March 2009 

Post your comment below 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.

True vile pointless nastiness will be deleted.  We will try to be fair but remember--This is about promoting ideas not hatred.

Your comments will NEVER be removed or altered to promote an agenda--political or otherwise

          Please, Don't Feed The Trolls-- Help Keep This Blog Productive

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

Comments

Add New Search RSS

ANONYMOUS   |March.08.2009 ON FIRE: You are who I talk about?? How do I know you are not the Troll, you are always complaining about. At least Street Sweeper offers dialoge, all you offer is to tell people who disagree with you to go back to the TH (I for one have never even be on that site, as I like this one), but then again you have your opinion and as everyone cn tell cannot stand anyone that doesn't have your same outlook, which is just to speak for the masses and never come out publically from under your rock.....You don't have to respond, because we all know you answer..."go back to the TimesHorrid". you are so original, too bad you can't keep a real job......Peace

Streetsweeper   |March.08.2009 On Fire, your right the public will take the brunt of what's to come and they will not happy. Most of the public in town do not pay attention to what's going on untill they are effected and they will be. What a nasty mess.

VHS   |March.08.2009 I understand the cost sharing logic and I agree with the concept. To perfect it, however, the calculation should include a weighting factor (perhaps it does). It seems to me that the IBEW labor force is paid a very average wage and if comparables were done to other cities I bet our IBEW would come out as average. perhaps the medical benefit would be slightly higher than average? The weighting coefficient might be as low as .1

On Fire   |March.08.2009 Street Sweeper, if only that were true. If only we could hold all of the players accountable. It will not be those in power, but the citizens that will have hell to pay.

Streetsweeper   |March.08.2009 Just looking for the truth and everyone has their own spin on it. The fact is this city is coming apart and nobody is doing anything but making excuses and blaming others. It's sad but Vallejo is not even close to rock bottom yet. The closer we get the more the public will lash out. For those in power will have hell to pay.

On Fire   |March.08.2009 Since so many of the trolls like signing on as Anonymous, I'd like to know how "union brother" knows whose opinions are which? The numerous "anono" posts can all be from the same person, simply trying to start confusion. The information on the bankruptcy and water rate issues have been discussed here at some length so if anyone is confused, it appears to be "anono" posts. Street Sweeper is an adult and quite capable of thinking for himself. He doesn't need a provocateur coming here and trying to put a wedge in the free flow of conversation. Anono, you appear to be confused and think you are over at the horrid where everyone who dare speaks a variance of opinion, gets labeled as a hater and a VIB'er. Slink on back to your side of the world.

ANONYMOUS   |March.08.2009 STREET SWEEPER: WHO indentified the PSU as the problem?? The problem has been that there has been no economic developement in this City for over 16 years. I am not blaming IBEW or CAMP, I only gave the reason for the nexus as explained by Mr. Stout and Mr. Soley. Now if you can show me where you are an expert in BK Law, then you may have some creditability, but until then, you are only a citizen that is offering YOUR opinion and as well meaning as you may be, do not get caught up in these bloggers opinions, because that is all they are. If the VIB'ers want to trust Stout, Soley and Tanner in the opinions they agree with, then they must agree with them when they don't like what they say. I can tell you are a hard working member of our local labor force, but don't let these writings give you any false sense of knowledge. BLOGS are BLOGS and it only means that you are able to offer your opinion without facts or identifying yourself. Remember you don't have any true friends over here, because you are ONE of THEM and we overhere are doing everything we can to turn you against each other. With your comments, I think our plan is working....Peace Union Brother..

Streetsweeper   |March.08.2009 Problem

Streetsweeper   |March.08.2009 Well, the PSU was identified as the propblem because they are 75 or 80% of the general fund while IBEW is about 10%. Next the city through us under the buss with CAMP to get peanuts. On the money transfer out of the water fund I just don't understand how it's not legal to do it for a loan to the general fund but it's ok for legal fees that relate to the general fund. They going to raid the housing fund to?

VHS   |March.08.2009 You know Streetsweeper, what you said is a brilliant observation. If the union that represents the labor force in enterprise funds/activities is involved in any way with the root cause of bankruptcy then a case can be made (has been made) for a cost sharing across the set of enterprise fund employees. My question to you is this: How did IBEW become entangled in the bankruptcy case? Did your leadership contribute money to the legal funds of the safety unions or did the city somehow involve you in the case? Its clearly in the best interest of the city to distribute the bankruptcy costs across the enterprise funds.

Streetsweeper   |March.08.2009 Why should the waterfund have to pay for a issue with the general fund? The waterfund is not bankrupt it is the general fund. Maybe they need the IBEW in this mess so they can raid the waterfund for legal fees. Then we allcan have our water bills increased.

ANON 2   |March.08.2009 CURIOUS.....if you had done any homework (but why start now???), you would have known tha Boex bought the Casa De about 15 years after the Handlerlys had sold the property to somebody who had turned it into a bar and flop house....Mr Boex, than came in and completely restored it to a national award winning first of its kind Senior Citizens Complex that served our Seniors extremely well until a couple of years ago, when the City would not let him improve it because it was in an historical zone???? That is when he decided to sell it, as well as he had health problems. Mr. Boex was a angel to all of the Seniors Citizens in Vallejo and they will all attest to that. To throw dirt on one of Vallejo's finest, really shows how little you know. Another fact, Mr. Boex came to Vallejo in 1973, built Hillcrest Park, for first time homeowners (and still successful today) then revitalized the Casa De. He has never lived in Vallejo, even though spent his money here, was never a GOB (whatever that means)but sincerely believed in this community. So before you run your mouth off on things you know nothing about, get your facts straight.....

ANONYMOUS   |March.08.2009 If you guys would listen to experts, instead of yourselves, you would have know that Mr. Stout, explained why they were using $500,000 from the water fund to help pay for BK, because there is a nexus between the employees of CAMP & IBEW who are working in the water department and the labor contracts, that are part of the BK claim. For some of you a NEXUS is the connection between the two issues. I hope that clears up some of your continual ramblings. now just go back to blaming the PSU's for everything, at least in those arguments don't need to be supported by facts????.....Peace

Anonymous   |March.08.2009 Pri, The Supreme Court frequently overturns various state referendums (218 is a referendum). While they may or may not allow water funds to be used, it is possible. Now go back to your river

Streetsweeper   |March.08.2009 Ok, then who is going to jail for transfering half a million out of the water fund to help pay legal fees for bankruptcy?

Pyriphlegethon   |March.08.2009 Anonymous says Federal law trumps state law and that the $138 million in the water fund reserve can be shifted to the GF. Anonymous needs to study up on Chapter 9 bankruptcy before posting such fantasy. He/she obviously does not understand our US Constitution, in particular the tenth amendment and its relationship to Chapter 9. The federal government cannot overrule what voters in states have determined through legislation. Prop 218 stopped CA cities from raiding other funds to shore up general funds and the Feds have NO power to overrule this. The federal government DOES NOT have the power to shift water funds to the general fund, and this is upheld by none other than our US Constitution. Sorry PSUs, but as some other poster said previously, if this was even tried, the Jarvis/Taxpayer groups will fight against it tooth and nail because it will be precedent setting. And, if the Feds actually succeeded in this (impossible...)the constitution should be thrown in the garbage...

curious   |March.08.2009 The truth about redevelopment abuse! http://www.coalitionforredevelopmentreform.org/references/morrreport.php

curious   |March.08.2009 Vallejo's decline began 40 years ago in the late 1960's when the GOBs got wind of the gobs of money to be made in the Redevelopment/subsidized housing world. They tore down 24 blocks of downtown buildings including a 6 story first class hotel and ran off the owners of the grand Casa de Vallejo which ended up in the hands of GOB Hal Boex who converted it to subsidized housing in the mid 1970's. Do you think that the obscene salaries paid to the PSUs is hush money so they don't complain that redevelopment sucks money out of the general fund?

Waz up wid dat?   |March.08.2009 Are redevelopment funds one of the real reasons that Triad never could get started in our downtown? Once an area is considered "blighted" and starts receiving funds, property owners dont want to stop receiving the funds, so they make sure the area remains "blighted?" Is this one of the reasons There was resistance from some of the property owners of some of the commercial buildings downtown who said there would be no parking and the Triad project should be moved elsewhere? Property owners do not want improvements made by private or corporate investors, they want redevelopment funds used so they can make sure the section 8 vouchers keep rolling in? Blight is better for business? BTW, Mr. Buck Kamphausen owns a lot on Virginia St. just West of Gracies, it has has graffiti on the wall for at least a year. Surrounding businesses have tried to get Kamphausen to remove the graffiti, calls to the city get you no where as you may be told Mr. Kamphausen owns that property, he has friends in the City, we dont like to bother him... Lots like Buck is doing his part at preserving "blight."

VHS   |March.08.2009 Good post Waz, I too am a believer that redevelopment is a four letter word. Most of the old times Vallejoans I associate with remember the beginning of the end as loss of the shopping mall to Fairfield. At that time, we viewed malls as magical places and we were so impressed with the experience of shopping them we abandoned the downtown. I dont know for sure but I think the section 8 demographic started to come on line perhaps 10 years after the mall episode.

PSU Watch   |March.07.2009 Yes, Helper, you're on the wrong site. Go to www.timesheraldonline.com to be with people who think and act like you.

VIB Helper   |March.07.2009 Did I miss something? Are you suggesting the failures are attributed to something other than the fire fighter and police officers? Maybe I'm on the wrong site. Isn't this the VIB. I'm just trying to help

PSU Watch   |March.07.2009 VIB Helper, we don't just blame you (the PSUs) for Vallejo's problems, so don't worry your tiny little brain about it. We know it's also the fault of the GOBs and your bought-and-paid-for City Council members. And let's not forget our newest and most pitiful threat, the huge ego of The Great and Powerful Oz.

Truth Teller   |March.07.2009 Hey VIB Helper, is that like Hamburger Helper? You know the MSG & sugar laden crap that mixes with cheap, greasy hamburger meat for the white trash crowd? Yeah, I thought so. You don't belong here. Go suck up to your brethren, the over paid, low IQ set in the soiled sandbox a.k.a. Topix. K?

On Fire   |March.07.2009 VIB helper = Troll. Slow at the horrid now, so they will be slinking over to feed.

VIB Helper   |March.07.2009 Waz, Please stop placing the blame of failures of Vallejo on anything other than the PSU. You need to go back to the Times Horrid. HERE the entire blame of the failed city lies on the fire fighters and police officers who serve the city every day. Anything else is just NONSENSE!!!

