MARC GARMAN - EDITOR

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Submissions

Be a VIB Contributor!

Latest News

Main Menu

Home
News
The GadFather
Primal Scream
Burning Archive
VIB TV
Links
Table of Contents
Contact Us

Current Screams

Popular

Syndicate

Login

PDF Print

Daily Scream - January 2008

Comments
Add New Search RSS
Derrick Lue   |February.29.2008
Great revenue idea: have Vallejo PD undercover detectives sell all the drugs in their evidence locker. It will bring in lots of needed cash plus it will save the county on prosecution costs!
Firebug   |January.30.2008
Had to chuckle at a letter to the editor today in the TH written by Bob Woolery applauding Councilman Bartee's attempts at political retribution against non IAFF staff. I failed to see how such a plan by Bartee should be applauded simply because it allegedly would "free up" money to hire more firefighters. Perhaps Bob should read our very own ADQ's Council minutes and realize that there wouldn't be any additional money to hire more firefighters.

The proposed plan would be used to reduce the $4.5 million share of the deficit from fireservices budget. Oh and Bob.. I have friends in
Vacaville and Fairfiled and their home insurance premiums are similar to mine.
SIlas Barnabe   |January.30.2008
TRIOF,
Mr. Davis knows if he "extends" the contracts and makes other controversial cuts outside of safety, raises fees imposes the legally challenged 911 phone tax, he most likely would not survive in another election with Cloutier. Rather than a bull in the China shop mentality I expect a rather poor magic show.

In this magic show Mr. Davis will try to pull a rabit out of hat, while making the elephant in the room disappear. He will need to convince the voting public that the rabbit he is pulling out of the hat really isn't the transformed elephant. Every one will know of course
that what he pulled out of the hat is an elephant with rabbit ears. I suspect they are crafting a "new" contract right now that incorporates all the goodies of the old. At the city council meeting this will be hailed as a money saver filled with gimmicks of old like underfunded budgets for overtime, bizarre and inflated incomes from fire inspections and other fees.

What I expect is Mr. Davis and his band of protectors of safety unions to put on a magic show, aided by the Times Herald perhaps even some slick glossy fliers from the firefighters union to convince us that an elephant
with rabbit ears is indeed a rabbit. In the end the citizens of vallejo will continue to endure higher fees than surrounding areas, the worst roads in Solano county, and the rank and file citizen left to deal with underfunded non-profits and the blight of a leadership that talks about bringing new business when their own business is providing low cost shelter and other amenities (like Walmart and 99 cent stores)to the poor.
TRIOF   |January.30.2008
Thanks to war for the link to the Napa/Solano Labor Council. It appears that Pitts, Hannigan and Wilson pledged to "preserve 13 rank and file firefighter paramedic jobs and provide enough cops on the streets to keep us safe" in a mailer that didn't go out to Vallejo voters. I wonder why? Well, we now can scratch Pitts and insert Davis. We have sat back while Council has been in negotiations with the police and fire unions and why is it that the public has been left in the dark? The only reason I can think of is that they know the public will be outraged at the end result and choose to
keep us in the dark until it's too late. If the negotiationss provided for real concessions by these two groups, don't you think that would be on the front page as a PR tactic to make them into "heros" again? Giving them bragging rights to say how they saved the city and didn't get any contract extensions or inflated benefit deals?

No, we haven't heard a word. Which if history is to teach us anything, we will again go down that contract extension road and sell out the citizens in order not to have to mention the "b" word. (BANKRUPTCY) The same road that has lead us to the
financial dilema we are in now. And it is this alledged new and improved group on council that will be out front driving. Why is it that the court challenges on the arbitration issues gone away? Why isn't the embezzelment of public funds (UBL) not been dealt with? For those who have been around for a while, we can remember when Gloria Exline gave henke his job back, with no consequences for violation of civil rights, interferring with the hiring process of the City's Fire Chief, and threatening the City Manager. She even gave him a Citizen of the Year award to smooth things over with him, all
in the name of moving the City forward and calming him down, making him feel better. I see another award in the near future. All of the abuse of tax payers funds (UBL'ing) will be swept under the rug, in the name of saving the city from bankruptcy. He will get UBL hours and run unchecked. Then we will give him even more power to continue to run this city. I hope I'll be proven wrong, but I won't bank on it. Get ready! People should show up to the study session and budget sessions in numbers or you will go back to how things were over ten years ago and this city will continue down that same
spiral to bankruptcy. Forget about your streets, because there will be no one downtown to hear your complaints. But hey, we have that "new broom" sweeping the city clean right?
WaR   |January.29.2008
VERY IMPORTANT: YOU�LL WANT TO BE THERE!

The Vallejo City Council Will be Holding a "Public" Goal-Setting Session on Tuesday, February 5th at 40. Location: Joseph Room, JFK Library, 505 Santa Clara St., Vallejo.

These are usually done in private and away from the citizens; for some reason we will be able to witness this VERY important session. Let�s find out what�s in store for Vallejo and its Citizens. During this last election the candidates for Mayor and City Council made many-many campaign promises to the citizens of Vallejo, Whether Good or Bad for Vallejo, let�s see
if those promises still remain the same. Will this Session of �Goal-Setting� tell what�s really in store for Vallejo�s future? Here�s some of promises made by the newest elected candidates�



CAMPAIGN PROMISES:

OSBY DAVIS:

�I have the audacity to believe that we can achieve the following vision for Vallejo, and I have the courage to step forward and help make them happen�

1. Good-paying jobs and thriving business centers.

2. A very low crime rate and safe neighborhoods.

3. Attractive, well-maintained streets.

4. An excellent educational system.

5. Well-planned,
forward-thinking economic development,

6. Plenty of well-maintained parks and innovative recreation activities for youth and adults of all ages.

7. Leaders and public officials who care more about what is best for the citizens and City of Vallejo than about how to get elected or re-elected.

8. The highest priority of building a sound economic, educational, and social foundation to ensure a successful future for the City for generations to come.� ( http://www.osbydavisformayor.com )



ERIN HANNIGAN:

�Will work to preserve 13 rank and file firefighter paramedic jobs.� and
�Committed to making Vallejo strong again. Erin believes in fighting to protect the history of our city.� (http://napasolanoclc.org/sc1.pdf & http://www.electhannigan.org/strongervallejo.htm )



MICHAEL WILSON:

�A leader who will work hard to maximize our potential and deliver a better city to our citizens. A safer, cleaner city with better streets and roads, A city that attracts new business and creates new jobs. A city landscape dotted with high-quality homes, parks for our families, and better schools. A city that is competitive with our neighbors. A city that we deserve. A city
that works.� and �Will work to preserve 13 rank and file firefighter paramedic jobs.� (http://napasolanoclc.org/sc1.pdf & http://www.wilsonforvallejo.com )



JOANNE SCHIVLEY:

�City government is a major business of, by, and for the people � ALL the people, not special interest groups. Vallejo�s citizens are my special interest group. By working together, in the spirit of unity, we can mov e Vallejo forward!�

�1. A line item budget, instead of our present vague format. This will provide much more detailed information and facilitate better council oversight

2. Change the
Community Forum to have part of it, strictly limited to 30 minutes, prior to the Consent Calendar, and a second segment, in its present agenda location, for any speakers not heard in the first 30 minutes

3. Putting a charter change on the ballot to require a run-off for any election in which no mayoral candidate received 51% of the votes cast

4. And lastly, at least for now, creation of an Ad Hoc Council Budget Committee by the mayor. I will be glad to volunteer for it.� (http://www.joanneschivley.com)
Paul Norberg   |January.29.2008
Grand Jury Reports
There is a link on the Solano County web site for the Grand Jury reports. At the top of the web page there is a box labeled "services". Click on this box and then scroll down to the Grand Jury Reports and you will see all the recent reports and responses.
Firebug   |January.29.2008
Our wonderfull majority at the County Supervisor's have a track record of trying to get rid of accountability. Early last year they wanted to "cut" the money used to print and distribute the Grand Jury report. How convenient for situations like the voting scandal and for keeping unthical individuals throughout the county safely out of the limelight (remember the UBL scandal?).
L Meitzenheimer   |January.29.2008
Carol, you can go directly to the site if you want: www.solanocourts.com . (It's easier to just go straight there) But why there isn't an easier link is anyone guess.
Carol   |January.29.2008
:?: Why isn't there a link to Grand Jury reports on the Solano County Website like the surrounding counties have on their website? All the other surrounding ounties do. Infact, if you log on to the county of marin website & search Grand Jury, you will get reports, and the process of a grand jury indictment.

Why can't I find this on Solano County's website?
Charlie Nowlin   |January.29.2008
:?: Why isn't the Grand Jury looking into this mess created by the Registrar of voters. We need Roy Bean to show up with a noose....
Firebug   |January.28.2008
The makeup of the Solano County Supervisors will need to be changed if we want real accountability on our voting systems. The agenda of this Board of Supervisors after a pro smart growth majority that put Measure A to the voters in 1989 has been termed out only Barbara Kondykis as the voice of uncomprosmised reason is left on that Board.

It is apparent the agenda of that Board majority will be to not act on the 2010 expiration of measure A which restricts building on counthy open space. With this group we can expect the status quo on our voting scandal, and strip malls and housing
developments on remaining county open space.

We need to put together a County-wide effort to remove some of them to regain a majority of reasonable progressive thinkers.
Anonymous   |January.28.2008
Here's a better movie to watch:
"Uncounted: The New Math of American Elections"
www.uncountedthemovie.com

And, another perpective about Zeitgeist the Movie.

An excerpt from Jay Kinney's review of "Zeitgeist, the Movie" posted by Mark Frauenfelder on this site

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/06/jay-kinney-reviews-z)

It
Anna   |January.27.2008
I watched zeitgeist yesterday at www.zeitgeistmovie.com after catching a few minutes while falling asleep last Thursday. I highly recommend this to anyone and everyone. It really is bigger than we think.
Jovita Skywalker   |January.26.2008
Invitation to watch Zeitgeist on Vcat on Thursday nights at 8pm ch 27 or go to vcat.tv. Zeitgeist is cutting through all illusions, the truth is here......
Serial MOm   |January.26.2008
I agree with Sparky, McRosenthal should be scat-canned...they are animals!


Serial Mom.
G. Manicotti   |January.26.2008
I'll withold the profanity... but YES
I'm in complete agreement with Sparky here.
Why are these incompetents allowed to keep
their jobs ?
There should be an immediate review and investigation.
Seems like we already know the results.
Anywhere else they would not only lose their jobs but face
criminal charges..
Or am I not understanding the gravity of their stupidity correctly ?
What is being done in Sacramento ?
Katy Miessner   |January.26.2008
I'm with you Sparky!
serial mom   |January.25.2008
L. Meitzenheimer:

I guess the building's concierge called in sick that day!

