The following is from "Yes on Measure A"--This Vallejo ballot measure seeks to remove binding arbitration from the Vallejo City Charter.  Some perspective from councilmember Joanne Schivley. 

VIB welcomes submissions from both sides of this issue. 

Comments

Add New Search RSS

Amazed   |May.12.2010 thanks Joanne Measure A has my vote. Can't wait for the land slide in favor come June!!

Bluetick   |May.12.2010 Ever one knows we don't need BA. Tony Intintoli ran this city into the mud so deep, it's a struggle to get out and his name has not been mentioned a single time. What a shame he's been on our city and still strutting around like a peacock with a title and control of our Transportation system. Why not call a spade a Spade. Knock out this BA and get back to building Vallejo. Quit *****footing around .. Enough already.

On Fire   |May.11.2010 For those who deny union bullying . This was an account of the union's behavior as noted at the Sacramento hearing. A rude, deluded union crowd I spent a couple hours in the PERS committee listening to testimony over Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth�s SB 919 pension-reform bill and was stunned by the rudeness of the mostly union crowd as bill supporters spoke out. They laughed and chatted loudly and were even shushed by the sergeant in arms. The bill would modestly reduce pension benefits for new workers as a way to rein in the state�s massive pension liability. A handful of bill supporters, including the Pacific Research Institute�s Jason Clemens (PRI is the sponsor of CalWatchdog), David Wolfe of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, David Crane and Michael Genest from the governor�s office and Larry Lees, Shasta County assessor, spoke in favor of the bill and then a long line of union spokespeople opposed the bill. The hearing, which I�m now watching on the California Channel, continues as we speak. Now, CalPERS � echoing the many union reps � are defending the current pension system. Listening to these folks, you�d think that the system is fully funded and in perfect health. CalPERS, at the prodding of Sen. Lou Correa, who helped create the problem by sponsoring �3 percent at 50″ legislation in 1999 when he was in the Assembly, touted the rebounding economy. Yeah, right. The union reps kept repeating the mantra that pension liabilities can be fixed at the bargaining table, which is utter nonsense. The unions control the bargaining table. It�s been at the bargaining table where these massive liabilities have been created. CalPERS is now insisting that the economy and its investments are coming back � a form of delusion that�s at odds with the views of less-interested parties. � Steven Greenhut

Gran Torino   |May.11.2010 Thank you Joanne, It becomes clearer every day that getting rid of binding arbitration is a great first step in getting our city back on track. Thank you for doing what is right and standing up to the special interest groups that only wish to pad their pockets. They may have the money for TV ads, billboards and glossy signs, but this is an issue that most educated people of Vallejo understand. I think YES ON A will pass, but be certain to vote people, it will not be easy to beat the all powerful union machine.

ANONYMOUS   |May.11.2010 YES ON MEASURE A: Yes I do listen, maybe you just don't understand or want to understand. If Schively said: "the council, if BA was chosen, would have to X plus BA and that was not a gamble they could afford to take? ", then I should thank her for gambling with MY Tax dollars, because by her own reasoning, she led us into bankruptcy and now wants to blame it on her NEW colleagues, who never took that gamble with MY money. Have you ever wondered why she never became an Branch Manager for BofA ???? You can keep spinning it anyway you like, but you still haven't told me how BA caused up to go into BR. We filed 2 years ago, prior to agreeing to 3 of the contracts; while paying the BR attorneys over $7 million. Now spin that Ms. Schively....

Anonymous   |May.11.2010 I'll say thank you as well Joann for the clear explanation of the costs involved. If X + A(arbitration) was the worst case scenario, why do we believe X + M(mediation) will be significantly better? The A and M costs are one time costs and shouldn't contribute to the structural deficit in any way. Why do we believe A - M is worth spending all this political capital on?

Yes on Measure A   |May.11.2010 Oh and thats a little interesting tidbit. Its my understanding that the City has to pay the full cost of the arbitrator. They don't do it for free. What does the union pay????

Yes on Measure A   |May.11.2010 ANONY doesn't listen: Schivley said the council--if they chose BA--would have has to pay X PLUS binding arbitration. It was a gamble they felt they couldn't take, since not only would they be in the bad place of paying X they would have paid the arbitrator too. Thanks Councilmember Schivley for taking the courage to tell it like it is. YES ON A

Old timer   |May.11.2010 Thanks Joanne! You have shown a lot of courage in the face of these bullies and have always done what you believed was best for the community. We had to learn the hard way that giving in to bullies never satisfies them. They always want more. Unfortunately, their long history of getting what they want through intimidation has led them to believe that ramping up the bullying and hatred will ultimately work. They mean it when they say that they will leave Vallejo "in ashes". Their behavior borders on sociopathic so you are right to fear them.

ANONYMOUS   |May.11.2010 I hate to say this, but that political piece by Ms.Schively was complete bogus. Why did she not state which BA awards let us into bankruptcy. She only admitted to being intimidated by the threat of BA, so she GAVE in to the demands of negotiations. To me that is a sekk out and a complete dereliction of her responsibility as an elected official of this City. I am sorry Councilwoman, but you blew it then and are trying to spin your way out of leading us into Bankruptcy. If you would have not been scared into making the wrong decision (many times) and an arbitrator had given those raises, then I would agree with you, but you are just not accepting your un-justafiable decisions made at the time. Maybe you should redo the interview and speak the truth....I think you are still upset that the Unions in Vallejo turned down your request for support?????? the Truth hurts, but will win out....

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.23

3.23 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."