Waz up wid dat   |March.07.2009 Today I had the chance to talk to several long time Vallejeons. They all expressed how growing up in Vallejo was great and how fantasic the down town area was for shopping and dining. Most of these people were in their early to mid 60's. I asked all of the, so when did you start seeing the decline, they equated it to the closing of Mare Island which was a large source of money pouring into the Vallejo economy. They tell me that when people found out Mare Island was closing they started selling off all their homes cheap. The Fed's also sold transfer'ed Mare Island folks homes very cheap which also depressed the market. Lots of outside investors started buying up the cheap properties and filled them with section 8 housing. Yep, thats right they figured out how to replace the funds from Mare Island with "other" funds from the Feds. Now I am told that everytime we use Redevelopment funds, we have to use 25% of the money for low income housing. Redevelopment funds are suppose to help blighted areas, but once an area is designated a "blighted area" the blight never goes away, and you have to throw more redevelopment funds at it. Of course VHA gets an admin fee (so I am told)a percent of the funds they use. So it is in the best interest of all parties who benefit from Federal Funds to make sure the blight never goes away. So, what if we discouraged the use of Redevelopment funds, and focued on private investors? No use of redevelopment funds = no more additional required section 8 housing (we have more than our share anyway.) Does anyone know how to reduce the use of Redevelopment funds by the City? Little Old Lady can you help us on this one? If it took a 150 year old city 20 years to really hit the skids, we certainly can redeem it, and not by relying on our city and its "blight programs." Viva Vallejo!

silasbarnabe   |March.07.2009 Anony, You might be correct about Federal Law "preempting" State laws if there was a Federal law pertaining to enterprise funds. Without a specific law or precedence I doubt the court of appeals with no precedence or no exisisting federal law about enterprise funds decide to allow Vallejo to balance its budget with enterprise monies. Like was said before this is a Henke pipe dream, and if the BK is allowed to stand, and with the City agreeing to contracts it can't afford, and little hope of convincing voters to accept tax increases I wonder if the VPOA contract won't wind right back at the capable hands of judge McManus.

Anonymous   |March.07.2009 It all sounds like a Red Herring, Henke fanatasy, or both. Don't see it happening!

Anonymous   |March.07.2009 Silias, Federal law trumps state law. There fight would not be with the PSU or the City of Vallejo at all. It would be with the 9th Circuit or possibbly with the US Supreme Court. Vallejo or its PSU would not even be part of the fight. The City used Federal BK laws to trump the state law requiring the City to honor existing MOUS.

silasbarnabe   |March.07.2009 Anony, If the 9th circuit court of appeals chose to specifically state that enterprise funds could be used to "balance" general fund deficits, I would expect a lot of new prop 218 lawsuits and many $$$ being spent from the Jarvis-Gann taxpayers association. I don't think the PSU's want to add them to the list of enemies with deep pockets. That would take this legal battle out of the hands of Ozzy and the funded bumbling four.

ANONYMOUS   |March.07.2009 If the judge rules the way Anon predicts, we can always blame the fund four and the mayor for not doing a better job of proving that they were bankrupt, regardless of what Tanner and Stout told them....remmeber no matter what comes from Judge McManus, we must continue to blame them and continue to say how Schivley would have handled it better......

Anonymous   |March.07.2009 In a few weeks the 9th Circuit will rule the $138 million in the water fund reserve can be used to bolster the general fund and the City is not Bankrupt. Then what?

Big City   |March.07.2009 Folks, you're confusing things regarding what you pay for water service. The amount you pay is determined by TWO things: the amount of water you use AND the rate per unit volume established by the city. Obviously, different customers use different amounts of water. Someone who uses a lot of water is going to pay a lot more than someone who uses very little. What you need to look at is the WATER RATE PER UNIT VOLUME and compare that to other water supplying entities to see where Vallejo is at. If that rate is exceptionally high compared to others, it strongly implies the kind of "shenanigans" I described previously. Even if it's not way out of line, that does not mean the city hasn't found ways to transfer the money to the general fund. It just means that they have not been more egregious in this effort than other cities. "Pirating" money from the special funds to the general fund is not unique to Vallejo; other cities are fast at work at it, too. Also, you really can't use the 2001 Black and Veatch rate study. It's too old now. You need something a lot more current since a lot of "shenanigans" have likely occurred in the past 8 years. Black and Veatch used to do one of these studies about every year but I don't know if they still do, or not. Remember, though, it's the RATE PER UNIT VOLUME that you need to compare NOT the bottom line on your water bill. The unit volume is often expressed in CCF (i.e. 100 cubic feet) units. This can be converted to gallons, if necessary for comparison purposes, by multiplying the CCF units by 748.

Unbelievable   |March.07.2009 OnFire - Well said, let's move on...

Streetsweeper   |March.07.2009 If the water fund has moved $500,000 into the general fund and will most likely move more to help pay the legal fees of bankruptcy, does this mean these rate hikes will be used by the water dept to recoupe this money? If the general fund will be $12,000,000 in the hole next year the money to pay legal fees has to come from somewhere right?

ANONYMOUS   |March.07.2009 Curios...you give a strong arguement for ghe "GOB'S BEING THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM"..by your continual ramblings on things you don't have a clue about. At least ON FIRE, tells it the way it is. If you had any knowledge you would know that any increase in the water rates, does NOT benefit the PSU's. The increase does NOT go to the general fund, but to the Water Fund, which is an untouchable account that the Water Superintendant so clearly explained the other night. I realize you are going to come back with your typical "troll" arguement, but again you do not know what you are talking about. I have been a regular here before you ever figured how to get on. In fact I orignally was in favor of what this site was pretty forward, but here lately with contributors like yourself, I am starting to think that maybe the funded four and Ossie maybe on the right track...Oh will, you probably won't understand what I just said, but I am pretty sure others will. If you will notice,over the past few weeks, more and more VIB'ers are starting to see through your rantings...Peace

curious   |March.07.2009 on fire is right on. This water rate chatter looks like it is being fed by trolls. After all, the City's stated solution to the financial problem of paying the PSU's more than we have incoming is to just get more money out of the citizens without going for a tax increase vote because that would lose. So "fees" are the answer. Higher rates, more "late fees" for payments not actually late, anything. That is what we have to be vigilant about. Watch your bill, watch those little flyers in your bill and make sure you send your objections in writing for any new fees proposed in the fine print. They count any non response as a vote for the increases. The real reason for the smoke screen is that the GOBs and PSUs are working together to get rid of any possibility of a trained, competent, intellegent and ethical City Manager who might actually work for the betterment of Vallejo and its citizens. They have been able to keep the City enslaved through paid elected officials that hire city managers who do what they are told and who pass that direction on to city staff. If Tanner could get hired, then the risk to the system of another competent person being in that spot is very high. Better for them to have an Ozby or Hermie or Bartee as a figurehead to keep the extractive system cooking along. Like Enron, the GOBs think they are the "smartest guys in the room".

VHS   |March.07.2009 Does anyone know if Linda Seifert has commented on the water rate issue? As a resident of Green Valley and someone who has been very successful in life, I hope Linda opposes any rate increase on the poorer residents of Vallejo in order to reduce the Green Valley rates. This would be another subsidy for the rich.

Well,   |March.07.2009 I guess you will have to shut up and pay the bill then or the city will shut it off. You can B&M about current rates and service charges which are too high, but they are not going to change. The current proposal is wrong and should have people ****ed off enough to say NO. The Green Valley resident charges should have no impact on Vallejo's in anyway. They chose the service and wanted it. They chose to live where they do and none of those house up there are comparable to the shacks here in Vallejo. None.

silasbarnabe   |March.07.2009 Sorry again Vallejo employee, My household has 3 people, the average would be 300 gallons per person per day. Did you notice that watering a lawn averaged 300 gallons? To reduce the bill you are in effect saying no lawns, no gardens, and no washing cars. Is that the PSU's vision for this City? You can't blame the user for average usage for a higher bill for the same service as other cities. The letter to our friends has already been sent.

Anonymous   |March.06.2009 Strong mayor in Vallejo is a joke. All I have to think of is Hermie Sunga. Enough said.

On Fire   |March.06.2009 Okay, is there a point to all of this discussion about water rates. If you are dissatisfied with your rates, or the possibility of your rates going up, then shouldn't the complaint go the the water dept? If your satisfied with what your being charged, and don't mind spending a little more, then you're off the hook and don't need to send anything in. If Silas wants to complain about his bill and feels that he is being charged with rates that are excessive, he can complain all he wants to. It's his bill for christ sake. I pay about $9 a billing cycle for water. I also pay $33.00 for service charges. I suppose I can wash my dogs more often, let the water run longer on my lawn (when it dries out)and keep my car cleaner. Then the city won't need raise my rates since I now use more water and thereby getting rid of the need for any increases! We are missing the point here, get your letters of complaint to the water dept. if you feel like objecting. But let's move on. It's beginning to smell like Troll toes here and we should check for toe jam that will distract us from everything else that may be needing attention. Just my opinion but, the thought of ozzy becoming strong mayor makes my stomach ill. We need people to sign up to be on the Charter Review committee. Something tells me that the stench from the GOBs will be all over that committee. First prerogative? Changing the charter to put in a strong mayor. He will push to have it by June, giving him time to put it on the Nov. ballot. Consider the cost first for the likes of ozzy to run the city! I don't think so!

Unbelievable   |March.06.2009 Oh Mr or Ms Illiterate, I said I DID NOT WANT a rate increase, and I said I didn't feel MY RATE was too high. I did a little research to show someone they needed to conserve and made what I thought was a compelling argument. Worse, I have some inside information and now I must be the city manager or something... that is quite a pathetic conclusion, don't you think? You are all so caught up in this paranoia that a person can't even share some information, even when it is constructive. His bill is high, he can reduce it but refuses to, he just says everyones' rates are too high, then gives no figures to back it up. You can't win an argument based on feelings. According to the survey referenced on Antioch's website, my rates are just fine. That is my opinion. If I was him, I would reduce my usage. I hope he continues to use a lot, it keeps my rate lower. This is not a winnable argument, and it has gotten very old. I did not insult the ratepayers, but I just insulted you, did you even notice? I probably lost you on the 5th word...

yeah, that's right   |March.06.2009 insult the rate payers: that'll get you your rate increase. Until the citizens feel that their money is being administered correctly, and not being wasted on extravagant salaries (oh, yes water dept too) you will not prevail, even if the rate hike is 'needed' by your standards. The rest of the City is mismanaged and wasteful. Why should Water be any different? Less arrogance, please.