No need to apologize. Appreciate what your doing for us.

p.s. I happy to see there were no white shoes worn

Serial Mom wants VIB to keep up the good work.
Sparky   |January.25.2008
Why are we beating around the bush and playing nice? McWilliams and Rosethal both should be s___ canned. Dang, if I screwed up 1/16th that bad I would expect my boss to kick me to the curb. They don't even sound like they get the seriousness of their mistakes. Off with their heads! I know I won't feel like we've got a fair for all voting system until we change out machines and the dolts who are operating them.

Who's with me?

(Sorry Sparky, but your pushing the "profanity" thing, and we want to post your comments, but we are "family oriented" so again, please keep it
clean.
Site Administrator)
L. Meitzenheimer   |January.25.2008
Apologies to those who had difficulty finding the meeting. I took the information directly off of the Solano Democratic Central Committee's website. We were not aware of the room change until we arrived at the meeting. Apologies to all!
Le Le   |January.25.2008
I agree with Serial Mom, if you change the room for an important meeting, you should post signs up !
Firebug   |January.25.2008
And to screw up open voting at hiddenbrook of all places! We know how much the love Local 1186 and Kurt Henke, remember the town meeting two years ago? I wonder how many more votes for Pearsall as well as Cloutier would have been gotten?
DAVEWEST   |January.25.2008
SENT TO TIMES HERALD BLOG:

> > > > > > > >

PLEASE !!! PLEASE !!!! DO NOT FALL BACK INTO THE TIMES HERALD BLOG-TRAP A-G-A-I-N...

Keeping You Here (A Captive Audience, Ignored in "Their" Murky Fishbowl)... This is Their Way To Control The Real News and/or "Total Truth" From the Public. You Know!... The Same Way They Filter and/or 86 "Certain" Letters and Writers From Their Opinion Page.

This IS and ALWAYS will be Ron Rhea and Ted Vollmer
Serial Mom   |January.24.2008
although I do not know the players yet (bare with me, as I've been living in another county for the past ten years), solano county politics reak of cronyism--big time! McRosenthal (Mcwilliams/Rosenthal) side-stepped alot of questions !!

Oh,buy the way: the next time a public is meeting is changed to a different room, please put signs up. That grandiose building was a bit confusing--However, I did get to meet Kondylis.

So, How did Solano County afford such a great big building? It's like driving a Escalade and being on welfare.

Cloutier has my support awith the support of
some us in Marin County. They will make donations.

Serial Mom
Katy Miessner   |January.24.2008
Hi John, if you arew referring to donations to Gary Cloutier's legal challenge against election mess, I'm pretty certain the legally (to compy with election law)donations must go through his campaign, Friends of Gary Cloutier, and they must be reported on a regular FPPC report, just as the regular campaign donations are reported. I hope this addresses your concerns--I'm right there with the televangelists!
L. Meitzenheimer   |January.23.2008
Tonight's presentation by Ira Rosenthal and Lindsey McWilliams made it abundantly clear that the mishandling of the last election was only a small portion of a much larger problem that exists with the Registrar's office (Full coverage to follow) The information that has been distributed from Mr. Rosenthal's office continues to indicate that no one has any real understanding on what happened with the November election. Not only that, but the answers keep changing! I did not hear anything tonight that clarified what went wrong. Nor did I hear anything to assure me that the Registrar's office has
a handle on the problems to a degree that they can assure the voters that the mistakes made, won't happen again. The responses to the questions only lead to more questions and confusion. Even the experts that were invited to listen in on the meeting were left shaking their heads.

What was certain, was that numerous mistakes were made and not just the ones documented by Cloutier's election challenge. If we can't depend on the system and people that are in that office to explain what happened and why, then there is is no doubt that the problems still exist and will continue to plague our
elections in the future. Yet the Board of Supervisor's (excluding Kondylis)feel that there is no reason to be concerned? Either they don't care, or they are inept at their jobs as representatives because they are willing to sit on their hands and do nothing anything about the problems. By putting their trust into a documented and admitted flawed system/department, they are letting the taxpayers know they don't have your best interests in mind. Again, lets follow the money and see if it leads to Diebold or ESS for any of these elected officials. There will be more information regarding the
formation of a citizen's watchdog group coming soon so stay tuned.
John C.   |January.23.2008
Dear fellow citizens:
I strongly support the spirit of contesting the results of a vote count "plagued by numerous instances of error". I'm pleased to read that the office of the Secretary of the State has initiated a fraud investigation. I'm leery and skeptical, however, of sending monetary support to a fund that may not be required to have open books. The televangelists spoiled it for everybody. Can anyone tell me if the law of the land compels the contestant to disclose either his costs or the sources of his donations?
TRIOF   |January.23.2008
Carol, the "injuction" case was from Cloutier's first request for a restraining order to not certify the recount results. His court case is seperate where he is challenging the election results and is still pending.
carol   |January.23.2008
alrighty now....Cloutier dismissed his Complaint , and our BOS voted down an "Election Advisory Committee." I'm assuming something else is going onwith Cloutier--perhaps he has a different agenda planned out.

As for our BOS, I guess if I had something to hide, I wouldn't anyone critquing me.
Sharpie   |January.22.2008
Spearman and Glaze can gripe all they want. It's no longer a matter of public opinion. It's in the courts or will be shortly and letters to the editor don't mean anything. At first I thought it was really a raw deal that Osby had to defend himself with Cloutier's challenge. Now - I'm not so sure. Seems like they have something to hide now.
Lou Bordisso   |January.22.2008
I am unable to attend the following:
January 22, 2008, at the County Board of Supervisors meeting, the election issues is on their agenda as well. Barbara Kondylis will be proposing the formation of an "Election Advisory Committee" that will be similar to ones already set up in other counties and modeled after the one in Marin County. This meeting will begin at 8AM, at 675 Texas Street in the Board of Sup.'s board room. However, I have contacted the voter fraud division of the Secretary of State office and was informed that an investigation is underway regarding the November
election.
Thanks VIB for your informative web pages!
Publius   |January.21.2008
Dan Glaze, Gerry Spearman, Osby Davis. Where have I heard those names together before? Oh yeah, the last time their voices were joined together, they were badmouthing the hardworking residents who were fighting the waterfront plan proposed by Desilva-Callahan! And if I remember correctly, wasn't it Gerry who at a City Council meeting called these citizens racists for no good reason other than they didn't agree with her position?

I don't remember ever seeing Gerry's name again after Osby stopped working for the developer (other than to slam people in the TH letters with nasty accusations
and mean name-calling when they had a different position on an issue than her). Not one word from her or Dan Glaze on the waterfront development again.

And so they surface together again. What's the common denominator?
TRIOF   |January.21.2008
Isn't it interesting that all of the letters that are attacking Cloutier for participating in what is his right (anyone's right) to challenge the questionable results of the recount, are all stating that he shoud just give up and should move on? I wonder if Mr. Davis lost the recount, would Dan Glaze and Gerri Spearman take the same position and tell Osby to get over it and move on?

What is the most surprizing fact is that these people don't have any problem with the fact that the Registrar's office mishandled the recount and now we don't know if our votes are being accurately counted,
not only in the last election but those yet to come? They apparently don't care that there were machine errors and glitches that can't be explained, or human errors that hasn't been addressed. They only appear to be mad that their candidate is being challenged. Ms. Spearman sounds like an agry and bitter person who is intent to attack anyone who doesn't see things her way. Someone has their priorities scrambled. No one is standing in the way of Davis doing his job. Besides, he can call on Kevin Shelly to advise him and raise funds. I'm waiting to see how much money the henkettes will throw his
way to help pay his legal fees! And you know they will and I wonder if these two will have any problem if their mayor accepts the union's blood money! (If he hasn't already. We are still waiting on the final FPPC reports)

Oh and by the way, anyone wanting to contribute to Gary Cloutier's court challange, can send their checks to his PO Box listed on his campaign website. It's about the principle and regardless to whether you supported Gary during the election or not, we should have some confidence that our votes are counted. The additional attention may make Mr. Rosenthal pay
better attention next time around.
L Meitzenheimer   |January.21.2008
Carol, any letters sent regarding an agenda item are supposed to be read into the offical record of the meeting and thanks for participating in the process. We will have people attending the meetings to report back on VIB. But if you are able to attend, please do so.
Katy Miessner   |January.21.2008
I'll be at the recount meetings -- I have proof that Mr. Rosenthal gave false information to the Board of Supes in December which I will speak about at the meetings. I also presonally witnessed the complete mismanagement of the recount and have contacted the CA Secretary of State. They are looking into the situation and I am urging them to open a formal investigation.

With the historic primaries almost upon us, and thight races in both the Democratic and Republican camps--and with California poised to influence the primaries also for the first time in recent history, Solano County
voters cannot allow the type of mismanagement that occurred in the recount.
carolyn   |January.21.2008
to Meitzenheimer: I wrote a letter re the ad hoc recount, b/c I can not attend. I want to make sure it is read and heard on Tuesday.

Carol
aka GCS
Anonymous   |January.21.2008
I Keep noticing in the Times Herald letters to the editor attacking the person (Gary Cloutier) because of election irregularities. It's odd that letter writers would attack people rather than defend the process. I noticed the letters defending the process ceased after it was an undeniable reality (By Ira Rosenthal's own conclusion) That there were mistakes made in this election that he can't account for.

Now that there is no way Davis supporters can defend the election process they attack the people raising the irregularities and mistakes with one letter writer Gerri Spearman panhandles for
donations to "fight a sore loser". I don't see how there can be an ounce of integrity in elected offices if there isn't absolute integrity in how the votes are counted. With a one vote margin and no integrity in the elections Mr. Davis will be more than just one vote away from obscurity, he will be one tough decision from, or a minor scandle away from being obtuse Mayor in a City with acute problems.
Silas Barnabe
Carol   |January.20.2008
Will VIB be at any of these meetings re the recount?
G.E.   |January.20.2008
WaR,
This scenario was described in Mr. Cloutier's letter of December 10, 2007 to the Board of Supervisors, on page 3 item #11. I have no reason not to believe it! Everything about the whole recount process, from beginning to end, makes me ill. In hindsight, I wish I would have kept every article dealing with this mess so I would be able to refer to it for my own sanity.
Trust in the system? no!
WaR   |January.19.2008
Is it true that Mrs. Davis was "WITNESSED" handling ballots, or was this simply rumored? If this is so and not rumored, I want to know why it was not STOPPED immediately and reported! The moment anybody other than the recount staff touched any of these ballots, the Registrar and/or Asst. Registrar should have put a halt to everything, call it to the attention of all other parties, TAKE NOTE of it and then REPORT IT!!! Is their anyone at VIB that can answer this question (Rumor or Witnessed Truth)?
L. Meitzenheimer   |January.19.2008
The Solano County Democratic Central Committee will have both Ira Rosenthal and Lindsey McWilliams from the Voter Registrar's office speaking at their meeting to discuss the issues of the Mayorial recount fiasco and what is in store for the coming elections this year. We encourage everyone who may have questions and comments on this subject to attend. This will be an excellent time to speak with these two so please try and attend. The meeting will be held on January 23, 2008 at the County Government Center, 675 Texas Street, Suite 600, Fairfield CA at 7PM. This is the first item on the agenda
so plan to be there at 7PM sharp. We hope to have a speaker there to discuss the open voting system as well.

