Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

Taxpayers leader: BART contract another giveaway to unions

By Leave a Comment

Editor:

Here we go again, folks. Another giveaway contract to BART unions. After a 15.8% salary increase in 2013, the BART board has now agreed to another 10.5% increase.

For that, we taxpayers got very little in exchange except for an agreement not to strike while the contract is in force.  What should have been a no-strike ever clause wasn’t part of the deal.

Unfortunately since its inception BART has been plagued by financial mismanagement.  Among other things it has set little or nothing aside for eventual capital replacement.  Instead it gave away all the money in wages and benefits making it the highest paid transportation system in the country.  It also has the highest fares.

The outrageous benefits were left untouched.  Total compensation (wages and benefits) for the average worker is over $100,000.  For a system crying poor mouth this makes no sense at all.

This new contract is to set the stage for a huge bond measure on the November ballot.  Claiming the system has reached the end of its useful life, BART says it needs $10 billion for capital improvements.  BART claims “its cars are the oldest big-city fleet in the United States”.  The truth, it’s the fourth youngest among fifteen similar system nationally.

And let’s not forget that they spent $486 million on a link to the Oakland airport replacing a completely satisfactory and efficient bus system.

To summarize, BART financial management has been a disaster from its inception.  The BART board has rolled over to the unions, giving away outrageous wages and benefits.  It has both the highest fares and wages/benefits in the country.  It has set little or nothing aside for capital replacement.  It expects the taxpayers to make up for its financial follies.

Until the BART board and unions wake up and renegotiate the contract it should not be given any more money to mismanage.

The Board must develop a reasonable financial plan and strategy (of which it has none).  It must develop some “backbone” when dealing/negotiating with its unions.

We are giving enough taxpayer subsidies already in sales and property taxes.  We shouldn’t give them any more to mismanage.

It’s time to vote no on any bond measure.

Ken Hambrick, Chairman

Alliance of Contra Costa Taxpayers

Watchdog: Overview of the Candidates for Contra Costa County Supervisor

By Leave a Comment

Watchdog Barbara Zivica logoBy Barbara Zivica

There’s an old expression about politics that goes like this “All politics are based on the indifference of the majority.” (James Reston). Let me reword it this way – all politics are local and politicians count on the ignorance of voters.” Do your own research and remember that when candidates are endorsed and elected by unions or a particular political party, they are no longer “independent” legislators.  Newspaper endorsements can also be biased.  Be sure you know the rules.  June 7th is a primary race. The top 2 vote getters will move onto the November 8th general election.

Speaking of endorsements, let’s look at the candidates for District 3, an open seat due to Mary Piepho‘s decision to retire and District 5, where Federal Glover is again running for re-election.

DISTRICT 3 – Includes most of Antioch, all of south side of Highway 4

STEVE BARR – Current Brentwood City Council member (term expires November 2018)  Endorsed as best pick for Supervisor by the Contra Costa Times.   Here are a few facts you may not know:  Barr switched parties from Democrat to Republican in 2015 in time to run for the seat held by Mary Piepho, who is a Republican.   He is one of two Brentwood councilmen who replaced non-elected directors on the East Contra Costa Fire District Board.  The Board which gave its firefighter a 5% across the board raise, hasn’t solved the lack of fire services in Brentwood, Oakley, Discovery Bay, Bethel Island, Byron and Knightsen.  They tried to pass two taxes but failed both times.  My biggest beef with him is, although he was opposed to a project labor agreement the City used on its new city hall, he was seated on the council when they unanimously agreed to move forward with creating a project labor agreement to build the Brentwood library.  Should we call him a “flip flopper”?

DIANE BURGIS: Executive Director of Friends of Marsh Creek Watershed, sits on the Regional Planning Committee for ABAG.  Prior to being elected to the EBRPD Board in November 2014, she sat on the Oakley City Council, being elected just two years before in 2012. Burgis also served on the Delta Protection Commission, executive Board for the East Bay League of Cities and Transportation, Communications and Public Works Policy Committee for the League of California Cities representing the Woman’s Caucus.  She currently serves as Ward 7 Director of East Bay Regional Park District and has incumbent Mary Piepho’s backing.