You know,   |March.06.2009 if you had a water leak and show that you had it fixed, you can get an adjustment on your high bill. I think they do an average. They usually verify the leak being fixed by coming out and monitoring your meter for about 5 mins after assuring that all house valves, etc are off. It's is true, however, that some people, like Silas, love to bitch anything.

Anonymous   |March.06.2009 From The City Of Antioch website, Note that it is from 2001: "According to the California Water Charge Survey - 2001, published by Black & Veatch, the current average water bill for residential service in Antioch is $32.75. For comparison purposes, the survey indicates that Pittsburg's monthly average is $37.63, Concord's monthly average is $46.80, Brentwood's monthly average is $29.50 and Oakley's monthly average is $46.15." Here is a link concerning Antioch: http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/your-water/CA10-MG052308.doc EBMUD: http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_11628694?source=rss The average customer has reduced usage since the last rate hike, less water used = rates must increase - it is a catch 22.

Unbelievable   |March.06.2009 I tried to help you see the light but alas, I have wasted my time. From the site you just quoted: "How much water do you use? An average California household uses between one half-acre foot and one-acre foot of water each year. Personal water use is highest in central valley cities, where a family may use as much as 300 gallons of water per person each day. Water use is as low as 50 gallons per person per day in some water-conserving coastal cities, such as San Francisco or Monterey." We are not in central valley, you admitted to 600 Gal/day usage, you use twice as much as someone in Stockton, their use is due to the heat. You ask questions and I give answers, it is irrelevant if you don't like the answers, water quality is not the only issue, the state of the system is, you act like it is brand new and no one has to pay for it. You seem to be angry that the average household may pay a little more for water, I don't know if that is true as I am only familiar with the rate I pay. I throw up my hands, you argue to argue and keep bringing up the PSU's, which has absolutely nothing to do with this subject. You are acting like a pathetic, petulant child. And you still waste water...

silasbarnabe   |March.06.2009 Happy hour must be pouring cheap well drinks tonight for the PSU. It is telling that we have city employees posting here consistently telling us how little they read this site. It is also equally telling that you have to resort to out of the area data to determine standards for excessive water usage. I suppose next you will be comparing Bay Area average water usage to Saudi Arabia to make your claim look better. For water usage in the Non Coastal Bay Area the average is about 280 gallons per capita per day sorry about that, but it is reality. http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/publications/water_resources/html/water_use_facts So you do not think your water fee is excessive? Why is it that in other municipalities where they have engineers providing the same services that their water bills are lower? I keep hearing from City employees including PSU's and their apologist that we are getting better quality than other Cities but I do not think we do for the money we pay. Maybe one day Vallejo City workers will be able to convince others besides themselves ,their families, and other apologists that Vallejo has provided extraordinary service for the money, but I wish you and other City employees luck with that because you have a long hard and bumpy uphill battle to prove that whopper.

NBR   |March.06.2009 Their lack of knowledge concerning water usage may be exceeded by the lack of knowledge concerning PS.

Unbelievable   |March.06.2009 Wow, you guys don't even know what excessive usage is, experience a real drought and see how excessive your usage is when they ration it and you feel the levied fines... That website only shows usage for different activities, it DOESN'T SAY flushing the toilet 40 times a day or taking 2 baths and 65 showers a day is normal or wasteful. Silas only VERIFIED, that his usage is billed properly because he admitted he used that much water, and it IS excessive. It is noted that some of you are silent, and some are sticking up for him, but none of you are stating your usage, because the average residential customer does NOT use 600 Gallons per day and world as it was discovered in 1492 is not flat, no matter how many of the European population believed it was. Yes, the city gets money from the other funds, vehicle money (it would be much cheaper to lease) overcharges on phone bills, landscape maintenance, you name it. So what, my water bill is not excessive to me because I don't treat it like it should be free. Continue to use your 600 gallons per day and I will use my 150. I used an extra 25 units one billing cycle due to a faulty inlet valve and could have bought at least 6 new valves for what that cost me extra, ergo, I will not let that go again. I am already angry about my garbage bill and my sewer bill, and I would probably be mad about water if I used as much as Silas regularly does, but I don't, and I feel absolutely no sympathy. My family still washes dishes, the cars, the dog, ourselves, our clothes, and fills the pool and jacuzzi. I have an efficient dishwasher, clothes washer, and toilets. My shower heads are the new ones with flow restrictors. Just for reference (it was the only link I could find): http://www.enterprisecdd.org/faq.htm#q1 It seems pretty accurate for my situation, Silas may have a lot more family members... Why is there a fee for your connection? Because the system was engineered to provide a certain amount of water to your tap, your neighbor's tap, your fire hydrant, etc. It cost's a certain amount to pump and treat that water and maintain that system, that cost is different based on the size of your line because of the capacity needed to provide constant flow and pressure to each size. A resident with a 3/4 in line should NOT have to supplement his next door neighbor with the 6000 square foot house and a 2 inch line. I won't address why our charges get progressively higher as that was already covered earlier, we pay a little more, but it is better to get the quality of water we do than the crap Benicia, Napa, and American Canyon send out their taps. I really wish you luck finding resolution with your issue Silas with an answer you are willing to hear or accept, but I don't really believe you will ever find it... No, I am not Erik, I assume you are talking about the Water Superintendant, he wouldn't have gotten the facts wrong nor do I think he would ever bother to monitor this website. In addition, I NEVER said I agree with the rate increases for the residents of Vallejo, I DO NOT, they are twice the cost of living every year, and personnel costs are apparently dropping and may drop even more. I have never seen any indication that any of the city's management ever pays any attention to this website, nor does "most" of the council...

Anonymous   |March.06.2009 Yeah, but the majority can't say anymore that they inherited the problems and it isn't their fault. They've firmly took ownership of Vallejo's financial problems when they voted to give raises and free health care to employees when they should have been cutting salaries and making employees pay for health care.

Frozen Salary   |March.06.2009 Well, the word came down this week at my company. Salaries are "frozen" for at least a year. The good side is--no layoffs. And to think our city council majority gave away guaranteed 7% raises each year for the next two years to our Unions.Keep it up voting block! We will be in BK Court again in two years.

Firebug   |March.06.2009 Anony, read the posts man. He did man up and did all the research to prove that his usage wasn't that high compared to the rates. Conclusion: Vallejo's water rates are high even before the next proposed raise.

What does   |March.06.2009 being a "PSU apologist" have to do with figuring out why your bill is so high? Go down to city hall and ask the water billing supervisor, Cindy, to have your service checked. You are being lazy and uninformed. Man up. It sounds like you are being disingenuous and petty. It is not us or them. It's you and them.

Big City   |March.06.2009 I'm not familiar with the Vallejo water rates or, even, if the water in Vallejo is supplied by a city entity. However, if the rates are, indeed, high and if the water is supplied by a city entity, I can almost guarantee you why. In that case, I'd STRONGLY SUSPECT that the city has found "creative" ways to "pirate" funds out of the water enterprise fund and into the general fund to help "feed the public safety monster". If someone looks closely, I'll bet you'll find that they've done the same thing with just about every other LEGALLY RESTRICTED special purpose fund. You see, the city is unable to establish new taxes or raise current ones without a public vote approving same under the provisions of Proposition 13 and Proposition 218. However, they can raise "fees" and "service charges" for certain services such as water, sewer, and some others. So, what they do is to UTTERLY ABUSE this ability. They find "creative ways" and "absurd nexus" between fee and service charge-supported funds and the general fund. Then, they move money from the special funds to the general fund. Of course, this then leaves the special funds short of money they need to provide the service which folks are PAYING FOR THROUGH THE SERVICE CHARGES. So, the whole process then repeats itself and the city raises the fees and service charges and finds more "creative way" to transfer them to the general fund. I'm sure the City of Vallejo has done this repeatedly until they "ran the well dry". Very likely, this "treachery" was one of their first "approaches" to try to "sustain the unsustainable". When that "well was dry", they resorted to using reserves to "sustain the unsustainable". When reserves ran out, they did the only thing they had left----bankruptcy!

silasbarnabe   |March.06.2009 Sorry PSU apologists, but the average per capita daily water usage is about 280 gallons. My usage is only slightly higher than average, all toilets, faucets sprinklers tested. The only vice we have is a garden, and I wash our two vehicles once a month. I love how even when proven wrong excuses are still made for our sky high bills!

FIRE PITA   |March.06.2009 Your consumption is high because you either use that amount of water or you have a leak. If you have a toilet that runs, where you have to jiggle the handle all the time, that uses an enormous amount of water. The sort of consumption also puts you at a higher rate for using so much. I average about 14cf per billing cycle about $50 which I think is too high, too. Why do we need fee increase when we are billed a so-called service charge? Why? Because the city is run so poorly, time is unaccounted for and its top heavy. With everyone suffering, the City just keeps on ticking.

Anonymous   |March.05.2009 The reason our rates are higher than say Antioch is probably because of the distribution costs, we have ample supply but have to pump it a long way to get it here. Our water quality is likely higher because we get so much of our water from Beryessa. Our infrastructure degraded for years as nothing was done and the general fund raided all the money out of the water fund coffers, prop 218 stopped that but the years of neglect took their toll, the motorcycle shop on Couch street has been flooded three times in the last 4 or 5 years. There are projects that must be completed and our bond rating is in the toilet, costing the water department even more money for interest. I heard if half of the water customers write in to complain about the new rates, they will not happen. I believe we'll pay now or pay later. Our sewer rates are too high but no one complains about that, the city council IS the board of directors for VSFCD.

Unbelievable   |March.05.2009 First I must apologize that I was wrong in that a unit is only 100 Cu-Ft. That being said, you still use a LOT of water. I could fill 27 15 foot doughboy pools with that much water. I grew up in the country and we had to haul our water from a city facility where we could buy it, my mother still does to this day, it costs 75 cents for 250 gallons. We never used more than 2000 gallons a month as we would fill our 1000 gallons cistern every 2 weeks, this was with a family of 6. You are using an incredible 4000 gallons a week and keep asking the same stupid question, "Why are Vallejo's waterbills so high?", let me rephrase this properly for you, "Why is my waterbill so high?". BECAUSE YOU USE A CRAPLOAD OF IT!!!!!!!!!!!! NO, you don't pay 3.10 a unit, that is average, you pay 2.06 per unit for the first 22 units and 3.53 per unit after that. Yes, bright guy, you are penalized for excessive usage just like PG&E does to you for both electricity and gas. That doesn't mean there isn't a leak between your meter and your house, maybe you don't waste water intentionally, but once that line exits the meter, the maintenance of and integrity of that line is yours, get it fixed, or keep paying the bill. I would refrain from calling someone a PSU apologist just because you use lots of water and have to pay for it, at least you are getting something for your money, unlike all the other taxes we pay that fill VPOA and IAFF pockets. If by this time you still don't get it, then you are just simple, hopeless and will never get a clue...