Also, on January 22, 2008, at the County Board of Supervisors meeting, the election issues is on their agenda as well. Barbara Kondylis will be proposing the formation of an "Election Advisory Committee" that will be similar to ones already set up in other counties and modeled after the one in Marin County. This meeting will begin at 8AM, at 675 Texas Street in the Board of Sup.'s board room. Please plan to attend this meeting if you can, and support Barbara Kondylis'
proposal and have make your comments and opinions heard. As you may remember from a previous meeting, the other Supervisor's were not supportive to the suggestion of holding off the certification of the recount of the Vallejo Mayorial race and were dismissive of the concerns regarding the irregularities and mistakes of the Registrar's office. If you support the formation of the Advisory Committee or have interest in participating on the committee, we will need to show up in numbers and let your voice be heard. If you are not able to attend, then please send letters, phone or emails to the
County so that it could be read into the records of the meeting.

Email: cao-clerk@solanocounty.com

snailmail: Board of Supervisors, Clerk of the Board, 675 Texas Street, Fairfield CA 94533

phone: 707 784-6100

More information on Open Voting: www.openvotingconsortium.org/
Body Snatchers   |January.18.2008
I always find that event reminds me of the movie "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". Too surreal for me.
Glass Half Full   |January.18.2008
My partner and I just got back from the Chamber Installation Dinner. Couldn't take any more of the self-congratulatory, slap-ourselves-on-the-back fest. According to Rick Wells, the Chamber is just so happy that they've "taken control" of the City Council "again" with this last election. Is it just me, or has the Chamber of Commerce lost its direction? (Or maybe they never had one?) I thought they were supposed to exist to bring in new businesses, not elect city councilmembers.

Also, interesting to note the firerighters had bought a table, complete with Henke and
Riley. I wonder if they were UBL-ing on the City's dime??
Publius   |January.18.2008
G.E., I heard Osby Davis' wife was seen HOLDING one of the contested ballots in her hand!! Can you tell me why in the world the elections officials would let the wife of one of the candidates anywhere near a ballot?

Mr. Glaze must think he is so much more intelligent than us, the residents of this fair city. Mr. Glaze, who started a quasi-"community group" to fight the citizens working for a better waterfront plan -- at the request of Osby Davis, then Callahan-DeSilva's spokesperson. Gee, who do you think Mr. Glaze supports?
Sparky   |January.18.2008
TRIOF, you are right on re: the negotiations I fear. Awhile ago on the previous incarnation of this site I saw what had been the concessions Henke wanted along with the contract extensions that Thompson was entertaining. That information needs to be brought out, extrapolated for costs and shown far and wide for what it it would have been - obscene extortion of public funds.

Now I hope Davis, Hannigan, Wilson, Bartee & Sunga are listening because if contract extensions are accepted, you will see a ****storm of public protest. When the big, fat bennie package numbers are shown in
comparison to any areas FF's package in California - added on top of the gross salaries these people are making in an economy that is in a recession - you will see some extremely angry people. And these people will bring their anger to those individuals named above, at their place of business, by their neighbors, when seen in public and at council meetings.

DO NOT CAVE to the terrorists. We need to end this contract as soon as possible. Any extension is a move in the wrong direction with serious consequences.

(Sparky, please keep the "no profanity" request in mind. We don't
want to alter any posts but want to keep it clean. Thanks, Site Administrator.)
Firebug   |January.18.2008
Is this better?
Mr. Glaze lost my confidence in his rubber stamping of the State Administrator's whims like selling property, and moving office gimmicks to pay back the State Loan. I perceived this as Mr. Glaze and other Board members doing whatever it took to get their power back from the State as soon as possible.

Lucky for us the sub-prime mess and housing slump has thwarted their efforts to sell Vallejo Schools assets.Other school districts like West Contra Costa have been under State control for nearly 17 years, so the urgency to turn give the helm of the school district back to
board members who where asleep at the helm (Wilson, Pendergast, and Preovolos) when the school district went bankrupt.

Displacing the East Vallejo little leaguers and betrayel of Measure A voters in using taxpayer approved funds for Administrative offices leaves me with issues about Mr. Glaze that make me question as to why any elected leader would associate with such a person, oh I forgot this same elected person deals with the likes of Willie Brown, Elihu Harris, and Kevin Shelley.

I do not know who Board member Hazel Wilson represented in the recount, but having someone that can't
count money (as she demonstrated in her tenure at the bankrupt Vallejo school district) oversee counting votes wasn't the wisest move or was it?
Site Administrator  - Missing text   |January.18.2008
Firebug, sorry, the second post was the same as the first, which ended mid sentence. You may try sending it again by retyping the text and not cut and paste.
Carolyn   |January.18.2008
Since the recount is now within the hands of the Courts, shouldn't someone advise Mr. Glaze to keep his pie hole shut, as he might have to testify, now, if this matter goes to trial?!
Now, that I am aware of who was present at the recount, gives me more of a reason to suspect that it was tainted!

Also, this recount should have been conducted by "impartial" individuals. How can individuals remain impartial if at once Davis was a Deputy Public Defender and a member of the Board of Supervisors??

The Register of Voters needs a Gag Order! "A slip of the Lips can Sink
Ships."
G.E.   |January.17.2008
Why was anyone living in Vallejo allowed anywhere near these ballots and to make matters worse, even seen handling them? I am not questioning that the recount staff and observers where above it all, (hopefully not the Law).

Any Solano County employee residing in Vallejo should have automatically been precluded from participation in the recount. Yes, anyone should have been able to observe the recount, but from behind glass. Any questionable ballots
discovered could then be brought to the glass viewing area for all to see and comment on.

One article stated that some ballots were
brought forth to the recount staff for interpretation of what the voter had in mind. I do not believe I would like to have my ballot left up for interpretation by anyone else but myself. If the ballot is that difficult to read it should be disqualified. How hard is it to mark an oval? Obviously the machine was not able to decifer it and the human recounter is trying to determine what the voter had in mind? I believe not.
Why were the ballots, all of them, not re-fed into the maschines for a total recount? Any discrepancies there?
Since these ballots have gone through so many hands who
in their right mind would trust an additional recount now?


Further more, it was my believe that all candidates running for office knew the issues troubling this City in detail. Did they not tell us that they knew exactly how to help Vallejo's stuck in the muck cart get some footing, if we would just elect them to lead? Now it comes to light that these elected representatives have to go through a learning curve? Yes, that is exactly what I want from our leadership, learning on the job.
Unbelievable!
Plainobserver   |January.18.2008
Daniel E. Glaze admits to "I served as a designated 'observer' for this process" and "Although clearly partial to one candidate, I ...." But why does he not tell readers outright whose designated observer he was? Is he afraid that, by telling them whose side he was or is on, the readers would see right through his selected "facts" and know the real agenda he's trying to promote?

It appears that he is as selective with his facts at present as he was years ago when he readily saw meanness in his critics but failed to see how mean he himself was toward them.
TRIOF   |January.17.2008
Excellent logic Mr. Corbett. I can't get my hopes up though. It appears that this Council (Gomes and Schively excluded) will give in to the contract extensions and get a meager concession in return. That agreement would likely also include throwing out the challenge to the arbitor's ruling.

I understand that the Council was in closed session for over 3 hours this Tuesday. What is taking so long to come up with a resolution? Could it all be to find ways to cover up what the end result will be? Waiting till Feb. only increases the red ink. So are they waiting to report back once the debt is
so bad that they will tell us that the City services will shut down, tax increases will be eminent, no one will be there to answer phones, etc. etc. unless....we will accept the contract extensions as a means to keep the city functioning? Is this a stalling tactic to be able to present a doom and gloom story so bad that we would be willing to accept anything....like selling our soul to the IAFF till 2020? Or are they simply trying to find a way to tell us that we will indeed be filing for bankruptcy, like the Council previous stated all along? The Mayor stated that even though the public may
not be informed, that doesn't mean there isn't any resolutions being discussed. My question is, why isn't the public being informed when it's our tax dollars that's funding the operation?
Firebug   |January.18.2008
Mr. Glaze lost my confidence in his rubber stamping of the State Administrator's whims like selling property, and moving administrative office gimmicks to pay back the State Loan. I perceived this as Mr. Glaze and other Board members doing whatever it took to get their power back from the State as soon as possible.

Lucky for us the sub-prime mess and housing slump has thwarted their efforts to sell Vallejo School
L. Meitzenheimer   |January.17.2008
Mr. Glaze seems intent on trying to save face for the Voter Registrar's fiasco but there are still many issues that have come up to dispute the "meticulous" recount.

First, as noted by the response(s) made by Rosenthal, there were mistakes made. Second, the Registrar now blames his employees for miscounts, trashed ballots, and procedural defects. It is required by the election code that the recount be supervised at all times by the Registrar. Not occasionally as noted by Dan Glaze. Maybe these things would not have happened if he would have taken the recount more seriously and made
it a priority to stay on top of what was (is) going on in his department. Third, he still has these "unexplainable machine errors" that were referred to as "cryptic error messages" and the still unexplainable differences in the numbers.

So there is additional training needed for his employees as well as himself. The training should have been implemented prior to the elections and not after the fact. There should be no "cryptic" messages that can't be decyphered. I believe that's why they put out operating guides and service manuals for the counting machines, so that
you don't have to "guess" as to what it means and then you don't simply push more buttons and refeed the ballots into the machine. If the Registrar doesn't know what the operational procedures are, why then can you simply blame the employees? I have yet to hear one time that he has accepted responsibility for the bungling of the election. Bungling that I may add, cost the tax payers money both in Solano County and Vallejo. Not to mention that Cloutier's decision to move forward and contest the election, will cost him close to $100,000, just to clean up the mess that Rosenthal
created. If it was this complicated for a mere 19,000 plus ballots, what can we expect during the upcoming primary and following elections this year? I have no confidence in a department head that blames his employees, can't explain what happened during the process, shirked his duites, and then makes up scenarios in an attempt to placate the Board of Supervisors and the public. He should be held accountable and step taken to remove him from his position. That would be the beginning of what would make me feel more confident that our votes will count.
TRIOF   |January.15.2008
This evening's council meeting is yet another example of talking loud and saying nothing with the exception of Gomes and Schively's reports. There has been a closed session every meeting both before and after, yet the public is held to waiting until Feb. to hear what additional cuts are going to be made. There apparently has been no movement, at least that we the tax payers are aware of. The budget was discussed last summer. We have even less money now than anticipated last summer. Yet the decision to move forward with any cuts is stalled month after month. If someone understands the method to
this madness, I'd like to hear it. I'm inclined to think that Davis has put this off as Firebug as stated but in the end, if (when) the city goes belly up, that will still impact Davis if a run off is held. We either will see a mayor that talked a lot and did nothing more than what was started by the previous council, or he will give the unions exactly what they have wanted.

