Guest opinion: Select candidates who demonstrate independence and critical thinking Around Town, posted by Editor, Pleasanton Weekly Online, on Oct 12, 2012 at 9:21 am
Regarding public employee pension liabilities and personnel costs, Pleasanton, like many cities, has had a failure in governance. How else would someone describe a situation where a City Council voted in irresponsible employee contracts in the early 2000s, looked the other way and/or downplayed the severity of the problem as it emerged (well before the recession), and only now is taking late and inadequate steps to fix the problem? E.g., both the City Council and management admit that recent contract negotiation actions ensure that the problem will grow. After nearly a decade of awareness of the issue, how can this be?
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, October 12, 2012, 12:00 AM
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2012 at 9:21 am Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
"It is interesting to note that the recently approved Bernal Community Park project is only partially funded and must rely on additional user fees, etc., to complete the project. "
A little more information... the Bernal Community Park plan was approved many years ago by Pleasanton voters. The primary culprit is that it was *never* funded, instead left to future Councils to find money for it.
Posted by GX, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2012 at 10:10 am
Stacey - I don't get your comment. Aren't master plans initially created and then funded along the way? Are you suggesting that since the park master plan wasn't 100% funded on day one of approval that that is the reason for lack of funds?
How would you frame the fact that personnel costs as a percent of total budget exploded since about 2003? Isn't that fact material to the point that current capital projects can't be properly funded?
Posted by Dean, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2012 at 12:29 pm
Stacey- you have no case here. The general fund's personnel costs are a whopping 78% leaving little money for all else, including capital projects like parks, roads, more tennis courts at the tennis park (the current ones are run by a 3rd party to save city funding), Paying off the golf course debt and more.
At what % of the GF do you think the unions need to modify their contracts, consider additional outsourcing or staff reductions? Or would you prefer we put our head between our knees and pray?
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2012 at 4:08 pm Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
My only point was to provide a little more information so that it wouldn't appear as if the Bernal Community Park were just *recently* approved. It wasn't. It was split into phases to be built when funding became available. Phase 1 is already built. It's only Phase 2 that was recently approved.
Can't Mr. Hughes find some other, better example? It seems like that was just thrown in there as padding. Of course the increase in personnel costs would crowd out other General Fund expenditures, but remember that Pleasanton uses CIP funds for capital projects (while other communities hopped on the redevelopment bandwagon). To frame the fact better, it would be nice to see the historic trends of the CIP funds, their inflows from the General Fund, and the percentage of capital projects over the years that couldn't be properly funded to find some relationship between rising personnel costs and capital projects. The Firehouse was also "partially funded". What happened there?
P.S. Master plans are not usually put to a vote of the people either.
Posted by Reality sets in, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2012 at 5:00 pm
Yes, day of reckoning is here. Pleasanton can no longer DO something, because it would be good for community, or even needed....gotta do those nasty numbers projected into future from this day forward. Unions will suck more and more forever, unless major changes are made. Retire early, live longer is not a model for fiscal responsibility.
From now on, we must require dollars share and percent of annual budget for any future expenditures. When we provide 40 years of retirement payout in future COL retirement payout. it's time for transparency and public notice. People simply cannot be left alone because they are trusted people. We'll decide what we can afford.
(I'm confused, why would PW endorse a PUBLIC UNION ACTIVIST ! ? !
Posted by Taxpayer, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 15, 2012 at 5:42 pm
Have you noticed the vicious attacks BY our public union members have not been like their usual patterns...softer, if at all. I would guess that they don't want to remind us, just how disgusting they are....they want THEIR 2 candidates elected. . . . .But,
I remember !!! They honestly believe they are 'entitled' to excesses...sky's the limit!
Posted by Re: Voting Patterns, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 15, 2012 at 9:39 pm
...not very difficult when it comes to the Mayors race. The UNIONS are supporting a Current Public Employee UNION member that was a former union rep. Cheryl Cook-Kailo said she wasn't looking to get into politics but "was recruited" to run for the Pleasanton city council.
Who recruited her? And why did those doing the recruiting think Cheryl would make such a great politician. Is it possible they believed her union status which included her management/negotiator role within the union made her the perfect candidate? I think So.
During Cherylís interview with the Contra Costa Times it became very clear that she doesnít understand how employee contracts might be an issue, and she doesnít understand the impact of pensions and retiree health care on the general fund. She doesnít understand the pension at all. Cheryl thought Pleasanton was the first city to adopt a two-tier pension formula. Maybe that explains why she voted to approve the new contracts that only increase employee costs? Who knows.
I think Cheryl is a nice woman but she clearly doesnít understand the fiscal issues facing Pleasanton. Electing a Public Employee Union members as Mayor just adds an additional layer of UNION influence into the mix. The Unions are a BIG part of the problem because the union members negotiate contracts with city management that have a me-too clause, and then the council, many of which have been endorsed and financed by public employee unions - approve the contract.
The level of collusion happening right here in Pleasanton is alarming (unions, Management, Mayor & Council). Unfortunately, that is just how things work in this broken state. The Unions are sitting at all four sides of the table and the citizens of Pleasanton arenít even allowed to view the contract until after itís approved by: the employees, the me-too management group, the MAYOR and the council members that the unions control.
WHY IS IT THAT THE CITY, CITY MANAGER, UNIONS, UNION EMPLOYEES, MAYOR & COUNCIL, do NOT want the TAXPAYERS to understand the REAL COSTS of these CONTRACTS THEY are APPROVING (and we are talking about contracts that cost a combined 70 million a year).
Neither Hosterman or Cook-Kaillo have a clue about how to address the fiscal issue facing Pleasanton, Alameda County , or CA.