NBR   |March.05.2009 ANONYMOUS |March.05.2009 "It looks like we may have found a good firechief finally. NBR's knowledge and ideas seem fantastic. I am assuming he has experience within the department to make those suggestions." Thank you for the vote of confidence. However, you confuse my observations with "suggestions" and "ideas". Because something is "doable" doesn't make it smart. Setting the staffing at those levels would only guarantee more OT to backfill for the injuries that would be inevitable. Try tapping the "Captain" for the chiefs job or CO. That level of staffing seems to fit the department profile they prefer. "National fire service staffing studies have shown that the effectiveness of a fire fighter to carry out tasks that are critical to saving lives, controlling fire, and preventing injuries to citizens and fire fighters are directly related to the staffing levels of their department." There are many advantages for adequate staffing levels for your emergency services to include:

silasbarnabe   |March.05.2009 To all the PSU apologists: According to the Vallejo water department bill 1 Unit = 100 cubic feet = 748 gallons of water. According to this water consumption calculator one can calulate their average use. http://www.csgnetwork.com/waterusagecalc According to my bill removing the $26 service charge with a total bill at $153 I used $127 worth of water and 46 units which is $3.10 per unit. According to the average household use of water 280 gallons per capita per day or 560 gallons for a household of two per day. 560 gallons X 60 days = 33600 gallons or 33600/748 = 44.91 units for 2 months. My bill showed me at slightly above the 44.91 unit average at 46 units for 60 days. So back to the original question why in the PSU loving apologists butts are Vallejo's water bills so high?

Anonymous   |March.05.2009 That happened to a friend of mine with her power, but at an appartment complex. The meters were switched and they'd been paying each other's bill. When he didn't pay his bill her power got shut off. Everything got fixed, but it was a PIA. It happens sometimes. Doesn't make it suck any less.

VHS   |March.05.2009 Not quite anon, I should have given the preamble to the story. I was mindin my own GD business one afternoon and went to take a shower and I aint got no water. So I fumble around and finally discover my water was shut off at the street. Turns out that when the owner next door called in to cancel his service, he gave my address by mistake or they wrote down my address by mistake, who knows. At the time I thought it was just some new progressives pulling a prank in the neighborhood so I turned the water back on. After the whole billing episode I put all the pieces together and figured it out. So the bottom line is, if you dont like your neighbor call in a shut off notice on him and he'll have to go down and deal with the water dept.

ANONYMOUS   |March.05.2009 It looks like we may have found a good firechief finally. NBR's knowledge and ideas seem fantastic. I am assuming he has experience within the department to make those suggestions. I am just wondering if NBR a firefighter or a clerical or relative of such????? If not then why should their advice on how to man our fire stations????

Anon   |March.05.2009 VHS, let me see if I under stand you right. You were billed for 1920 and 1916? Or you were billed twice for 1920? Being able to bill for multiple address on one account is a basic thing billing systems must do. If you are lucky enough to own several homes in town you'd probably want a single bill. Doesn't excuse bad itemization on the bill though. Now billing someone twice for their own usage, that's messed up.

VHS   |March.05.2009 It pays to go down to the cashiers window and ask for an explanation of your water bill. I had a crazy experience with the water dept. about 3 years ago. My next door neighbor sold his home and a new family moved in. Somehow my street address 1920 was entered by mistake on the new account for the new people moving in next door at 1916. So the next bill arrived and it was double the normal amount. I thought maybe the grandkids were playing with the hose and goofing off during their summer stay with us but the bill continued for a few months at this elevated rate. Finally I went down and pestered the cashier and low and behold, my account was billed for twice for both addresses. This tells me there is a serious problem with the software system they use. I never could get an explanation on how in the world you could bill two addresses on one account. The water people were very friendly but I don't trust their software or their internal processes one bit.

NBR   |March.04.2009 Something to consider We have an Engine Company and a Truck company sitting in the same station. Rob Stout said Vallejo, under the current financial constraints, will probably be forced to close one station. So if the Truck company is so important to the operation of the FD maybe we need to consider eliminating an Engine Company and staffing that Fire House with the Truck Company. Considering further: Reducing to a total of 5 engine companies is doable. What that will mean is, on average, twice a day 4 out of 5 engines (+ the truck) will be responding to a fire call as per state law. That will leave one (1) engine to cover the entire city for the other 28 medical calls that happen on an average day. How fast that will wear out equipment and personnel is debatable, but it will take its toll which translates into much higher operating costs. But optimum operation isn't your focus.

UM   |March.04.2009 Erik, stop debating folks and go back to reading playboy.

Unbelievable   |March.04.2009 There is only the Service charge based on meter size which I discussed below and a water usage or consumption charge, unless you don't live in Vallejo. Hiddenbrooke and/or Mare Island residents may pay more but I didn't see any extras pertaining to them in the new rate study posted on the city website.

Charlie   |March.04.2009 Do you have a leak? A toilet that runs? That's too high.

silasbarnabe   |March.04.2009 Like I said before my bill is $150 every two months not my water usage....what is wrong with this picture? Could it be too many fees attached to the bill?

Unbelievable   |March.04.2009 My mistake, $31 to $33 every two months! That is only $15.50 to $16.50 per month.

Unbelievable   |March.04.2009 By the way, if every customer used as much water as you, I last heard there were about 45000, we would need to increase our current pumping capacity and waterplant to at least 12 times it's current size. I was being generous with the 1000 gal/day figure, it is probably more like 300 to 400 on average, ergo, the average bill is likely 31 to 33 dollars per month... Funny how those of you with the most always complain the loudest.

Unbelievable   |March.04.2009 So, you say your bill is 150 every 2 months, at current rates we have: 1" service - $36 22000 Cu-Ft @ 2.06/Ccf = $45.32 $150-$36-$45.32=$68 => $68/$3.53=19000 Cu-Ft for a total of 41000 Cu-Ft or 306680 Gallons or 5111 Gal/Day or 3.54 Gal/Min 1 1/2" Service is $54.80 and a 2" service is $77.30 bi-monthly. A normal 3 person household should not exceed 1000 Gal/day and with a normal 1" service, would only pay $26.60 for the connection charge and 16.48 for 8 Units of water every two months, and that is worst case in the summer including watering the lawn and washing the car. If you are watering 2 acres of lawn with treated water, that is your problem. Bottom line, you are extremely wasteful of water and deserve to pay at least that much. Just be glad you don't live in Green Valley.

Anonymous   |March.04.2009 Something to consider We have an Engine Company and a Truck company sitting in the same station. Rob Stout said Vallejo, under the current financial constraints, will probably be forced to close one station. So if the Truck company is so important to the operation of the FD maybe we need to consider eliminating an Engine Company and staffing that Fire House with the Truck Company. There aren't many Fires to begin with and the Truck Company covers the entire city so it doesn't really matter where it's positioned as long as its close to the area that historically require its service. 95+% of the FD response is medical and the Truck Company would still be able to cover the area vacated by the Engine Company because they would occupy the same building. The savings would be the compensation for 3 FF's per shift (200K each) * 3 shifts. That equals 1,800,000 per year less from the general fund, with the same medical service that is currently provided.

On Fire   |March.04.2009 So if I am understanding the court's ruling, if the court rules in favor of the city, which means they are able to open the contracts and negotiate new ones for IAFF and IBEW, it doesn't go to binding arbitration and that any new CBA would have to be accepted by the City to move it forward? Is anyone else reading this differently? Because once the decision is rendered by the court, there would be no more delays by IAFF to try to put it back in the hands of BA?

Anonymous   |March.04.2009 Curious Thank you very much for your thoughts. I would love to tell you I completely understand what you're saying, including the implications, but I'm not sure I do... Any chance you can break it down further or provide links that I can research.

Firebug   |March.04.2009 NBR A plumber on stand by usually gets a "shift diferential" not full pay.

PSU Watch   |March.04.2009 http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1671238 "Sacramento cops give up raises to save 70 jobs." (I hope VPOA considers this in June when the city is forced to cut more police positions due to the $13 million budget deficit.) "...a spokesman with the firefighters' union told The Bee today that the labor organization was willing to discuss salary concessions with the city if two other issues under negotiation are cleared up first." (ahhhh, the old we'll negotiate if you solve all our issues first card. Havent the other FF unions learned from 1186 what not to do?)

Anon   |March.04.2009 Curious, I like your idea but you'll need to work down that argument into a sound bite to sell it to the public. An elevator pitch at longest. We can talk all we want here, lay out our arguments to a tee, but there will be so much smoke blown our way no one will cut through it. While I signed it, I thought the argument made against binding arbitration was weak. When you've got to explain a process before you get to the solution, you've already lost most your audience. Binding Arbitration: Let Vallejo decided what is best for our city, not a random arbitrator. General Plan: A plan that accounts for everyone General Law City: If it works for 95% of California towns, why not us?

PSU Watch   |March.04.2009 Ok, I can't let this one go unnoted. NBR, please, the Seafood Extravaganza and Medusa Run? Those weren't donations the FFs made to that event. They were on the city UBL dime. They went abalone diving on the city UBL dime. That's not volunteer time, that's a paid junket. Pretending otherwise is an insult to the taxpayers. Same goes for the Good Day Cafe fundraiser. Why the Good Day Cafe? How can you justify saving the Good Day Cafe and yet boycotting the GA Street Grill out of existence? Lame.