Also, are the court challenges regarding the arbitration decisions on hold? Are we still paying the attorney's while they are in a holding pattern?
Sharpie   |January.15.2008
Davis is working at Lightning Speed as he tries to learn all the stuff that he knows nothing about. Is that hard work or just a make up class in the workings of Vallejo :?: There is nothing going on with the budget since it's primarily a timing issue for the Unions. I expect that they will soon step in and exclaim that they are once again "stepping up to the plate" (as Davis, Bartenke, Hannigan and Wilson agree to extend their contract) and delay the bankruptcy of Vallejo a few more years. Puke
Firebug   |January.15.2008
TRIOF-
I am certain Mr. Davis is trying to find a way to put off making the choice of raising fees, taxes snd granting contract extensions after a potential run off election. Considering who and what his political advisors are (Brown, Harris, and Shelley) I know he won't make any decisions that we could hold him accountable for in a runoff election.
TRIOF   |January.15.2008
Sorry, I meant Feb. 2008.
TRIOF   |January.15.2008
I agree Firebug, if the Mayor is speeding along, why have we not heard what's going on with the budget? No updates? If we wait till Feb. 2007, that is only 4 months before the end of the fiscal year. What adjustments could be made then that will keep the city from going belly up? Again, are the employees going to write a check and give back some of the salary increases? I think not.

Perhaps if Mr. Davis had attended council meetings or been involved with what was happening in the city prior to his deciding to run for office he wouldn't have to work so hard now to "catch up". I
would think that the citizens expect this from the mayor and our newly weds. (Wilson and Hannigan) The paper almost makes it sound like we should all be grateful that the mayor is taking so much time to get acquainted with his responsibilities. Didn't they all say they wanted to serve the people of Vallejo?
Site Administrator   |January.15.2008
Please note that while we are currently accepting and posting "announcements" in the Daily Scream, we will be posting information on how to get announcements that concern the community in a separate section and the information will be posted in the near future.
Firebug   |January.15.2008
More irony from the TH! They write that Vallejo's economy will improve in two years because of Touro and the Housing market. I thought it was the fault and responsibility of the council to generate income for the city? It appears like this standard has changed since the election and revenues just seem to come to the city based on the overall economy of our STate and Country.

It was also Ironic that they mention Davis moving at lightning speed in his first month in office since Dec 11. I don''t consider delaying budget cuts until February to be moving at the kind of speed that dictates
"maintaining momentum". If anything delaying cuts for two months looks like obstructionism to me.

Kudos to Dave West for his letter to the editor.
Fr. Lou A. Bordisso-Rally with   |January.15.2008
Join President Bill Clinton at UC Davis Rally!
When
Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 8:30 PM - 9:30 PM

Where
University of California Davis
760 Orchard Road
Davis, CA 95616
General Area: The Activities & Recreation Center; Arc Basketball Court

Description
Join President Bill Clinton as he takes the stage at UC Davis to lead a Students for Change Rally in support of Senator Hillary Clinton! This event also features Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi, and is sponsored by the UC Davis College Democrats. This rally is FREE to the public. Doors will open at 8:30 p.m. and the event will
take place at The Activities & Recreation Center; Arc Basketball Court on campus. For any questions, please call our San Francisco Headquarters at (415) 255-7431 or email us at YoloCountyforHillary@gmail.com.

Host
Hillary for President Events
LFM   |January.14.2008
A Note for those who may be interested:

The Vallejo for Obama campaign is holding information meetings for potential volunteers in the next week at the Continentals of Omega Boys and Girls Club, 1 Positive Place in North Vallejo.
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is trying to secure the Democratic presidential nomination. The California primary is Feb. 5.

Informational meetings will be held at the following times:
� North Vallejo for Obama for all areas north of Interstate 80, 7 to 8 p.m. Tuesday.

� South Vallejo for Obama for all areas south of I-80, 7 to 8 p.m. Wednesday.

Publius   |January.14.2008
Quotemonger, here's some more that might fit the circumstances (unfortunately):

"Augustus Gloop! Augustus Gloop!
The great big greedy nincompoop!
How long could we allow this beast
To gorge and guzzle, feed and feast
On everything he wanted to?"
-Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory

(Let's see, what name could we substitute for Augustus Gloop that might fit for Vallejo??!)
Anonymous   |January.14.2008
They also navigated an inner world few would dare to imagine.

"It became more and more like play-acting," He says
of those not-so-distant days. "I felt dishonest and deceitful not
telling our friends, our relatives, the people we loved, who I really
was."

He knew he wanted a different future, BUT NOT IF IT MEANT SACRIFICING THE PAST.
(Daniel Steele???)

Greed is the selfish desire for or pursuit of money, wealth, power, food, or other possessions,

Greed is not only money.
WaR   |January.14.2008
COUNTY SUPERVISORS' J. SILVA, M. REAGAN, J. VASQUEZ, and J. SPERING aka... Solano County's GOOD OL' BOY TEAM!!! If they only knew just how closely the four of them are being watched by their voting constituents, especially after certifying a bogus recount in which they had been warned. Many of us see this act by the four of them as some kind of underlying trick to further their own agendas. Many of us watched as the GOB Team told the public just how "meticulous" the Registrar's recount was performed. Now we're wondering if any of them will be big enough to apologize or... even
recognize they were wrong? The Registrar has finally admitted publically that the recount was filled with inaccuracies. The four of them chastidized Supervisor Kondylis for wanting to delay the certification for simply an hour or two. Seems that Kondylis was right and the Good Ol' Boys were wrong! I for one will be going to the January Supervisor's meeting and I will be getting as many people as I can to go also!
Doug Sherman   |January.12.2008
Good for you Barbara Kondylis. My primary concern is accurate counting of the ballots. I
Quote Monger ~ Greed   |January.12.2008
JANWILLEM VAN DE WETERING:
Greed is a fat demon with a small mouth and whatever you feed it is never enough.

MARIAN WRIGHT EDELMAN:
It's time for greatness -- not for greed. It's a time for idealism -- not ideology. It is a time not just for compassionate words, but compassionate action.

P.J. O'Rourke
No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power.

Vince McMahon
I don't mind paying people more for something
if we're getting more. But just to change a deal because you're greedy and you want more? No. I'm not gonna go along with that.

Thomas Merton
The tighter you squeeze, the less you have.
TRIOF   |January.11.2008
The statements came from the henkettes NBR, and not from me. So you should take your message to them about any reference regarding over simplification of the obvious.

Vallejo's financial outlook gets worse with every update yet there is no word of progress from the new mayor. It appears that Davis either thinks he can either get blood from a turnip or we are looking at another round of contract extensions. Makes one wonder, what is this secret plan? Is it the same plan Davis talked about during his campaign but never got around to revealing to the public? Why is it that the public is kept
in the dark during these back room deals? Is he waiting until it's too late to do anything about it? I suppose we will have to wait till next months update to find out...maybe.
Common Cents   |January.11.2008
It's interesting to read the debate regarding the IAFF contract with its MOU and supplemental agreement. Great reading material! But isn't the real issue the fact that the City is facing bankruptcy? So instead of discussing each contract and salary section, let's look at the total increases from July 1, 2000 to July 1, 2007. This along with the IAFF minimum staffing requirement and extra pay for Education, EMT, Paramedic, Bi-lingual, Longevity, and Hazardout Material Duty is why the City is going broke.
CAMP - 20.1%
IBEW - 26.3%
IAFF - 44.86%
VPOA - 45.58%

So even bringing in new
businesses, the City would not be able to keep up with these hugh pay increases. Enough is Enough! No more contracts with deferrals of pay raises and/or extensions of the contract or we will be back in this same mess.
Anonymous   |January.11.2008
Coming from NBR's camp the Mother of Tautologies "more firemen = more safety" I think TRIOF should be honored with the compliment. I can't wait to called a person known to imbibe in alcohol while making over $100,000 a year all the while being paid to do so. Now that would be a compliment coming from such a merry band of public servants that can't even attend a Council meeting without being compensated yet claiming to "love Vallejo".
NBR   |January.11.2008
Not only do you oversimplify but you are also very adept at Begging The Question (Assuming The Answer, Tautology): reasoning in a circle. The thing to be proved is used as one of your assumptions. For example: "We must have a death penalty to discourage violent crime". (This assumes it discourages crime.) Similar to your declarative example: "The Council failed to bring in more revenue knowing that it would negatively impact our raises and perks.....". You may as well ask when the FF's quit beating there wives?
Lost Dog   |January.11.2008
:!: :!: Hey everybody, this is a special announcement to interrupt the ongoing debate.. A very special dog was abducted from the front yard of Harry Siter at Lemon and Sonoma.

Harry can be contacted at 707-558-0191

The dog's name is Teddy and he's a border collie-healer, black and white with brown spots.

$1,000 reward if found

please visit Find Teddy Flyer Here for Teddy's photo.
Sharpie   |January.11.2008
Best Phrase of the day "Holy Obfuscation"
TRIOF   |January.11.2008
So NBR thinks my read on who is to blame is over simplification the budget crisis?

Hmmmm...Sort of like the henkettes stating "The Council failed to bring in more revenue knowing that it would negatively impact our raises and perks that we weaseled out of them in the prior years in what's referred to as the fairly negotiated contracts". And "the Council did this because they have a personal vendetta against us and are haters and don't care about the safety of the citizens". Or maybe "the city moved the money out of the general fund and hid it in other funds just so they
don't have to pay our raises"? Or " the city has resources that they can sell and that would pay our salary increases/perks and keep the budget in the black...for this year. Our financial situation isn't that bad!" or my favorite "We offered to give up our raises in order to help save the City and they turned it down!"
That type of over simplification?

Because it appears that the safety unions took advantage of a bad situation and the city gave into their demands in order to get a quick fix to deal with the already problematic revenue situation. We can look
to David Martinez and his pie in the sky budget analysis that started us down this slippery slope. (Not to say that this started way before he was on the scene.) So is the city and the policy makers the only one to blame for not taking the unions years ago when they knew that the city was having a shortfall of revenues? Or does some of the blame go to the over aggressive union henkettes that took advantage of the situation?

Vallejo is just part of a larger problem throughout the state. The safety employee's contracts, perks, and salaries all across the Bay Area and beyond are being
discussed by cities that are facing lost/slow revenues and the unions continue playing a shell game. Recent articles in the San Jose Mercury News, in San Rafael, Berkeley, Contra Costa County etc. all tell of the out of control salaries of the safety unions and how they are having to deal with them. Do any of the union negotiators care? No indeed. It's all about control and greed. Still too simple for you?
NBR   |January.11.2008
TRIOF I think you are over simplifying?