DOUG HARDCASTLE –  Owner of Hardcastle RV Center in Oakley, for more than 40 years.  Served as Director on the Ironhouse Sanitary District Board from 2000 to 2012 and President of Board from 2010-2011.   Elected to the Oakley City Council in 2012 and just completed a year as Mayor.  Endorsed by current Mayor Kevin Romick and Bill Baker, former US Representative for California’s 10th Congressional District.  Small business owners are the backbone of the U.S. economy.  Hardcastle is especially concerned about economic development, local jobs, public safety, improved roads and transportation and protecting the Delta and open space.

WADE HARPER – Flip flopper.  In 2008 when getting appointed to the Antioch School Board he committed to running for re-election in 2010,  instead he ran for City Council and then for the Mayor’s seat.  In an accelerated swearing in ceremony in December 2012, held in order to allow  the new mayor and council members to reverse the previously signed contract with APOA, which changed the 3% at 50 pension calculation to a 3% at 55 formula.  This was done in order to avoid having to adhere to a new voter approved law which would take effect on January 1, 2012 reducing the pension formula for new police hires from 2% at 50 to 2.7% at age 55 and freezing benefit formulas for lateral hires.

After committing to being a full-time Mayor if elected, he got a job teaching for the Antioch school district. In June 2014 he implied commitment to allow a citizens group to move forward on plans for a park and event center on the former lumber yard site, then voted to sell it to a developer.  In October 2015 he made a commitment to Senator Steve Glazer to not run for higher office when hired as a field rep.  Two months later, he quit the job to run for Supervisor.  He is endorsed by The Antioch Education Association, the professional organization and bargaining unit for all the teachers of Antioch Unified School District, Council woman Mary Rocha, and Councilman Tony Tiscareno.

ODESSA LEFRANCOIS –  Retired Navy veteran, 12th year county health services employee and civil rights activist. Says her priorities are better health care delivery, especially to vets, better regional transportation infrastructure, unfair labor practices and community issues concerning seniors.  She is 2nd Vice President of Local Union 1 and President of the NAACP East County Branch.

MONICA WILSON – Elected to the Antioch City Council in 2012. Her press release states her successes include helping grow local businesses and making public safety a top priority, securing local measures to hire and support more police officers.  Frankly, she’s overstating her qualifications and accomplishments.  Residents are now paying for two tax measures and experiencing a continuing understaffed police, code enforcement and animal control department.  She has been endorsed by SEIU (Service Employees International Union and the Democrat leadership machine in the county.

DISTRICT 5 – Includes most of the portion of Antioch north of Highway 4

ANAMARIE AVILA FARIAS – current Martinez City Councilmember, elected in 2012, and current Board Member for the Juvenile Hall Auxiliary of Contra Costa County.  Was a member of the Martinez Planning Commission for 8 years and served on the Parks and Recreation and Marina Commission.  Employed for nearly 10 years with the San Francisco Mayor’s Office of Housing & Community development and in 2015 was appointed by Governor Jerry Brown Jr. to serve as a Board Director for the California Housing Finance Agency.  She is currently a Board Member for the Latino Caucus and has numerous union endorsements.

CONRAD DANDRIDGE –  Former member of the Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council, This is 2nd time Dandridge, ran for the Board.  In 2006 he ran for a District 4 seat in unincorporated Martinez.   Sue Bonilla won that race.  Dandridge is a program analyst for the Transportation Security Administration in Oakland.  Claims to know District 5 well due to having worked s a Census Bureau field operations supervisor all over Contra Costa.  Doesn’t believe Glover is an effective advocate for District 5, especially the unincorporated areas.