Curious   |March.04.2009 The new housing element will also have to take into account the cumulative effect of the Federal HUD subsidized housing program on listed and eligible historic "properties"...that includes historic districts. That's the law.

curious   |March.04.2009 OK� here�s the short answer to Miss� question. The only clear trade I know of was the City of Vallejo�s agreement with Lennar that they did not have to provide any �affordable/subsidized� housing over on Mare Island. (The definition of �affordable� for HUD is �subsidized�) Hal Boax (Casa de Vallejo) really wanted to convert the Marine Barracks to subsidized housing but got shut down by Lennar because all upper income housing has a much better market return. That�s why Lennar bulldozed all the little duplexes and replaced them with McMansions and why the City will not allow live/work rehabilitation of the historic industrial buildings. To dig out the real dirt on the horse trading would take insider squealing, much research and a Grand Jury investigation that was not compromised by GOBs. The long answer is that the system at work in the North Bay exhibits planning theory from the 1970�s that was discredited long ago and replaced by theories called �sustainable�, �smart growth� and �transit oriented development� which are now codified in General Plan guidance. The old sprawl theory forced new development onto agricultural lands and provided tools for Redevelopment of the abandoned urban centers. Redevelopment requires that 20% of the tax increment goes to the development of �affordable/subsidized� housing. Vallejo has a whole bunch of Redevelopment areas and we renewed the ones that recently sunsetted (because they are supposed to be limited only to a specific term of years). Redevelopment requires �blight� so the new developments don�t really have to provide �affordable/subsidized� housing. General Plan guidance (2003) calls for a coordinated regional response to housing needs through a Council of Governments. But in reality, Solano County just washes their hands to the messy issue of �subsidized� housing and defers to city jurisdictional decisions. That�s why you see Al DeSilva (Vallejo�s primary architect of Vallejo�s �subsidized� machine) and Terry Curtola at the mayoral recount in the County registrar�s office that fudged the results for Osby. GP guidance, Chapter 2 says �Geographic inequity describes a situation in which the burdens of undesirable land uses are concentrated in certain neighborhoods while the benefits are received elsewhere�. Vallejo has laws on the books regarding substandard housing, nuisances and maintenance requirements, but because the PSUs suck up the entire general fund in Vallejo, there is no money or political will to enforce them. GP law requires that a housing element be updated every 5 years which Vallejo is in the process of doing right now because staff is good at stepping on all the squares even if they forget stuff�like assessing the substandard rental units (required) that fall outside the mandated HUD criteria of �subsidized� and quality of life amenities like parks (required). So Vallejo gets a really skewed result�lots of poor people and fewer subsidized units than it appears we need. Remember �subsidized� housing is paid for by your tax dollars. Redevelopment Agencies move tax dollars from the General Fund to the Redevelopment Agency. The political pressure mounts to build more subsidized units, especially �Projects� (even though no enlightened jurisdiction does that anymore). Since Vallejo wants it and needs it, there is no pressure on the County to incorporate affordable units in all new developments (required). Wink, wink. What do we do? First, do not think that joining into the public participation process for the Housing Element update will do an iota of good. City staff already has their outcome determined and your participation would help provide the illusion of public process (required). More effective, begin the legal procedure to invalidate Vallejo�s General Plan for failure to address internal inconsistencies and address the various statutorily required issues in the housing element. This could result in a moratorium until an updated, legally defensible GP is created.

curious   |March.04.2009 fiddle, I will send this post to admin. Maybe it is too long.

curious   |March.04.2009 The only clear trade I know of was the City of Vallejo

curious   |March.04.2009 The short answer to Miss

curious   |March.04.2009 OK

NBR   |March.04.2009 Robert schussel |March.04.2009 NBR Many red herrings seem to swimming around. 1) Even Novato is often a push in the 30 minute range 2)Fire Fighters are being given an incentive for something they should possess. 3) On paper Vallejo does not require any education beyond High. The reality is that almost every Fire Fighter has an AA. An AA is the usual price of entry today so why pay them extra for what the market demands as entry level. 4) If your starting wage was $30 per hour your yearly wage would be $62,400 for a 40 hour job not the 85K .Remember Plumbers are not sleeping on the job and typically don't have a lot of down time . 1) Your opinion, I don't agree. I've driven it maybe 500+ times in my life (since 1963). It might be tedious and boring but its not that far or long. 2) An arguable point. However they should receive the same consideration as any other employee as well as their peers from surrounding communities (ie. Santa Rosa) Raising so much fuss over .0115 of the budget does not seem appropriate. 3) If you don't want to encourage higher education, that is your opinion. I don't agree with it. If you want to raise the bar (education required for entry level) that should be negotiated. If you prefer to negotiate vis-a-vis with bankruptcy as the vehicle for change, I don't agree with you. 4.) If a plumber was required to be on standby, he/she would get paid. If the plumber worked 56.6 hour a week he would get 16.6 of that time @ 1.5x normal rate (state law). A ff gets 3.6 of that time @ 1.5x hourly rate (state law). A $30 per hour plumber would gross $101,244 for the same hours worked whereas the ff grosses $91,104 ... State Law. If you prefer a volunteer FD .... fine. Lobby for it. Run for council on that platform. You can eliminate paying for the "down time'. I don't see that as an attractive advertisement for any businesses. I don't agree with that position.

Robert schussel   |March.04.2009 NBR Many red herrings seem to swimming around. 1) Even Novato is often a push in the 30 minute range 2)Fire Fighters are being given an incentive for something they should possess. 3) On paper Vallejo does not require any education beyond High. The reality is that almost every Fire Fighter has an AA. An AA is the usual price of entry today so why pay them extra for what the market demands as entry level. 4) If your starting wage was $30 per hour your yearly wage would be $62,400 for a 40 hour job not the 85K .Remember Plumbers are not sleeping on the job and typically don't have a lot of down time .

Anonymous   |March.04.2009 Now that is "interesting". Of course you wouldn't want to take away any educational incentive pay. But, if you want to encourage higher levels of education, beyond the city paying tuition reimbursement, why not require all Captains have at least an AA (or Bachelors) degree and all Assistant Chiefs have a four year degree. Vallejo pays top dollar and should expect nothing less. Other cities do it. Time to put the carrot in front of the horse as opposed to giving away what amounts to handouts. As it stands now the horse is so fat & happy he has little incentive to take advantage of a free education. Maybe increased education requirements will also help this group understand a financial statement, understand Vallejo's dire predicament, and help the Chief determine who actually deserves a promotion.

NBR   |March.04.2009 "NBR, can you honestly say you have ever wondered how Vallejo, a blue color town, with an average household income of $56,000 (that's not per person, that's per household) could afford to pay PSU members twice and three times the average household income?" No I have not. I guess they do it the same way Santa Rosa does it. Santa Rosa, California From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The median income for a household in the city is $50,931

WAZ UP WID DAT?   |March.04.2009 NBR, can you honestly say you have ever wondered how Vallejo, a blue color town, with an average household income of $56,000 (that's not per person, that's per household) could afford to pay PSU members twice and three times the average household income? That would make no sense. Yes, Santa Rosa may be able to afford such contracts, they are in the wine country and reap the benefits of a much more affluent tax base. Contra Costa also has a more affuent tax base to pull from. So why is the city with the least amount of tax base in the Bay Area paying the most? Our citizens get the least from their taxes, we pretty much just get PSU, no roads, parks, senior programs, libraries. We dont look pretty like Walnut Creek, dont have the arts like Santa Rosa, dont have the Opera house like Napa, we are busy using all our general funds on PSU contracts. Of course no one of stature would want to move here, who wants to move somewhere where no money is used on the citizens, it's used to pay PSU contracts. At least if fire and police lived here we could recoup some of our money via tax dollars... NBR dont pretend like you "dont get it" you do, you just want to distract us from the truth

NBR   |March.04.2009 No to NBR |March.03.2009 "..... You have absolutely lost touch with the world if you think plumbers and electricians and auto mechanics make 30/hr to start." I am easy to get along with. I'll restate the hourly salary. That after 25 years a plumber or electrician is making as much per hour (probably more) than a fire fighter with 25 years of service. side bar: I just paid $85 for 20 minutes of work by a plumber

NBR   |March.04.2009 silasbarnabe |March.04.2009 "NBR, It is laughable that the likes of someone like you or interesting for that matter would complain about repsonding to minutiae when that is your modus operandi for the questions you take issue with. If about $1,000,000 could help fund our non-profits properly and it is only .0115 of the general fund and it is not a fiscal issue why doesn't the firedepartment give it up?" I conceded the point to Robert (distance/time of SF and Petaluma) . You on the other hand dwell on debating minutiae. (here you are bringing it up again) I would not suggest PS give up the educational incentive pay for at least two reasons. 1) It is not unique to Vallejo PS and encouraging higher education both in recruiting and present employees, in my opinion, is a benefit to the city. Encouraging higher education, in my opinion, is always a benefit to the employer regardless of the education required for entry level position. 2) There is no guarantee that the money saved from eliminating the educational incentive will not go to another "Empress" effort. I'd much rather see the non-profits recieve donations from efforts like the Sea Food Extravaganza, Medusa Run or the Pancake Breakfast Benefit for the burned out 'Good Day Cafe'. The passing of the boot during the haircuts for the cancer patient. Particiaption as dealers in other organizations 'casino night' fund raisers. Community participaing in events whose proceeds go directly to GVRD or non-profits. I personally would never donate my time to fund the Empress. I'll pay to go watch a venue, but that is it.

silasbarnabe   |March.04.2009 NBR, It is laughable that the likes of someone like you or interesting for that matter would complain about repsonding to minutiae when that is your modus operandi for the questions you take issue with. Who said my water usage was $75? I said my bill was $75 for the month $150/2 billed every other month. If the water department would agree that the entire bill is only water usage I would be OK with that. If about $1,000,000 could help fund our non-profits properly and it is only .0115 of the general fund and it is not a fiscal issue why doesn't the firedepartment give it up?

NBR   |March.04.2009 No to NBR |March.03.2009 1 million is over 5% of the FD budget, It is the General Fund that is the topic of bankruptcy. How much the GF is affected by expenditures is the focus. If you are upset about an item that affects the GF by .0115 then your indignation is not fiscally related. It is personal. If the educational incentive was the same as Santa Rosa FD the affect on the GF would be .004, however, according to you it would still be completely unnecessary. Supply and demand, remove the incentives and pay them 25 to 30/hr and you will still have people applying in droves everytime there is an opening because no education is required and it is a fairly easy job most of the time. This subject was raised in response to "Waz up" reference to his/her cousin ((who admits he is overpaid???) their opinion that I do not share) and the VFD "luxurious" contract which is quite similar to Santa Rosa. Both FD have the same PERS 3%@50

WAZ UPS WID DAT?   |March.04.2009 The below statement is "to" NBR, not written by NBR.