"No, I suppose it wasn't the ff.'s fault that they.........."

(Reductive Fallacy (Oversimplification):
over-simplifying. As Einstein said, everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.)
Firebug   |January.11.2008
Holy obfuscation and diversion to the fact that IAFF 1186 employees got over a 10 percent raise effective 07/01/2007
Way to go NBR
Katy Miessner   |January.11.2008
I have an email into the City asking exactly what they used for estimates of raises next year and the year after, and why. We know that this year its 10%, likely more as the other cities' surveys are done.

Going, going, gone sent in some interesting info on raises for City workers (except 2007 should be 10% not 8.5% for IAFF). IBEW jobs (electrical workers) can be just as dangerous as firefighters. These jobs (and fishermen & garbage workers) are among the top ten most dangerous jobs in the US. Firefighters are about #32, depending on the source, but I have not found any study that puts
them in the top ten (Police are found there). These are stats published by the government BTW, you can find them on the internet.

IBEW got an average of a 2.84% in raises since 1990, with IAFF at almost 300 times more, at 6.06%. In 2004, CAMOP & IBEW actually gave BACK 5% (thank you!). Overall, CAMP averaged the least at 2.18% and VPOA a little behind IAFF at 5.95% (if they also get the 10%, they will be the highest at 6.12%).


CAMP IAFF IBEW VPOA
1999 9.53% 8.21% 9.29% 8.00%
2000 2.00% 6.50% 3.60% 6.50%
2001 5.00% 8.46% 5.00% 8.46%
2002 0.00% 6.38% 0.00% 6.38%
2003 2.10% 4.09% 1.60% 4.09%
2004 -5.00% 0.00% -5.00% 0.00%
2005 3.00% 5.20% 4.00% 5.92%
2006 3.00% 5.73% 4.00% 5.73%
2007 0.00% 10.00% 3.10% 8.5%

Average: 2.18% 6.06% 2.84% 5.95%

If two employees were hired in 1998, both at $70,000 but one IBEW and one IAFF, by 2007 the IBEW employee would have gotten raises totaling $19,600 and the IAFF employees rasies totaling $48,600 - almost $30,000 more.
TRIOF   |January.11.2008
Yeah, well the "10 percent over and over" was not my statement so I'll leave that to the others to respond to. No, I suppose it wasn't the ff.'s fault that they wanted and received the contract extensions that added numerous perks in addition to hefty salary increases in return for deferring a yearly increase that the city could not afford. I suppose it's not their fault that they have this "14 city comparison" that's used to justify their salary increases either. (Which is totally ridiculous since many of the cities used do not have the same level of revenues or expenses and
they are all part of the never ending shell game.) And I suppose you could say that it's not their fault for accepting the 46+ percent increases over the last seven years. Greed doesn't accept blame. It only points the finger to those it conspired with. The players had a full understanding that the city was going under, and as anticipated increased revenues didn't materialized, they kept making deals (called cost savings) and so now the city as a whole has to pay for the quick fix deals that were made. Funny, only one side profitted from those deals, but it's not their fault...right.
Anonymous   |January.11.2008
Thank you for reminding me to "focus". This originally started when I questioned the assumption (from Fund Accounting for Dummies) that FF raises would likely be 10% year after year

ref: "Fund Accounting for Dummies" by Paul Norberg: " The City then subtracts future expenses they know the City can't avoid, like Firefighter salaries that include 10% raises they will likely get year after year."

Ms. Miesnner then adds that the budgeting "crystal ball" requires the Finance Director to include the increase estimates (I agree with) in estimating the upcoming
budget expenses.

The formula that apparently other departments use in some form (ref: Doug Sherman "salaries will be increased by a formula based on the wages of San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose." doesn't specifically call for it. The additional 2% average was negotiated and the city had to sign off for it. Your thorough explanation showed how the Safety Services got a 5%+ over the last 7 years and 10% this year. Please take the time to explain how they will continue to get the same 10% "year after year", as claimed by Mr. Norberg and expected by Ms. Miesnner.

I
would also like to take the same liberty you did to "correct my wording". I should have stated that the original MOU would increase the base salaries by a percentage equal to the average salary increase in the Firefighter classification of the 14 comparable cities and fire districts". If circumstances change after that signing and adjustments are requested it is not the Safety Services fault.
GoingGoingGone   |January.11.2008
Salary Increases since 1990:

1990
CAMP: 9.53
IAFF: 8.21
IBEW: 9.29
VPOA: 8

2000
CAMP: 2
IAFF: 6.5
IBEW: 3.6
VPOA: 6.5

2001
CAMP: 5
IAFF: 8.46
IBEW: 5
VPOA: 8.46

2002
CAMP: 0
IAFF: 6.38
IBEW: 0
VPOA: 6.38

2003
CAMP: 2.1
IAFF: 4.09
IBEW: 1.6
VPOA: 4.09

2004
CAMP: -5
IAFF: 0
IBEW: -5
VPOA: 0

2005
CAMP: 3
IAFF: 5.2
IBEW: 4
VPOA: 5.92

2006
CAMP: 3
IAFF: 5.73
IBEW: 4
VPOA: 5.73

2007
CAMP: 0
IAFF: 8.5
IBEW: 3.1
VPOA: 8.5
TRIOF   |January.10.2008
NBR, let's stay focused. The fact that they rec'd a percentage above and beyond the a/c/c's increase is documented in the MOU. The only thing that was mistated, was that our ff.'s were given a salary increase which was from the highest city of the 14 comparable cities, instead of the "average". In reality when you add the "bonus" percentage on top of the salary increases, that would bring you closer to what the highest city rec'd. Regardless, your declaration was that they did not rec. a percentage in addition to the salary increases since 2001 is not true.

The MOU states
that the ff.'s have received a percentage increase on top of the a/c/c's increase in 2001-2003, 2005-2007. The total received amounted to about 14 percent over 7 year period, which results in an average of 2 percent every year. In the years of 2000 to present the total including the a/c/c's increase is about 46 percent. This amounts to about 5.75 percent each year and the total for 2007 hasn't been totaled yet so the numbers will increase. The deferrals have yeilded a much higher increase (salary and perks)in the later years and resulted in no real cost savings to the city. Anyway you look at
it, it's more than most other cities, and more than this city can afford no matter how you OBFUSCATE it.
HalfEmpty   |January.10.2008
NBR -- "Simpler still if they (prior council) would have voted yes on the negotiated settlement by interim city mgr Thompson."

Simpler for you and your union pals. Deferred raises, extended contracts, more bennies, Henke's personal lawsuit fees (approved and paid by union members) paid by the citizens of Vallejo. The city would squeak by for another year until the next June rolled around and be in the exact same pre-Thompson's proposed agreement place: figuring out how to pay for the deferred raises and the new bennies, and let's not forget about unfunded health care
liabilities. Year after year, the council would be greeted by a budget crisis until the contract ended after all of the extensions and a new, fair contract could be put in place.

Don't forget, either, that it didn't matter what the 1186ers offered -- it wasn't enough without an agreement from the VPOA. And the VPOA didn't agree. That's what Gerry Davis said at a council meeting as to why he turned the proposed deal down. Gerry Davis, a strong, longterm IAFF and VPOA supported candidate changed his position because the deal being offered gave all to the unions and left the city in the red
with an extended contract, more raises coming due and no way out. And Tony Intintoli, also a strong union-supported candidate changed his position because what was offered wasn't enough to solve the problems.

No matter how many holes you plug up in the leaking dam, soon enough you run out of fingers. We've simply run out of fingers.
NBR   |January.10.2008
TRIOF...Do you honestly think your restatement: "item 7 that indicates that the ff.'s will receive "2 percent increase of the base salary which was abandoned in 2003, the average salary increase equal to the comparable 14 cities, and a additional 1 percent for 07/01/05....Item 8, indicates 2 percent increase abandoned in 2003, the salary increase equal to the 14 cities for 07/01/2006.....Item 9, indicates a 4.5 percent increase from 2004, plus the salary increase from the 14 cities for 07/01/07. Which I understand could still equal about 2 percent more by the time the other cities have
their final increases and they apply them to our ff.'s salary retro to 07/2007."

could be confused for your original claim?

"They get an increase that amounts to whatever the highest city received, plus an additional two percent on top or that."

If that was your attempt at a condensed synopsis of the agreement...you failed.

I guess it would have been simpler if the union would have just stayed with the CITY PROPOSAL (several years ago) of 10% above the avg?

Simpler still if they (prior council) would have voted yes on the negotiated settlement by interim city mgr
Thompson.
Doug Sherman   |January.10.2008
The CAMP agreement for our city managerial staff contains similar language where those salaries will be increased by a formula based on the wages of San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose. Im not sure what concessions they have agreed to but I was surprised to see this language in their contract. See Section 6 Salary.
http://www.ci.vallejo.ca.us/uploads/54/2596.pdf
TRIOF   |January.10.2008
Liddicoet, my mistake, I mispoke about receiving the increase based on the "highest city" salary increase. It is based on the "average" of the 14 comparable cities. So I don't see that as being "complete wrong" but will correct my wording.

NBR, you apparently did not read the SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT.

On page 3 of the SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT, dated 07/2004, item 7 that indicates that the ff.'s will receive "2 percent increase of the base salary which was abandoned in 2003, the average salary increase equal to the comparable 14 cities, and a additional 1 percent
for 07/01/05

Item 8, indicates 2 percent increase abandoned in 2003, the salary increase equal to the 14 cities for 07/01/2006.

Item 9, indicates a 4.5 percent increase from 2004, plus the salary increase from the 14 cities for 07/01/07. Which I understand could still equal about 2 percent more by the time the other cities have their final increases and they apply them to our ff.'s salary retro to 07/2007.

So the additional 2 percent on top of the average increase continued until 06/2007. The 07/2007 increase was the first that the additional 2 percent on top of the the average
salary increase was NOT paid. But they will get an additional increase that can amount to 2 percent or more depending on what the other cities do, as stated before.

So for the last seven years, the ff.'s have received from 1 percent to 2 percent above the average salary increase. They may of deferred it, but it was received and paid never the less.
Firebug   |January.10.2008
More of NBR obfuscation.
The MOU is here it clearly says on July 1 2007 4.5 precent PLUS the two years of forgone 2 percent plus the average salary increases of the 14 comparable cities.

http://www.iedasurvey.com/docs/IEDA215_9900_FIREFIGHTERS%20ASSOC%20MOU.pdf
NBR   |January.10.2008
To TRIOF, I had to look up the FF MOU on the cities website. A one time additional 2% increase was added to the avg raise in 2001 (7 years ago!). In 2002 it was 1.5% and 2003=1% additional (above avg.). Since 2004 "the City of Vallejo shall increase the base salaries by a percentage equal to the average salary increase in the Firefighter classification of the 14 comparable cities and fire districts". So your fundamental understanding of raises being whatever the highest city received + 2% does not reflect what the MOU states. It appears you did not continue to read pg. 19 paragraphs
B4 through B6.