FEDERAL GLOVER –  Former Pittsburg City Council Member, Served as Mayor from 1998 to 1999 and has been on the Board of Supervisors since 2000.  He’s now running for his fifth term in office (no term limits in local government but there should be). His campaign manager is Mary Jo Rossi, whose name has come up in regard to backroom deals concerning the Navy land plan.   Glover is another “flip flopper”.  In the past he promised voters he’d  “hold the line” on growth. However, campaign finance reports show he received at least $38,000+ from groups often seen to be in opposition to environmental concerns i.e. $$20,000 from Chevron and Tosco, $56,000+  from developers (the largest $15,000 from Homebuilders Assoc, $6,830 from Alves/Paramount, $5,000 from PROPAC and from Seeno $3,175.   He’s voted for over 6,700 homes – 1,500 in Alamo Creek, 200 in Discovery Bay, Oakley – sphere of influence addition for homes (2,000 acres) in addition to over 5,000 homes he approved in Pittsburg.  He also told residents (Contra Costa Times 1/14/2000 ) “It’s time to stand up and own up to the fact that our ability to bring BART further east is not going to happen.”  Voted to give himself a 60% raise in 2006 then another 33% in 2014. But, after county staff and residents gathered enough signatures to force a referendum in 2015, Glover voted to reverse his vote on the 33% raise. Instead, he voted for a 14% pay raise, last year although the county employees only received a 4% raise.  He’s endorsed by the Democratic Party of Contra Costa.

MIKE MENESINI – Former Martinez Mayor for 18 years and Councilman for eight years. He works in San Francisco as an Assistant District Attorney. Unsuccessfully ran for County Supervisor in 1992, Superior Court judge in 1994 and Contra Costa District Attorney in 2002. Left the city with a $30 million shortfall in pension and retiree health plans and only 64 percent of the funds they should have. Also allowed for pension spiking by the city’s police force and expensive, lifetime retiree health insurance benefits from their first day on the job, for themselves, spouses and children up to age 26.

DAN ROMERO – Mayor of Hercules. Joined the Hercules City Council in 2011 following the recall of previous members.  Reelected in 2012. Had to deal with the $38 million mess from redevelopment spending by previous councils. Weathered controversy and attacks by fellow council member over who should be Mayor. Supported 2004 Franklin Canyon Measure M, which down zoned the area to one home for every 40 acres. Side note for Antioch residents – Romero voted to hire Steve Duran, as City Manager, who later left to become Antioch’s City Manager. He is a business owner with an insurance agency in Pinole.

Guest Commentary: East Contra Costa Fire Protection District needs a new approach to funding, not another tax increase attempt

By Leave a Comment

Brentwood gets higher percentage of property tax than other cities, some should go to fire district

By Hal Bray

In 1978 Proposition 13 became the law.  The legislature was given the task of reallocating property taxes according to its guidelines.  As usual they made a mess of it.

Oh, the original allocation may have been alright, but the state legislature put nothing in the legislation to reallocate taxes over timebased on population shifts, growth or some other equitable measure.So those entities receiving less were, and have stayed, underfunded since 1978. Hence, our issue today for the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District.

In 1978 fire fighting in East County was made up of voluntary fire districts; therefore firefighting and emergency medical services in the area received only 7.5% of our 1% ad valorem property tax. Other, established fire districts within the countyreceived, on average 12%, some much more. If East County would have received the county average or San Ramon’s allocation of 21% or even ConFire’s 14%, or if periodic adjustments had been made, the district’s budget today would be approximately double what it is today and we would not be having this severe crisis.

Where does the funding that ECCFPD did not get in 1978 go?  It went to the City of Brentwood, the County, the school districts and special districts within the ECCFPD boundaries.  It is time to right this historical wrong, redirecting some of our current property taxes from these entities to ECCFPD to provide for the services necessary to save lives and protect property.

We, East County Voters for Equal Protection (ECV) , want the other public entities within the ECCFPD boundaries to adjust their allocations by approximately 5% (which in many cases is only about 1-2% of their total revenue)to provide adequate funding for the ECCFPD.  This would not cut any of their current programs, but would reduce their growth rate. They can keep the bonus allocations they have received since 1978, but going forward the funding is desperately needed to protect the lives and homes, schools and infrastructure of East County.

This reallocation would provide the $7.8 million that ECCFPD needs to open and operate three more stations bringing the total number of stations to six.  We, ECV, would then support a tax measure on the ballot to fund beyond six stations, if necessary; but government must do their part first.