NBR   |March.04.2009 What, the cities you state are so close to Vallejo for travel, San Francisco? Yes, 34 miles away, usually takes me an hour, Vacaville from Vallejo? It takes me 35 minutes now to get to Fairfield. Napa? It takes me 45 minutes to get from Vallejo down highway 29 to Napa. If you live in a rual area like Kurt Henke, it can take an hour in traffic. We are not fools, we know miles dont equal minutes when there is traffic involved. And yes, my fire captain cousin thinks they are over paid, he says fire fighting is not even in the top ten of most dangerous jobs. They have always encouraged locals from Santa Rosa apply for positions, and had an unwritten rule that upper mangement really wanted you to live within 15 minutes of the station. That would force you to live in Santa Rosa, where crossing over a busy overpass can take 15 minutes. My big complaint is that the majority of Fire dont live in Vallejo maybe only 10%. They not only dont live in our county, but in other counties, in fact two live in Santa Rosa, they may possibly lie as to the city they live in, as do many. So, if our 1186 all live elsewhere, we are subject to the outside politics of who they want to "pay for" and set in the city council. They dont really care what is going on with Vallejeons, they dont live here, so any politicing they do will be self serving. They dont have to ask "how will that affect my child, neighbor, people I go to church with?" Hey, and I dont blame the fire department for wanting to get paid when they do charity events. I dont usually leave my city (or county) and go to another city to help them with their charity work, I dont know those people, have nohting in common with them, so why should I care? Hey, Vallejo fire has not operated for the "greater good of the Vallejo citizen." It has operated for the good of 1186. It shows! 1186 has not been sitting around trying to figure out how to save the city money, or how to conserve. For years they have been trying to figure out ways to spend more money each year. It's evident in the use of UBL time. What did the San Francisco Chron call it "partying on the City's dime."

No to NBR   |March.03.2009 1 million is over 5% of the FD budget, it is not a red herring. It is also completely unnecessary. Supply and demand, remove the incentives and pay them 25 to 30/hr and you will still have people applying in droves everytime there is an opening because no education is required and it is a fairly easy job most of the time. The same with most positions that have a good salary and train you on the job. You have absolutely lost touch with the world if you think plumbers and electricians and auto mechanics make 30/hr to start. As a matter of fact, everything you say isn't researched or is just a obvious distortion of the truth, you are for all intents and purposes, just wasting our time whenever you post.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 NBR, we aren't here to serve you and answer your inane and disingenuous questions that are really meant to **** people off or annoy them. That's why you are a troll. That's why Streetsweeper isn't. I rarely agree with ol' Streetsweeper, but I enjoy the lively debate and honest exchange of opinions. Go back to the Horrid.

No Silas   |March.03.2009 He said his bill was 75, that means he used at least 20 units, that is 75 for two months, not per month, I didn't misread and you must not live here since you aren't familiar with the rates. And you really didn't read my post. That makes me question why you post so much...

On Fire   |March.03.2009 The move to have the city charter committee review general law vs charter city is going to be a plus. Get rid of the city charter in it's entirety and kiss binding arbitration goodbye! Yea Silas! Can't be any worse than being lead by people who wear the union label. Something to consider. It also would stop the city from raising taxes and fees to cover their bad decisions and stopping someone like ozzy from becoming a strong mayor. If not by committee, then by petition. It only takes 10 percent of the electorate. That's about 5300 signatures. It's worth looking into.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 What Fires?

NBR   |March.03.2009 "Fire fighting was much more dangerous years ago, when they were all volunteers and didn't feel the world owed them..." Could the good Dr. Schussel expalin the logic to this declaration? If it is more dangerous, because "volunteers" were fighting the fire, that is an excellent reason not to have volunteers fight fires. Of course unless you prefer putting individuals in 'harms way' as much as possible. If it is less dangerous to use paid ff's, I'd think you would choose the safest method.

NBR   |March.03.2009 Robert To avoid discussion over a point of minutiae I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and replace Petaluma and San Francisco with Novato (equi-distant from Santa Rosa and Vallejo) and Oakland. You point out that Vallejo educational incentive pay can be as high as 10%. You also point out that the job only requires an AA degree. Well, the same education requirement is true for Santa Rosa. IF a Vallejo FF is recieving a 10% ed. incentive, then they have a 4 year degree and not an AA degree only. Santa Rosa benefits description is not very detailed, a more accurate comparison is not possible. The eucationl incentive is a red herring argument. IF EVERY FD employee recieved the max incentive (which they don't) the total added cost would be less than $1m or less than .0115 of the General Fund. "How many entry level jobs do you know that only requires at most an AA degree starts at 80,000. Most people don't make that type of money without significant experience." First of all, there are plenty of entry level jobs that start at $30 per hour (approximate starting rate for a Vallejo FF) Plumbers and electricians and car mechanics start out at a higher rate. The value of labor has nothing to do with education level. If your $700,000 Hiddenbrooke home is burning, the $40 per hour ff is more valuable than your $200 and hour lawyer or CFO.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 DISTOL, did someone hold a gun to your head and force you to take the job? Fire fighting was much more dangerous years ago, when they were all volunteers and didn't feel the world owed them...

ANONYMOUS   |March.03.2009 Mr. Schussell: I noticed at tonights Council meeting, Mr. Garman referred to you as Dr.Schussell. Did I miss somthing or do you have a medical degree? or is it an Educational Doctrate? I have also heard that you are planning on running for City Council this November, I hope that is true, as we could use someone with your integrity, experience and knowledge up there during these tough times. I realize you are probably just testing the political waters with you apperances before the Council, but I would hope you announce soon, before some of those other clowns, that are considering it beat you to the punch..Good luck

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 Mr. Schussel, How many professions do you know that have a job outline that requires you to go into a burning building to save a life? Or a job that requires you face getting shot or killed by someone who is pointing a gun at you and has no regard for your life? These are inherent dangers that can't be avoided in these jobs. But then you'd be perfectly satisfied if the employees had at least Masters Degrees to hold these jobs, and these degrees would do what? Make the employee invincible to the dangers these jobs are exposed to? Please, you are far more intelligent than that, I hope.

Firebug   |March.03.2009 DISTOL, I can read the convulsions that you type, but I cannot read angry that you feel. Not the right medium, but I didn't expect you to grasp that. The proper emoticon for you would be every time you read something onfire posts.

Robert Schussel   |March.03.2009 NBR Without getting a speeding ticket there is no way that SF,Petaluma is within 30 minutes of Vallejo. Vallejo FF get up to 10% educational incentives and 10% for the Paramedic Cert. which essentally is now a requirement. You seemed to have left them out of your discussion. How many entry level jobs do you know that only requires at most an AA degree starts at 80,000. Most people don't make that type of money without significant experience.

NBR   |March.03.2009 Waz up wid dat? |March.03.2009 NBR's question to me was "how would you know the percentage of fire department that live in Santa Rosa, or in neighboring ciies." Good question, and my answer is, my cousin is a fire captain for Santa Rosa, so I have insider information. They use to be required to live within 15 minutes of their stations, but now its with in 30 minutes of their stations. 60% within 30 minutes? Is 30 minutes within "the area"? Vacaville is 30 minutes away from Vallejo FS. San Francisco is 30 minutes away from Vallejo FS. Petaluma is 30 minutes away from Vallejo FS (maybe 20 from Santa Rosa?). Pleasant Hill (Joe Tanner) is within 30 minutes of a Vallejo FS. Did your cousin say that 60% lived within the Santa Rosa city limit or within "the area"? Your cousin ought to be happy with his contract. They get a raise based on SF/Oak/San Jose CPI: "13.3.4 Effective July 5, 2009 there shall be a salary increase equal to 100% of the average bimonthly percentage change in the SF/OAK/SJ CPI-U for the months of February and April of the calendar year. Regardless of the foregoing, there shall be a minimum salary increase of two and one half percent (2.5%) and a maximum salary increase of five percent (5%). The Santa Rosa job description identical to Vallejo's http://ci.santarosa.ca.us/departments/hr/Pages/JobDescriptions.aspx They have a sick leave retirement buy back program. Santa Rosa City employs are eligible for up to 4% educational incentive pay. Fire employees designated as proficient in the Spanish language shall receive 3% additional pay. Their FF's make $6739 monthly before the specialty pays available. Your cousin is working under a contract very similar to Vallejo's, does he consider his contract "luxurious"? Do you?

On Fire   |March.03.2009 Truth Teller, I heard about these fliers around town too. Looks like there are more "VIB'er" types than some would like to acknowledge. I'm curious as to what the message was. Has anyone seen one? Is it about the taxes/fees?

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 Note to On Fire: don't read this, it will only distract you. Firebug, Did someone type your post for you and slipped in the word "angry" at the end without your knowledge? You need to go back and reread the "...convulsions when you get angry." Oh wait, you thought the reason I was convulsing was I was angry. Wrong. Convulsing with laughter, ever heard of it? And all because of you..............

On Fire   |March.04.2009 ditty, I'm sorry, did I use too many big words for you? I was trying to put as many pictures as possible so that you could follow along with the dialog. I know that you and your vile buddies are used to four letter words and talking about female anatomy, and your favorite, "VIB meltdown" nonsense, but for the juvenile level you are all functioning at, I try to keep it simple. We have already had many demonstrations of your "intellectual" skills, so I try not to dumb down too much so as not to further discouraged your growth and inhibit your participate in the civil and rational dialog. When you begin to show some maturity, maybe we will stop putting some of the pictures to add some additional language at your comprehension level. I like to encourage growth, even in the slowest child. Besides, the smiley faces help demonstrate that I don't take you seriously enough to have an adult conversation with you, or waste any emotion on your school yard silliness. Maybe you can have your 8 year old help you with your comprehension and communication skills in the future, but I wouldn't let her see how "uncle" acts in real life over at the t-h. You may damage her opinion of what is supposed to be her role model for an adult.

Get Real   |March.03.2009 BTW, just thought you would all like to know, the water in Napa and surrounding cites is putrid right now, mold and algae got in the North Bay Aquaduct and all the drinkin water has a smell of mold and mildew. The city says it's "ok" to drink... Good think Vallejo has many sources of water, we switched over to Lake Barressa a few days ago, oh well... "Let them drink wine."

Truth Teller   |March.03.2009 Starve the Troll... And back to more important news, I hear the (not so) Great Oz is buzzing like an angry (wanna) Bee because there are some flyers calling him out being disseminated. Dude, you won by 1 vote, you suck as Mayor, you are no leader and you've ****ed off your base with the Touro dis. Wanting to be strong mayor was bad enough but keep racking up those demerits! It's really getting fun now.

Missmarvelous   |March.03.2009 "Curious" lets expand on your statment earlier, because Vallejeons deserve to know. Are there actually developments in other Solano County cites in which developer's built a project and then dumped the affordable housing requirement in Vallejo? How about other counties, developers sneaking their affordable housing in Vallejo? Can you site a case, it's important that we understand the "shell games" being played. If we all know what is going on, we can arm ourselves. I think a lot of things have gotten by Vallejeons as they have been "secret handshake" deals. We all want to know!