So...why estimate that VFD raises will be 10% annually when other cities avg 3-5% and sometimes as low as 1%, if as the MOU states, the raises are based on avgs.? It is mathematically impossible for an avg. to be greater than the highest number used in the "set" to determine the avg.

Prior posts show NYFF perks include Lifelong medical coverage for member and family; Growth opportunities; Flexible work schedules; Up to four weeks paid vacation per year; Generous pension after 20 years of service. + Captains wage of $145,000
Tom Liddicoet   |January.10.2008
As usual, Triof is completely wrong regarding the FF salary increase. Read the contract yourself. It is online.
pat norberg   |January.10.2008
Hello,
The council meeting had much discussion about public forum speaking. I want to offer a very simple suggestion to the council members and mayor to speed up the process. Why can't all those who have submitted cards to speak line up when they start this segment? This would avoid the boring and laborous walk back and forth to the podium which seems to take forever....
WaR   |January.10.2008
"Registrar's Recount Review" (*Cited from the Vallejo Times Herald January 8, 200.

"The Registrar of Voters determined that four of the 13 discrepancies between the machine and manual counts cannot be adequatley explained. Possible reason, according to county officials:"

*"not all the ballots were tallied during the recount"
*"operator error in handling the counting machines"

"The recount process was THOROUGH and COMPLETE." Davis said when interviewed about the newest findings by the Registrar's Recount Review
Board.
__________________________________________________________

I don't understand why "Mayor" Davis would now reject the Registrar's new findings. Davis positively believed, without reservation, the Registrar's judgment when the votes mysteriously fell to his favor. Is Davis now having a delusional moment or is it purely denial on his part? The Registrar has now stated emphatically "the recount was inaccurate and incomplete." I guess this proves, "some people only believe what they want to believe." I don't know which one would make the best Mayor. But, at
this point, I do know which outcome would give all voters the best chance of making sure all our votes in Solano County will count in the next election. NONE of us can afford too sit back any longer and watch our votes simply not count due to "human error" or shoddy machines!!!
TRIOF   |January.09.2008
To NBR, I'm sure your not unfamiliar with the ff.'s contract. It calls for a salary increase that is tied to 14 other cities/districts. They get an increase that amounts to whatever the highest city received, plus an additional two percent on top or that. This is why the salary increase is still increasing since the budget was set. They also received the deferred salary increases that were part of what was referred to as a "cost savings" they so generously offered from prior years. This is what gave the ff.'s their contract extensions and other costly perks that the city now cannot
afford. I don't remember the ff.'s offering to give up any salary increase, only deferring them and/or adding more perks as part of their "generous offer" to help save our city and only if their contracts were extended.

So unless we get a miracle, (not holding my breath) what happened this year is just more of what we can expect until 2010. But with this current council majority, we are more than likely looking at additional years being added on to the contracts very soon and again, the ff.'s union will declare they saved the city and will continue to line their pockets with more
of our tax dollars as we lose more city services.
You got what you voted for   |January.09.2008
I watched the rerun of last nights council meeting. During the redevelopment portion of the rerun it become very clear what all of you voting for Hannigan, Davis and Sunga did to the city. You voted in people who clearly have no idea what is or has been going on. The decision to extend an agreement with Triad was postponed. Why you ask? Because Davis, Sunga and Hannigan don't seem to even know what it's about. They don't know the agreement made last year, they don't understand the differences between the old agreement and the new one (how about reading them for starters), and as usual they all
need more information. This is what you get when you vote for people who have had zero interest in what has been happening in Vallejo for the past 10 years. Before they got elected, they didn't go to Council meetings, never spoke at the podium unless paid (Davis), and apparently never read the papers either. Such as shame that the uninformed in Vallejo vote in the people who basically are clueless, very impressionable, and in all reality cost the city additional staff time and dollars as they learn from square one. Please vote in people who know what's going on whether they've been in office
or not. Vote for people who care about Vallejo enough to be informed about new development, or ongoing plans. You get what you vote for, and we got a bunch who by the way now have a majority. I urge all of you to hold this majority responsible for resolving this budget for the long term. Don't hold your breath however, most of them don't have enough information to come to any conclusions yet (barf).
T.A.D.Q.M.   |January.09.2008
TADQM (The Aging Disco Queen's Mother - many thanks to her sleuthing!) found this on the Boston Globe's site. Abuse--UBL and other--is unfortunately not unique to Vallejo. (and does Vallejo have alcohol & drug testing?)

Excerpts:
"In the last six years, 102 Boston firefighters have substantially enhanced their tax-free disability pensions by claiming career-ending injuries while they were filling in for superiors at higher pay grades, according to a Globe review of city retirement and payroll records."

"By making their injury claims while on temporary assignment, the
firefighters were able to boost their pensions an average of $10,300 a year, to $61,737 apiece. The average lifetime increase for the 102 firefighters works out to $248,000, according to actuarial tables. The supplements, made possible by a provision in the firefighters contract, will cost the city $25 million over time."

The Fire Commissioner is quoted, "An office job at headquarters is not a hazardous work environment. So these claims raise questions about the integrity of the individual and the integrity of the claim."

And more:
[Boston] firefighters have been working
without a new contract since 2006, and talks broke down last year over this dispute. Further complicating the negotiations is the city's insistence on drug and alcohol testing in the wake of the August deaths of two firefighters in a West Roxbury blaze. The autopsies of the two men showed one was intoxicated and the second had traces of cocaine in his system.

href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/01/07/firemen_getting_enhanced_pensions/?p1=email_to_a_friend">http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/01/07/firemen_getting_enhanced_pensions/?p1=email_to_a_friend
TRIOF   |January.09.2008
Interesting how Phil Smith chose to only single out two council members to demand accountability! The same questions should be asked of everyone on council, not just Gomes and Cloutier. It wasn't council's decision that made WalMart move to American Canyon. They were going to close up shop in Vallejo anyway, with the anticipation that they would be able to put their mega store on the White Slough property. So Mr. Smith appears to be confused. As I recall, the majority voted to have the study (EIR) move forward. But Mr. Smith doesn't hold Bartee and Sunga accountable for their part does he?


My question is why do some people think Walmart is going to be the savior of Vallejo? Just as the Grocery Outlet's move across the freeway will leave an empty storefront (and yet again leaving the people in that area without a grocery store)the plan for a mega store could possibly close down most of the Seafood City shopping center and leave more empty spaces as well as further down the corridor of Sonoma Blvd. The loss of revenue from the many stores at the Redwood Plaza and the surrounding area will cut into any revenue brought in by WalMart. In any case, why doesn't Mr. Smith call up
the other two council members (Bartee and Sunga)and ask them where wallymart is at with the EIR? Let's put all of the people on council to the same scrutiny and accountability for all of their actions, not just a few.
NBR   |January.09.2008
In response to Ms. Miesner...
What is the basis for assuming that the VFD raises would be 10% YEAR AFTER YEAR? Neighboring Marin county averages 3-5% annually...why estimate Vallejo to be 10% annually?
Anonymous   |January.09.2008
Between 3%-5% is what Marin County employees receive. Some years we only receive 1%. Ten percent toward FF seems pretty high.
Katy Miessner   |January.09.2008
In response to NBR's comment:
The Funds for Dummies report says: "The City then subtracts future expenses they know the City can't avoid, like Firefighter salaries that include 10% raises they will likely get year after year."

NBR then asks if the City's "logic train" has fallen off the track because s/he speculates that the FD would have taken a 3% raise this year.

NBR, budgeting is somewhat of a crystal ball, but when you know you will incur expenses, you must budget for them. Negotiations this year were completely unsuccessful. Can you tell us about what happened in
close session? I think not, and so I would leave the speculations alone. 5 of the 7 council members did not believe IAFF 1186's final offer was tenable, and so FFs got a 10% raise and might possibly get more this year.

The Budget Director has no choice but to budget these costs. Doing anything less would be irresponsible, because if he knows the City has future years' expense obligations, such as a contract until 2010 that very likely will result in 10% (or more) raises for FF's, he & the City must be responsible and budget those very likely raises.
Firebug   |January.09.2008
In true NBR form
"My memory serves me that the previous council voted to pay 7% more in raises than what the FF's would have accepted. That decision had more impact as to what monies would be affected and by how much, more than anything the FF's were asking"

So it was the Council that "forced" you to take money you never asked for? Isn't that what Hannigan and Wilson did when they cherry picked COLA information to give you guys an even larger raise? I was also amused with Phil Smith letter to the TH and how he singled out Cloutier and Gomes.

I kept thinking of this
while I was at the dog park which never would have been with Hannigan and Wilson, Sunga, and Bartee's of the Council. They are only interested in raided other funds to take care of the safety employees in the city. I wonder why when it comes to raiding funds Sunga seems not to care about information, but when it comes to cutting from those he is beholden to he never seems to have enough information.
VJO res   |January.09.2008
Bill S
In order to compare apples to apples you should compare the total NY package as the VFD critics are always referencing to the TOTAL VFD compensation. A NY FF (5 years) makes: $68,475 (base) + $18,043 (*fringe)= $86,518 (total). A NY Captain is $96,903 + $19,467= $145,645. That figure does not include: Lifelong medical coverage for member and family; Growth opportunities; Flexible work schedules; Up to four weeks paid vacation per year; Generous pension after 20 years of service. (unsure if pension can be collected before age 50 (minimum age to retire under
CALPERS))
http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/community/ff_salary_benefits_080106.shtml

* Fringe benefits reflect overtime, holiday pay and other differentials
NBR   |January.08.2008
My memory serves me that the previous council voted to pay 7% more in raises than what the FF's would have accepted. That decision had more impact as to what monies would be affected and by how much, more than anything the FF's were asking
Sparky   |January.08.2008
Grrrreat new site! So NBR, are you saying the FF'ers would take 3% instead of whopping 10% this year - without an extension of contract (and all the obscene bennies that each extension brings)? Yeah, I thought not. 1186 is staying consistent, there is no real concession on the part of 1186.

As an aside, I watched the city council meeting tonight. I thought Buck Kamphausen reminded me of someone I recently saw on TV. It was from the movie It's a Wonderful Life and I think Buck wants Vallejo renamed to Bucksville. We're in trouble folks 'cause Bucky Boy is starting to call in some loans
- in the form of backers to some of his new crazy schemes. Watch out!
Bill S   |January.08.2008
Saw an interesting figure today. NYFD's Captains base salary is around $85k, after 5 years? Watch out for influx of NYFD personnel.
Mark H   |January.08.2008
If Lady B has any great ideas to bring in $10 or $20 million I would be in full favor of increasing revenue. Not realistic or even remotely possible in my opinion.
Firebug   |January.08.2008
Does NBR's memory about the 4 percent raise of the garbage company also include the amount used to subsidize safety services expenses (including the raises). I guess our roads (the worst in Solano County)will have to wait a little longer for the repairs funded from the amount in the garbage fee hike. I seem to recall your rambles about the sanctity of enterprise funds (transportation encroachment) when it comes to "taking" from the general fund has this changed now that the fire deparmtent encrouches on an enterprise fund (garbage co)?


