425
"A realtor in a good year"
And when is the last one of those?
Nowdays it's !0 houses a month sold for 100 realtors.
A good realtor is hard to find but in any market a good realtor can make money. When houses are over 500k and your making 3%.
During the recession good short sale realtors made major money. During the crazy buy buy market the good realtors made major money.
I know realtors who made over 500K doing short sales.
Realtors make more from buying property and renting them out, or buying crap property fixing them and flipping. Commission sales pay the bills. Investing makes you rich.
320 tyzemid
I know of this lady, who has a job, like the people who sit in the information booth at the mall who makes over $93,000.
And yes it is a city funded job.
Post a Comment