Waz up wid dat?   |March.03.2009 NBR's question to me was "how would you know the percentage of fire department that live in Santa Rosa, or in neighboring ciies." Good question, and my answer is, my cousin is a fire captain for Santa Rosa, so I have insider information. They use to be required to live within 15 minutes of their stations, but now its with in 30 minutes of their stations. In case you are reading this NBR, my fire captain cousin has always brought up the fire contracts of local 1186. His local could never figure out how Vallejo could afford such luxurious contracts. Sonoma County has much retail and an affluent tax payer, both of which Vallejo does not have. As a side note: I also use to have two relatives that worked for San Francisco Fire, they lived in the Sierra Foothills, but lied and said they lived in the east bay (they also had a maximum distance they could live from the station.) They both retired at 55 years old and have started new careers.

Curious   |March.03.2009 Admin, we need some sort of filtering mechanism. All this red-herring baiting by the trolls is designed to take us off the scent of pure corruption and the identification of evil-doers that have remained hidden under the radar far far too long. The up tick in troll chatter looks like we are getting really close to the truth. Free speech does have limitations and the rules of civic engagement should apply at this site. I find troll chatter a distraction from the issues.

Firebug   |March.03.2009 NBR, According to you, you live in the Contra Costa Water District so you already know what 3 units cost, why ask questions that need not be asked? Or better yet that you can answer yourself.

Firebug   |March.03.2009 DISTOL, I said convulsions, I know it is difficult for you to understand the difference between anger and convulsions, and equally as difficult to make a relevant point.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 No, we don't have stupid made up polls that you can vote on over here, NBR. Go back to the Times Horrid for those silly games. Matter of fact, just go back to the Times Horrid where you belong period.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 Ditto to NBR.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 DISTOL is so focused on the emoticons and not the content: he's here trying to drag VIB down to the junior high school boy's level of infatuation with bodily function expletives that the Times Horrid and their PSU apologists are so well known for. DISTOL, you're becoming a bore. I have an emoticon for you but its not here: big yaaawwwnnnn.

NBR   |March.03.2009 On Fire |March.03.2009 It's really too bad that TROLLS are not self sustaining. They seem to always want to scurry from under their rocks, and try to find new areas to feed. The t-h soiled sand box, which they claim to be their own, has constant complaints if anyone makes a comment that challenges their ranting. And they try to banish everyone back to "VIB". "bansihed" ??? like "Anonymous |March.03.2009 Go back to the Times Horrid, NBR." and this "banishment" because: NBR |March.03.2009 "Over 60% of Santa Rosa Fire fighters live in the area," Where would you get such a detailed stat? What exactly is "the area"? Is "the area" defined as Sonoma County? or was it NBR |March.02.2009 silasbarnabe |March.02.2009 "I think you missed the significance of FB's post, why is it that 10 units costs $40 in Antioch, and $75 in Vallejo?" What would 3 units cost in Antioch and in Vallejo? They are intelligent questions hoping to encourage intelligent discourse. An honest answer won't support the allegation and insuation. The response to such questions is: " ....The t-h soiled sand box, which they claim to be their own, has constant complaints if anyone makes a comment that challenges their ranting. And they try to banish everyone back to "VIB". So back to your rock smelly TROLL. We have no use for you here....." Intelligent or juvenile???? The honest vote is juvenile.

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 On Fire, The only person I know that uses little emoticons as much as you is my 8 year old niece. She has a reason, she's 8 years old. Once more dearie, untwist the panties before they cause permanent damage. And thank you for yet another laugh.

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 Firebug, Angry? You crack me up. On Fire is the one who seems angry, frustrated, living with twisted panties, etc.. I think you guys are hilarious, and one of the biggest jokes to come out of Vallejo. Come on answer back, keep me and the rest of the rational people laughing.

On Fire   |March.03.2009 Diddy, don't be so sure what powers the Queen has! Besides, I might call upon Ms. Gomes since you keep bestowing her and Ms. Schivley with so much power, and have her run you out of town. You are simply jealous that no one here has to resort to vile and repulsive behavior and act like juveniles. You wish you could have a civil conversation with people who don't talk about your mother and what is under women's clothes. I understand that your sand box is soiled, but we here at VIB, don't like the stench you and your boys over at the horrid bring with your conversations. You claim to hate all of us here at VIB. You claim that we are all uninformed and don't know what we are talking about. You state that VIB'ers are ruining the city. So why in the world are you so worried about what we are talking about? If we are such a small group of people why do you pay so much attention to the website? Just stop reading our blogs, stop peeking in on our articles. Simple solution wouldn't you say? Stay over at the t-h with your intellegent discourse bunch where you can have a real conversation.

Firebug   |March.03.2009 DISTOL, I rather enjoy reading your convulsions when you get angry.

curious   |March.03.2009 Would that be the same Terry Curtola that was mayor during the early 1980's when Mariner's Cove was illegally filled and the City got whacked by a substantial fine? The same Terry Curtola who was hired in Vallejo's Economic Development Department with none of the professional qualifications and is now collecting a fat City pension? The same Terry Curtola that led the recent Solano County General plan effort that recommended that all the required "affordable/subsidized" housing be located in multiunit buildings in the unincorporated portion of the County within the City Limits of Vallejo?

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 On Fire, You seem to have a problem with the democratic system too. Anyone who says anything that doesn't align with your beliefs -- you are the first to yell (excuse me, Lewis Carroll)"Off with their head". Yes, you are the Queen, loud and pushy, and a figment of your imagination. Too bad this is a open website and not your private realm. End of On Fire's chapter.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 Who was there? Al DaSilva (speaks volumes). Tom Hannigan (erins dad, again speaks volumes). Possibly Terry Curtola. Pam Pitts campaign workers (hmmmm). And DISTOL - if you can't stand Vallejo, why to you come here to this blog? You care enough about Vallejo to spend time insulting the city, here and on the TH. If I felt about Vallejo as you do, I'd get as far away as I could. Oh, but not you. Vallejo is the main vein for you blood sucking parasites.

On Fire   |March.03.2009 It's really too bad that TROLLS are not self sustaining. They seem to always want to scurry from under their rocks, and try to find new areas to feed. The t-h soiled sand box, which they claim to be their own, has constant complaints if anyone makes a comment that challenges their ranting. And they try to banish everyone back to "VIB". So back to your rock smelly TROLL. We have no use for you here. Read the new news items if you must, but do not look for crumbs.

Obviously   |March.03.2009 the unions are nothing but lobbyists, where the most money wins. We see it in state and country wide elections. That is why you see a few percentage of people get rich off of the taxpayers backs. Legalized bribery and collusion. Really, if voters got outraged things would change but we have a country full of apathetic, ignorant people who can't see the forest through the trees or won't. Police and fire personnel are put on pedestals and they have the money, ironically from the taxpayers who pay their salaries, to keep themselves there.

curious   |March.03.2009 Which of the GOBs were in the room during the mayoral recount when votes for Gary went missing? And who do they represent??? I am betting Solano County greenbelt developers and their ilk that need to dump their component of "affordable/subsidized" housing in Vallejo to keep their new subdivisions nicely economically segregated and free of any poor people. Then they milk the poor in Vallejo like ants farm aphids.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 Go back to the Times Horrid, NBR.

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 "Perhaps if the employees contributed to their own.........." You not only have a problem with PS, you have a problem with the democratic system. Poor soul.

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 Anonymous, Beautiful? OMG, wake up, Vallejo is the newest Bay Area ghetto....better yet, keeping sleeping, at least in your dreams it's beautiful, and you don't have to deal with reality. Have a nice nap.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 Hence the name the Funded Four + Ozzie, because at least he wasn't Union endorsed and his campaign wasn't union funded. However, I personally think Ozzie has made some sort of deal with the Unions for them to support his campaign for Strong Mayor, in return for some big favors. Like getting rid of Tanner. We'll just have to wait and see that one play out.

Robert Schussel   |March.03.2009 Mayor Davis individual contributions over $1,000. This is about half the amount Hannigan and wilson each received in addition to all of the Union monies. Georgia House Graphics 2,750 Montezuma Wetlands 2,000 Young Investments 2,000 0Davis & Davis 2,000 Donald Hurt 1,400 Eyvette Robinson 1,430 Davenport's 1,000 Joseph Blaney 1,000 Margie Sabathia 1,000 Earlene Coleman-Ali 1,000 TOTAL $15,580

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 Perhaps if those employees contributed their money to their own communities, instead of buying candidates in ours, we could elect people who actually want to put Vallejo first, and not you and your unions. Then we could build the community that we want, instead of just paying all of our taxes for your expensive salaries and bennies that allow you to live in Sebastopol, Napa, and Novato.

WHO CONTRIBUTED ALL THE BREAD   |March.03.2009 TO DAVIS?

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 DISTOL - you might hold your nose at Vallejo - typical PSU attitude. But its a beautiful place that outsiders like to dis, since you are all the parasites Vallejo could easily shake off if we had a healthy unbought city govt'.

Did I Say That Outloud   |March.03.2009 Perhaps more employees would live in Vallejo, if Vallejo was worth living in.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 Robert, wow, "Buy Vallejo" is a sickening breakdown of how Hannigan and Wilson were bought and paid for lock, stock and barrel. It's no wonder they vote as they do. I mean, I knew this, but seeing it in black and white makes me sick. And in the end, where you list the Vallejo firefighters who contributed to their campaigns -- not one of them lives in Vallejo. Disgusting. Shame on Hammy and Wilson. We need campaign finance reform NOW.

Firebug   |March.03.2009 NBR, They are considering expanding the Los Vaqueros Reservoir again right now. The rub for them will be how to divide up the $900,000,000 cost. That being said there is no reason that I can find that would justify Vallejo's water rates to be that much higher than Antioch's. http://www.contracostatimes.com/top-stories/ci_11769517 Silas, That is a super idea! Throw out the entire Charter and revert to a "General Law" City. From your links there are only 83 Charter Cities out of over 400 hundred Cities in California. Taking control away from Ozzy and the funded four and subnjugating their decisions to ahigher authority is a step in the right direction. Sky high water and sewer fees, outrageous permit fees and business license fees, you are right there is something for everyone to hate in the City Charter, getting the signatures to toss out the whole thing would be much easier.

Anonymous   |March.03.2009 Streetsweeper, that's all the proof you need that the city is insolvent. The Funded Four had absolutely no choice but to vote for bankruptcy. They were cornered like rats. If they hadn't voted for it, the city would have not paid bills or employees, and the Fundeds could have been personally liable. Once again, they were acting out of self interest. At least they are consistent.

NBR   |March.03.2009 "Over 60% of Santa Rosa Fire fighters live in the area," Where would you get such a detailed stat? What exactly is "the area"? Is "the area" defined as Sonoma County?