And to leaving things to the courts? The
arbitrator is not the court, if we eliminated binding arbitration from our city charter and really left binding arbitration to the "courts" it would be found unconstitutional as it already has again and again in the "courts".

And to lady B the argument of "more revenues" has been so overused it's hard to take you seriously. Business Revenues are down everywhere in California, and so with that in mind you must want to increase the tax burden on Vallejoans. Good luck with that one!
Anonymous   |January.08.2008
Kudos to Paul and Katy, great analogies. Our friends in the IAFF local 1186 have obfuscated this issue again and again. On another note in a city right accross the bridge from us (Pinole)a citizen group is recalling two council members that have giant safety union support. I read recently the recall leaders are are being sued for defamation (sound familiar?) because of their web page that mostly refers to contra costa times news articles.

http://www.pinolerecall.com/

For anyone with any advice that suffered at the hands of the lawsuits that were eventually tossed on anti-SLAPP statutes
please email them and offer your support and understanding and comradery. Some of the shady deals there resemble ours.
Lady B   |January.08.2008
My question is why is everyone against the firefighters? Instead of re-negotiating the contract - that was voted in by the city council - why aren't we looking for ways to pay it - BRING ADDITIONAL REVENUE to VALLEJO!!! Think positive instead of negative....let's be more proactive please.......
NBR   |January.08.2008
from "Fund Accounting for Dummies" by Paul Norberg: " The City then subtracts future expenses they know the City can't avoid, like Firefighter salaries that include 10% raises they will likely get year after year. Remember, former Council member Tony Pearsall asked the Firefighters to forego their raises for two years to help us from going into a deficit and unfortunately, the Fire Union refused."

Is the Stout/Norberg prediction of yearly 10% raises by the FD the reason for the projected deficit? Did their 'logic train' fall off the track? The FD would have taken a 3%
raise this year (the garbage co. got 4%). The FD may have declined Pearalls 0%, but they certainly would have taken less than what the council majority essentially voted to give them.
Anonymous   |January.08.2008
"TRIOF | | January.07.2008
(1) Ramon seems to imply that the conspiracy by the tax payers is to push the City toward bankruptcy. * Like it would be our decision? Logic just isn't on your side Ramon. ** Why would the tax payers want the city to be insolvent?"

"DFisher | | January.04.2008
(2) I often hear people mention allowing the city to Bankrupt so that the contracts can be broken."

I don't believe the laws are 'cut and dried', however, if the laws (and cases) are read carefully OR casually there is little to there to lend hope that the contracts will be
nullified. My impression, to your question (**), is gained from the same sources as "DFisher" (see statement #2).
(*) The decision is not in your hands, but in the hands of those that need to make the "request" from the CA legislature to go ahead and "apply". Additionally, if one can make the choice to "allow" something to happen (ie bankruptcy as DFisher has "heard" then the only ones that can really answer your last question (**) are those that choose to "allow" the city to request filing for bankruptcy.
Personally I am having a hard time
placing faith in those that look at the court as the answer. A council person already "guaranteed" winning the fire arbitration (kinda like Dewey Wins!) in conjunction with the recent string of city court defeats, one would have to wonder why bankruptcy is preferred by those that Mr. DFisher has 'heard mention'?
gmanicotti   |January.08.2008
Looks like it's time to fire off a few letters to Sacramento.
Absolutely incredible. And what does this say about our county Supes ? ( Kondylis excepted )
TRIOF   |January.07.2008
So the Rosenthal misplaced ballots saga continues. Did the Registrar not say that his dept. had been diligent in their count? Did he not say that his dept. had taken extra time to look in every nook and cranny to make sure that no ballots had been misplaced or placed into "the wrong precinct"? "We went through every ballot to make sure they were counted," Rosenthal said. First, they find an uncounted ballot in the "disgard box" on Friday after the election was certified. Then, under pressure from the Board of Supervisor's office, they do yet another internal recount and
find two more missing ballots which now makes the difference between Cloutier and Davis 1 vote? Can somebody please tell me why this was not done right the first time? No doubt that if they count again, the numbers will change again. How do the voters regain their confidence in the voting process when so much is wrong with the Registrar's office?

I totally understand Cloutier's wish to take this to court. What is even more unjust, is to have to pay out about $50,000 to $100,000 just to have this entire mess reviewed and decided upon.
Doug Sherman   |January.07.2008
Firebug, I tend to agree with you on Vallejo
Firebug   |January.07.2008
Wow we are down to one vote! What does this reveal about the inegrity of those that voted to certify this recount, and those that belittled the real Patriots for expressing doubt!
TRIOF   |January.07.2008
Ramon seems to imply that the conspiracy by the tax payers is to push the City toward bankruptcy. Like it would be our decision? Logic just isn't on your side Ramon. Why would the tax payers want the city to be insolvent? So we could have more of our services cut? Really?

The statement made by some, in my opinion, seemed to come out of frustration that if the unions weren't going to help the city out by making true cost saving cuts, and continued to insist on "getting what was due", then maybe by filing bankruptcy, the city could be released from the unaffordable contracts. Which
may or may not hold to be true. It would be up to the judge to decide which debts are eliminated and which would have to be paid. Bankruptcy laws are not cut and dry as noted by the City Attorney. The taxpayers don't have to research the laws to know that. Well, apparently everyone but Ramon.
Firebug   |January.07.2008
Looks like Ramon just made a compelling argument not to extend the existing contracts with folks that have made it clear that their pocketbook is more important than the citizens they allegedly serve.
Ramon   |January.07.2008
triof: "thanks but it is still confusing as to what would happen with the City of Vallejo if they were forced to file. The last information given by the City Attorney in Nov. 2007, it was said that the city was reviewing the Fed. rules that legislate the bankruptcy code, and that it was still unclear as to what would happen if the city had to file."

This is code for....Lawyers (Cloutier and others), Financial Officers (Norberg), International Diplomats (Gray), Bankers (Schively), Financial Experts (Miesenner) and cabal cannot find any interpretation in other city bankruptcy rulings
or the Ca. legislature that is interpreted in the way they'd feel it is favorable to them. Soooo, the 'faithful' (VIBer faithful) are told that bankruptcy is "unclear" and to hold the line. Eventually, if the path they have been led down is destruction (because no one leading the 'kill 1186 charge' did their homework) they will be able to spin it into...'its not our fault!.... the International set it up and the Local acted as the tool (in cooperation with old Vallejo money) to bring Vallejo to a locked up position of safety contracts with State having total control. Saadam did the
same nose thumbing at the U.S. military.
admin   |January.06.2008
avatar Silus' Post from 12/31 has been added below in the Dec 2007 Doc.
Firebug   |January.06.2008
Doug
I would like to take out the revenues generated by the fire department to arrive at the (net) expenses for Vallejo that you arrived with but since our general fund raids other funds like the garbage fund to pay for fire department expenses the only apples to apples comparison is with total expenses which puts vallejo and hayward spending the same with vallejo having 25 less sworn fire fighters.
TRIOF   |January.06.2008
Firebug, I totally agree, there are other forces at work here. My prior post was focusing on the issue of our new council and mayor who should be watched as they hold the votes to send us right back into the same strangle hold with the unions and with the good ol' boys at the helm. There is an old tie in with Osby and the Curtola's and Lavazzo's of Vallejo. These people have been pulling string behind the scenes for years now and members of the chamber as well as the board of realators have prevented Vallejo from progressing and have lined their pockets all the while. The everyday citizens are
at risk of suffering from even more cuts in services if they don't go to the council meetings, if they don't pay attention and make their voices heard. The henkettes have tried to blame the "haters" for what's wrong with Vallejo, but we all know who is bringing this city down.
Webmaster   |January.06.2008
I just bumped up the maximum post length. Sorry about that!
Anonymous   |January.06.2008
Sorry the above comment was me

Firebug
Anonymous   |January.06.2008
TRIOF,
Read Silas Barnabe's Dec 31 letter (For some reason it disappeared) and things will be a little clearer. I have been critical of the firefighters union, but it is clear that there is more at work here. We bash the firefighters union (deservedly so) But we don't get at the other power brokers that run this city. I am beginning to see connections of certain business people in the chamber of commerce that use IAFF 1186 money in return for supporting like interests. The firefighters union wants their contracts extended, and those that do business in vallejo, develop in Vallejo want to do
things their way. How nice that they can come together in Mr. Davis, Hannigan and Wilson.

The Waterfront development and subsequent lawsuits to get any input should be a good example to us. Look at the players involved in that and look at the current city government makeup. In the end the only interests served on our council are the firefighters union, and certain business interests to hell with the rest of us. The attitide is just keep paying up and shutup while "we" continue to run this town.
TRIOF   |January.05.2008
Sorry, I guess we have a limit to the space for comments...
continued:
which would be dismissed. So it's not clear that the safety contracts would automatically be rendered null and void. There are still too many variables that are not spelled out since this is not an area that has a set precident in the courts. All the more reason the public should have the right to weigh the choices before our "Mayor" decides for us what is the right choice.

As the previous posted stated, we will be awaiting the final FPPC report to see if our Mayor was truly supported by the unions. This would
put things in a different light to say the least, and would be more cause for the citizens to pay close attention to what will be coming from our new Mayor as well as the majority council who were supported by the henkettes. Up until the election, we were lead to believe that Pamela Pitts was the one the unions were behind. Are we now to believe that Osby Davis was the one they were truly behind? Makes one wonder....
TRIOF   |January.05.2008
To whomever submitted the bankruptcy link, thanks but it is still confusing as to what would happen with the City of Vallejo if they were forced to file. The last information given by the City Attorney in Nov. 2007, it was said that the city was reviewing the Fed. rules that legislate the bankruptcy code, and that it was still unclear as to what would happen if the city had to file. The City Council then asked that they have a study session that would give the council and public more information as to what exactly it would mean. Since then, we have had a second new Mayor that has taken the
"bankruptcy" word off the table and cancelling the study session. So instead, the Council is now apparently in discussion with the City employees and the representing unions to try to come up with some sort of resolution on the budget crisis. Whatever that means. So I now wonder, why was the study session cancelled? Why should we(the citizens) not have the opportunity to fully understand our options? Why is this information only available to Council since it is the tax payers and other citizens that will bear the burden of their decisions?

