“Saving California Communities: Starting Here!” – a Davis community event
SCC will host Saving California Communities: Starting Here!, a Davis community conversation to explore possibilities and begin…
SCC will host Saving California Communities: Starting Here!, a Davis community conversation to explore possibilities and begin…
The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and other Cmunicipalities through their organization TANC (Transmission Agency of Northern…
The following is the text of my comments to Council on Tuesday night:
As Councilmember Sue Greenwald said on multiple occasions last week, the council’s discussion completely ignored the largest sources of expenditures and the areas that we must address, not only to close the multi-year, multi-million dollar deficit, but to address the structural issues that underlie our current predicament.
The current political mantra at both the federal level and here in the state of California is the perceived need for “universal health care”. It is seen as the solution to the crucial issue of health care reform. Rather the more important question should be: “Is universal health care the answer to rising health care costs and the ever increasing number of uninsured, or are there other options to consider that might be better?”
The unfortunate aspect of this evening was that the people commissioned to do the independent review of the water resources initiatives were unavailable to present the report and answer questions. That means the city had to rely on the public works department to continue to present their views of the viability of the project.
Once again we revisit the complete failure of the city’s last budget workshop. A good amount of insight can be gleaned from the way the school district has approached their budget the last two years.
We did not see a prolonged focus on small details. That is not to say the CBO of the School District, Bruce Colby has not tried to cut all of the marginal costs he can, because he did. But at the core, most of the school district’s cost goes to employees. That is the same issue facing the city as well. And so in order to cut substantial and meaningful amounts of money to balance a budget, there are really two places to go–employee salaries and positions. Anything else is really a waste of time.
At present, there are competing health care bills working their way through the California Legislature. In addition, President Obama is working hard to find a way to pass national health care reform.
The council has two items on the agenda this week dealing with water.
The most important thing that we learn from the Enterprise article probably has little to do with its primary intent. It shows us the widening gap now between the thinking of Mayor Pro Tem Don Saylor and now even city staff. Already we have seen Mr. Saylor has moved far afield from the of his colleagues on the council. He was the only one to support without qualification the mixed-use project at Cannery Park. He was the only one to express lament at the exit of Cannery. And he was the only one to push for immediately doing a new and/ or updated General Plan.
Mayor Asmundson’s second tenure as Mayor has been somewhat less eventful than her first tenure that saw open civil unrest befall the city. However, more quietly she has effectively moved to stifle debate and dissent at least within official city hall.
Los Angeles faces budget cuts that amount to $700 million from their $6 billion general fund budget.
One question that comes to mind is what does this rule mean exactly? Are we required by this rule to carry four person engine units, or are there alternatives available for smaller departments like Davis to be safe but to be fiscally responsible at the same time?
The most disappointing aspect of it is, is that instead of going head on against the bulk of city expenses, the large monies and obligations the city faces, two of the councilmembers–the Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tem largely focused on minutiae.
Professor Branner in August of 2008 filed a lawsuit at the UC Regents and Vice Provost Horwitz alleging that their actions violated his rights and protections under California law.
This first part will focus on a memorandum by City Manager Bill Emlen that pretty much proves he is missing the point. There is some serious denial going on in this city and it begins with the city manager. He writes:
A Conference in Davis, California – Saturday, April 25, 2009 DAVIS COMMUNITY TO HOST CONFERENCE ON LIVING…
Thursday and Friday, April 16 & 17 – The Consortium for Women and Research, in collaboration with…
“I had pretty much decided that I was not going to run for re-election to the Board of Supervisors. My family and business commitments were calling.”
“The retirement plans provided through CalPERS are considered “defined benefit” plans such that, upon agreement on a specific benefit level, the employer and employees contribute annually funding amounts to CalPERS according to the contribution rates established by CalPERS through annual actuarial valuations which set the contribution rates for the succeeding fiscal year. CalPERS typically provides contracting agencies with their contribution rates in October for the following (July-June) fiscal year. As such, CalPERS contribution rates reflect roughly a two-year lag relative to “current” actuarial results.”
There is some interesting legislation that finally looks at tackling runaway state salaries. Assemblymember Anthony Portantino has introduced legislation that looks to freeze salaries, benefits, overtime, and compensation for those who make over $150,000. One group not directly addressed in this are UC Employees. The numbers are staggering at the top end. Well publicized is President Mark Yudof getting an annual salary last year of over $800,000.