WAZ UP WID DAT   |March.03.2009 My rant is, city employees, espeically VOPA and local 1186 do not live in Vallejo. That is one of the reasons they dont care about postive industry such as the Touro Cancer Center being built in Vallejo. LNG, a prison or casino are just fine industry for Vallejo, it keeps it out of the town they live in, and what do they care, these kind of projects would generate the taxes that they need to live the life "they have been accustom to." They may actully believe that good projects such as the Touro Cancer Center should come to their town instead, they probably cant believe such a project could come to Vallejo, I mean after all, it's just a getto, the place you buy section 8 property, send parolees and other social blight. How dare Vallejo think it could have such a project. Worse yet, what if Touro start influencing the city? That would take away the affectiveness of the out of town lobby, such as IAFF 1186 and VOPA. The City of Santa Rosa is in talks with both Fire and Police unions right now, as they are in bad way. Over 60% of Santa Rosa Fire fighters live in the area, they are thinking of ways to help the city save money. In an effort to save their own jobs, some have offered to take demotions. So far they have not used the "the babies will burn and the old people will die" routine to scare and threaten the city. Remember, 60% live in the area, they want to help preserve THEIR city. We have a bunch of out of towners working and running our city, it's got us into bankruptcy...

Streetsweeper   |March.03.2009 Robert, if the 5 members of the council are funded by these unions why did they vote for bankruptcy? I can not think of anything worse for labor to have politicians voting to file to reject contracts. Seems like a waste of money for the unions. IBEW did not back anyone in the last election. Not sure what local 180 had in mind when they tossed money in the pot. I plan to ask my union to support those who will bring in industry and who have vision, courage, plus are ready to get things done, not just talk.

NBR   |March.02.2009 Firebug My bill ranges between $30-50. Antioch is in Contra Costa County, which completed the 100,000 water acre feet resevoir beind the dam that took 1 year to build and 3 years to fill. Other than flooding a tranquil verdant valley there was no downside to creating the watershed. Flat rate water after passing a bond to build the dam. Push for that type of construction in Solano Co. and we can enjoy the same type rates. I won't join in to support you because my overall waterbill will increase while still using the same quantity.

NBR   |March.02.2009 silasbarnabe |March.02.2009 "I think you missed the significance of FB's post, why is it that 10 units costs $40 in Antioch, and $75 in Vallejo?" What would 3 units cost in Antioch and in Vallejo?

On Fire   |March.02.2009 Found it Silas. Guess I got too excited and didn't see your link. Thanks, will be reading up on it.

On Fire   |March.02.2009 By George Silas, you may be on to something. Instead of rewriting the City Charter to put ozzy in as king, just change the entire city structure, sweeping out the control of utility rate increases and BA along with it. What type of vote do we need, simple or majority vote? Does anyone know? Where can we find this information Silas?

silasbarnabe   |March.02.2009 I think you missed the significance of FB's post, why is it that 10 units costs $40 in Antioch, and $75 in Vallejo?

Wow Firebug   |March.02.2009 FYI: You must be using at least 10 units a month, you either waste a lot, have a huge oversize yard or an oversize service, else you have a toilet running which has happened to me before. A 5 person 3 bedroom household like mine only averages at most 5 units in the summertime per month.My bill is usually only about $35.

silasbarnabe   |March.02.2009 Some very good information on Charter Cities. http://www.cacities.org/index.jsp?zone=locc&previewStory=26279 Though I can't specifically find where the CPUC does not regulate Charter Cities water departments, I have an interesting idea. It might be more worth while to gather petition signatures to remove Vallejo as a Charter city rather than just specific items like Binding Arbitration. Everybody has something to hate about the City Charter (like the city's power to levy fee and rate increases)and if you study the differences between Charter Cities and General Law Cities, dumping the Vallejo City Charter that has become corrupt by special interests may be a viable alternative and easily garner the signatures needed to reject the Charter.

the puc   |March.02.2009 does not regulate charter cities' water dept. In the last rate increase, the water dept sent you an opportunity to object to the fees hidden in the pamphlets sent along with your bill. Ask for a copy to see what it looked like. Look out for the next one.

social justice   |March.02.2009 requires that the cost and availability of services does not adversely affect the poorer and disadvantaged segments of our community. "Fees" are indirect and inverse taxes that more heavily affect the poor. Higher water rates obviously hit poorer families more than they hit richer families because water use is pretty constant per family member but incomes are lower. So increasing water rates require a larger percentage of lower incomes. Same with sewer fees, same with phone utility taxes, same with garbage. Note that none of those fees, inverse taxes, etc. is flows to the absentee property owners through the property tax base...which is the socially just method. Maybe we need to file a complaint with the PUC.

Captain   |March.02.2009 Agreed.... Hopefully the Judge will chime in soon. Can't wait to read his opinion of this troublesome chapter in Vallejo's history.

Firebug   |March.02.2009 Thanks for the info Captain, I really like to make the distinction of what is union and what is robbery. Vallejo PSU's are not like other unions, they influence politicians with monetary support or other types of intangible support. They also will use their power and influence to better their compensation even if it at the expense and deteriment to those they serve. When other Cities PSU's make concessions, Vallejo's continue to sue, bully and drag their feet until concessions are turned into raises.

Captain   |March.02.2009 Did you know: For every 1% increase to PS salary, the cost to the city of Vallejo is 1.45% Vallejo pays 5% additional to FD employees that have EMT certification. Daily City pays $100 per year. Every other bay area city considers this a minimum requirement. EMT certification is a one semester class (3 units) followed by a very simple test. Vallejo pays thousands per year, per employee. The PD Chief wanted Oakland & Fremont added to the salary survey in place of Dixon & (I forget the other central valley city). I'm sure the union promoted this through the chief, to the tax payers detriment. Vallejo FD compensated time off is off the charts, as is the PD and probably CAMP and IBEW. IBEW has 230 filled positions & 260 unfilled positions. 115 IBEW members are allocated to the GF. Of those, some split their alloccation with other funds. IBEW has entire Kaiser North health benefit paid by Vallejo per the contract (capped at kaiser north). Apparently, the city is also paying Full premiums of some members that are under the more expensive plans. If there's a layoff of IBEW members, the city is Required to negotiate with the IBEW union. San Jose PD gets 80% retirement after 30 years. The Unions support the Unions. The Police Chief/department head supports the unions which benefits his son. The Unions support their Council members and the Mayor. The Council supports the Union. The city staff that recommended the VPOA contract were union members. Only 13% of workers in the US are Union Members but, and I'm guessing here, 98% of city employees are workiing for the Union in one way or another. I'm not anti-union, but at least in the private sector there's some legitimate competition. I'm not seeing that so much in the public sector. Looks to me more like a collusion injected oligolopoly. IMHO

On Fire   |March.02.2009 Can somebody explain what the heck the Water Dept. is talking about? If a flood of letters come in to complain, he will postpone the rate increase? It sounds like they don't really need the increase because I know I'm certainly going to send him a No letter. How many constitutes "enough"? One letter, a hundred letters? This has to be one of the craziest things to come out of that department yet.

admin   |March.02.2009 Unfortunately there is a requirement to own the "Batman Spotlight" prior to any engagement by Batman into local crime fighting efforts. Batman will look into the technical support issues suggested by VHS. Also, I am very sad to say that Cat Woman died awhile ago in an ugly argument at a local canasta table. You do understand that the Bat Bike is loud for safety reasons don't you? Last but not least, Mr. Wayne has been hit hard by the recession and Wayne Manor is in foreclosure. Albert is looking for work by the way.

Captain   |March.02.2009 Silas It's not clear to me if the letter writing campaign will work. Here is the double-talk from the article: "...If most of the department's written feedback opposes the rate increases, they will not occur. No responce will be interpreted as support for the change."

Firebug   |March.02.2009 I have always been interested in comparing (not water rates) water bills from surrounding City's and see how much above other communities we are already paying. The thing about Vallejo is that they separated the water and sewer bills over 20 years ago which confounds comparison's to other communities that have a unified bill and department. I have friends in Antioch that pay $40 a month for using the same amount of water that I use while being charged $75 a month.

Streetsweeper   |March.02.2009 Batman, we need you to patrol the downtown at night and our schools during they day. Please do not ride that rocket bike through town because folks will complain about the noise and it's not very green. Also, see if Bruce can float us a loan of about 100mil for a casino.

VHS   |March.02.2009 Batman, can you force the left column under current screams to display only the current months posts. When I browse the site I always look at the comment previews in this column and click one of them to open and respond. If the post I click came from a past months scream the new post ends up in the past month as well. How do we force the new post to hit the current month. having a UI confusion moment here.

Turn On The Bat Lite   |March.01.2009 Well somebody better go turn the Bat light on, tell Batman to stop fooling around with Catwomen or whatever the hell he's doing, and tell him he needs to save Gotham City because the Joker is in charge of the mayor's office and our town is turning into a bad comic book story.

Anonymous   |March.01.2009 Did that rant last night make you feel better Osby/Geri? Belittling your constituents? Yes, your constituents, whether we voted for you or not. If you continue to put your own egotistical interests before Vallejo's, we won't wait until your next election to vote you out of office. Losing the Touro project would do it for me and I think many others. And not just the people you discount who go to council meetings. Let's see, your so proud of the "Vallejo's First Black Mayor" title. How about "Vallejo's First Recalled Mayor?" Doesn't sound as good I bet.

Waz up wid dat?   |March.01.2009 So the burning question is, what would be the reasoning behind sending all good projects away from Vallejo? It has been suggested that the biggest money maker right now is REDEVELOPMENT FUNDS. The more blight we have, the more funding we get. If Vallejo were to move out of the business of blight, less redevelopment funds would be available, and investors aka slumlords would have less funds availble to them. Slumlords would be forced to improve their buildings/houses and rent to non-section 8 folks, who are more likely to complain about "conditions" of the property. Um, attorneys who represent landlords would receive less business. Includiing attorneys representing landlords in the historic district who what to change their historic building and not use approved building materials for an historic designated area (ie. vinyl windows in the Casa de Vallejo and other historic houses-buildings.) Viva Vallejo!

admin   |March.01.2009 We're into a new month! Please scream here. Do me a favor also and continue to spread the word about VIB and remember "Don't feed the trolls". Batman says: "People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy, and I can't do that as Bruce Wayne. As a man, I'm flesh and blood. I can be ignored, I can be destroyed. But as a symbol ... as a symbol, I can be incorruptible. I can be everlasting."

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

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.23

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