To me, that only can imply that under the
Mayor's directives, and by majority vote from the Council, that the safety unions will again win a contract extension that will take them past 2010 and in return, they would give up some portion of their salary and possibly some benefits...that would keep the budget in the black for now. We have an insightful history that tells us that any consessions will mean more in payouts and perks to the unions in future years and in return, our budget clears this year. So no matter how much more "revenues" we take in, it will only serve to feed the henkette's greed and the citizens will continue
to suffer from lack of City services. It has been said that even if the City is successful in filing a bankruptcy, the judge would then decide which debts would possibly be restructured and which would be dismissed. So it's not clear that the safety contracts would automatically be rendered null and void. There are still too many variables that are not spelled out since this is not an area that has a set precident in the courts. All the more reason the public should have the right to weigh the choices before our "Mayor" decides for us what is the right choice.

As the previous
posted stated, we will be awaiting the final FPPC report to see if our Mayor was truly supported by the unions. This would put things in a different light and would be more cause for the citizens to pay close attention to what will be coming from our new Mayor as well as the majority council who were supported by the henkettes. Up until the election, we were lead to believe that Pamela Pitts was the one the unions were behind. Are we now to believe that Osby Davis was the one they were truly behind? Makes one wonder....
Publius   |January.05.2008
Wandering around the internet tonight doing a little research. And I see that the main page of the California Professional Firefighters Association's website (www.cpf.org) is ecstatic that Osby Davis "won" the mayoral recount:

"Pro-Labor Vallejo Mayoral Candidate Wins Squeaker in Recount...After a year in which its firefighters battled through arbitration, legal threats, suspect budget analysis and threats of termination, the future may be brighter for Vallejo firefighters. Yesterday, the last vestiges of two hostile council members were swept aside with the recount victory of
Osby Davis. Davis, who had strong labor support in the campaign, was declared the winner of the contest by three votes after an exhaustive hand recount. With his victory, Vallejo Firefighters Local #1186 is positioned to receive a more balanced assessment of its critical staffing needs."

CPFA says that Osby had "strong labor support" in the campaign. I recall "Labor" suporting Pam Pitts, not Osby. Even Osby's website (www.osbydavisformayor.com) doesn't list a single union endorsement. So where did the CPFA get the idea that Osby was supported by Labor?

I just can't
wait to see the FPPC reports that are due at the end of January. I sure hope that Osby's report doesn't include support from the 1186ers or their PAC, "United Workers Bullied by IAFF 1186." We'll be looking at the subsequent FPPC reports, too, to see what contributions are made well after the election brou-ha-ha is over.
Doug Sherman   |January.06.2008
Hayward fire department vs. Vallejo fire department.
Hayward fire department vs. Vallejo fire department.

You're right firebug, this comparison is puzzling. I'm looking over the Hayward and Vallejo fire budgets for 2006 in the respective general funds and see that Hayward only allocates $1.5 million more in expenses for 146 fire department personnel vs. Vallejo's 110 fire personnel. Hayward shows 2006 actual budget at $23,542,320 and Vallejo 2006 approved budget at $22,059,500. Hayward has one more fire station than we do: Hayward 9 and Vallejo 8. The hourly rates seem to be basically the
same with Vallejo and Hayward both in each others contracts as "comparable cities". Hayward has a minimum staffing of 33 and we have 28. So how can the budgets be so close yet the ratio of department personnel be so great. Do we have a systemic injury problem or absenteeism problem in our department which is driving high backfill rates? The union leave in recent years may be part of the backfill problem but probably not enough to save us significant amounts of money by itself. Perhaps what we should be comparing is the amount of money it takes to staff 1 (M)inimum (S)taff position. In
other words, Hayward is $23,542,320 / 33 = $713,404 per MS and Vallejo is $22,059,500 / 28 = $787,839 per MS. If we can work to get Vallejo's $ per minimum staff person down in line with other comparable cities then we begin to look a little better. The good news for Vallejo in this scenario comes downstream in the retirement and medical cost. IMO one of our goals should be to keep the number of personnel down in the department, within safe limits for the responders, to minimize the retirement costs.
:(   |January.04.2008
DFisher

It is completely unclear to me if Vallejo could get out from under the collective bargaining agreements that are in place. see this link and read the 4 or 5 paragraphs on this subject:

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/nbrc/report/22chapte#2473
Doug Sherman   |January.05.2008
Hayward fire department vs. Vallejo fire department.
You
DFisher   |January.04.2008
I often hear people mention allowing the city to Bankrupt so that the contracts can be broken. Does anyone know the real story and pros and cons of this option? I'd be interested in hearing a well informed answer rather than hearsay.
Anonymous   |January.04.2008
Doug,
We pay the same as Hayward for fire services with 25 less fireifghters (that shoud trigger a red flag).
Firebug
L Meitzenheimer   |January.04.2008
You are absolutely correct Bill. Ira Rosenthal was not able to answer the questions regarding the missing votes or the reason why after two machine counts where the numbers came out to be the same, but the hand count gave a different result. He attributed it to "possible machine error" stating that "it could have been attributed to a machine misfeed". These are not answers, they were assumptions. This is not acceptable and exactly why there will be meetings in the near future to discuss the need to form voter watchdog groups in Solano County. The voters have a right to observe
the entire vote count process which includes video taping the process, asking questions on what is happening during the count, observing the computers, etc. This is essential this coming Feb. to assure the voters that their vote was counted and counted toward their candidates of choice. There will be more information on the upcoming meeting very soon and it will be posted here on VIB. The voters have to show Mr. Rosenthal that the shoddy work done by his office will not be tolerated again and that he is under the scrutiny of the voters.

In light of the national concern over the ES&S and
Diebold secretly programmed computer systems, one would think the Voter Registrar's office should do everything they can to have a transparent process. Apparently Mr. Rosenthal disagrees with this and has so voiced his opinion on more than one occasion. So watch for more updates on this issue soon.
Bill S   |January.03.2008
Just received my voter information guide; for the Feb.5, Presidential Primary Election. Please read the, Voter Bill of Rights. Number 9 and 10, caught my attention. # 9. You have the right to ask questions about election procedures and observe the election process. You have the right to ask questions of the precinct board and election officials regarding election procedures to receive an answer or be directed to the appropriate official for an answer. # 10. You have the right to report any illegal or fraudulent activity to a local official or to the Secretary of State's office. Please remember
this the next time you vote and please note any irregularities. We should all be able to vote with confidence and know that our vote was counted properly!
Anonymous   |January.03.2008
firefighters working on christmas day earn straight time
Bill S   |January.03.2008
I am absolutely thrilled I have lived long enough to witness an African American, win a Presidential Caucus.
This is history making and long overdue. I salute Sen. Obama and his effort. Note to Solano County; it appears that Iowa knows how to count and verify votes. Please contact a.s.a.p. Request film of event!
Doug Sherman   |January.03.2008
Firebug, when you say we pay our safety employees more are you talking about their total end of year pay or their base hourly wage :?:
Webmaster   |January.03.2008
I removed the website and title fields. The majority of people would not post a website and I think having the entire Post displayed is a better option rather than simply a title. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
firebug   |January.03.2008
Where that argument falls apart is that these communities where these so called fatcats cash their fat rent checks pay their safety employees less than those in Vallejo
Judy Irvin   |January.03.2008
One huge source of money that has not been discussed is the Federal Government.

Vallejo is an "entitlement" community where checks for a couple of million $ are sent automatically each year because the City has so many disadvantaged and extremely low income people. The money partially funds projects in targeted very low income neighborhoods, but they include a large percentage for City staff "management". Projects include mostly infrastructure...curb and gutter, etc...and the contracts go to the big, out-of-town guys like NorthBay Construction.

That also is true for
the HUD Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, some $26 million at last count. Most of it goes to the non-resident property owners, but about 20% goes to the Vallejo Housing Authority and Economic Development. Did you all do the math there? The money does not go for Code Enforcement or other General Fund programs and the data are pretty clear that concentrations of poverty lead to increases in the demand for safety services as well as increasing direct and indirect living costs for every resident of Vallejo.

Jerry Brown, the former mayor of Oakland and our current State Attorney General,
hit the nail on the head when he said that one of the largest industries in Oakland was "farming the poor". So I think we all need to "follow the money". Locally to the pockets of the rental market suppliers or City staff's fat paychecks and up the Highway 80 corridor to where the big landowners have been profiting greatly from land development spurred by the push to the safe, livable suburbs and away from the Vallejo urban center where it is increasingly costly to live and do business. Gosh, if Vallejo was not so desperately poor, the Feds might stop sending all that money.


Yes, it is the right thing to take care of the disadvantaged amongst us. But Vallejo has been the place where other communities send the people they don't want. Where is the tipping point between helping the disadvantaged and running the middle class out? When we are over the line, there is no chance for building businesses (the solution du jour) because economic proformas don't factor hype.
Webmaster   |January.03.2008
That's all optional. You don't have to enter Website or Title of your comment. In fact if you leave the title off of your comment you'll see that the entire post will show up rather than just the title. No need to sign in for anything at all.
Joe Feller  - Chair     |January.03.2008
Hey all

Happy New Year and new format. This looks great and I hope that you continue to provide Vallejo with important information.

Happy New year all!
Joe
WaR  - HOW DOES THE SIGNUP WORK?   |January.03.2008
HOW DOES THE SIGNUP for SIGNIN WORK? ARE YOU NOW ASKING FOR A PERSONAL "WEBSITE" OR EMAIL address?
WaR  - NICE   |January.03.2008
NICE JOB GUYZ!!!!
The Editor     |January.02.2008
Welcome to The Daily Scream!!! Instead of sending an email go ahead and post your comment below with our spiffy new comments feature and we'll put up your words...BUT...this is not an open forum for racist, nasty, personal, homophobic, or otherwise offensive comments that do not fall under the category of intelligent discourse. Comments will be read before they are posted so posts will not be instantaneous. We will try to read and post comments at least twice a day. This feature is on a trial basis--if it works out it will become permanent. True vile pointless nastiness will be deleted.
We will try to be fair but remember--This is about promoting ideas not hatred. If you have any suggestions or comments please feel free to send them to vib.editor@gmail.com.
GCS   |January.02.2008
Bob,

I work in public safety. And yes, there are an occassional stressful moments..most of these firefighters/public safety officers are happy to work holidays b/c of the overtime $$.

GCS
Write comment
Name:
 
:angry::0:confused::cheer:B):evil::silly::dry::lol::kiss::D:pinch:
:(:shock::X:side::):P:unsure::woohoo::huh::whistle:;):s
 
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."
 
[ Back ]
  1. pintarbersamamedan.org
  2. https://pintarbersamamanado.org
  3. https://pintarbersamasorong.org/dana
  4. HK LOTTO
  5. GenerasiTOGEL
  6. TOGEL
  7. TOGEL HONGKONG
  8. TOGEL
  9. https://elk-mountain.com/
  10. data sdy