What must the community do to get the funding for ECCFPD?

The process to reallocate property taxes is clear; we know the process and the law. It is difficult, at best, and requires the co-operation of local elected officials and the concurrence by the areas residents.  We recommend starting today and, in the short term, achieve this funding with a local MOU or Joint powers Agreement (JPA).

However, since our elected and appointed officials in East County are reluctant to solve this crisis, we, the residents of East County, must create the political will for these officialsto look beyond their own parochial interests and think of the common good.

This issue is, fundamentally, about fair and equitable solutions. Fire Services are funded by property taxes. Local government and school districts are among the largest land owners in East County.  They are also large consumers of fire district services.  However, they pay no property taxes and, therefore, do not pay their share of the costs of the services.  We believe it is their responsibility to step up and share the cost of correcting this injustice.

Assemblyman Jim Frazier and State Senator Steve Glazer have said publically that they will carry any necessary legislation to Sacramento to complete the transaction, once a local agreement is reached.

Our local elected and appointed officials hold the keys to unlock the solution to our crises.Most will tell you the process is long and difficult, but will not tell you that they are the obstacle.  This issue is one, long, self-fulfilling prophecy that starts with them.

This is why we have begun meeting with local elected and appointed officials and   community groups.  We must build the political will, break the cycle of self-interest,in our officials or, in this an election year, vote out of office any official who will not support this effort.

We need you, the community residents of East County to contact your city council, school board, irrigation and/or water district and other special districts to make this happen.

Hal Bray is a Brentwood resident and is co-chair of East County Voters for Equal Protection, a non-partisan citizen’s action committee, whose goal is to improve funding for the ECCFPD. For more information, email hal.bray@pacbell.net or like the group on Facebook at www.facebook.com/EastCountyVoters.

Guest Commentary: California minimum wage increase – you win some, you lose some

By Leave a Comment

By John Kabateck

If one takes a quick glance at the daily schedule of events happening in and around the State Capitol all on the same Monday this week, there seems to be a peculiar political paradox taking place right under our noses. Or, in laymen’s terms: an offensive double standard.

On Monday, April 4, the Governor signed SB 3, legislation increasing the California minimum wage to $15 an hour. Never mind that a mere three months ago small businesses and voters saw it rise to $10.00 an hour, making it even then (second only to the District of Columbia at $10.50) the highest in the nation. As the Governor himself stated in January, “Raise the minimum wage too much and you put a lot of people out of work. There won’t be a lot of jobs. It’s a matter of balance.”

Also on the agenda the same day this week was a hearing to evaluate the High-Speed Rail Authority, including criticism by many on both sides of the aisle about the significant cost the rail project will be to the state and California taxpayers. Too bad constituents weren’t afforded the same formal hearing process and public discourse surrounding the minimum wage measure, which the Governor’s Department of Finance has pegged at $4 billion per year. Instead, the measure moved faster than a bullet train – from a weekend discussion with labor unions, to the legislative chambers for a party-line vote, to the Governor’s desk for a swift signature – all without small businesses and voters allowed a seat at the table and open discussion. Had that taken place, we would have clearly heard stakeholders raise concerns about these enormous recurring state costs that will affect the truly vulnerable across our state – not just “mom and pops”, but persons with disabilities, students in our schools, local governments in rural and economically disadvantaged regions, and seniors on fixed incomes, to name a few.

Add to the irony a Capitol rally on this very same Monday surrounding legislation to exempt certain personal care products from the state sales tax. While some products would no doubt be exempted, most others would not and most small businesses would still be expected to continue to levy on their products a statewide sales tax that is also the highest in the nation. To add insult to injury, legislation has also been in play that seeks to extend the sales tax to service industries. So, exempt certain businesses and taxpayers from some taxes, while insisting that other, new, struggling industries pay more. And how, exactly, is a minimum wage hike not a “tax” on our number one job creators, the corner restaurant, the book store, the retailer? According to the legislature, “You win some, you lose some – we’ll make that decision for you based on our special interest support.”

Voters deserve better than this. Fortunately, in this election year, we all have an opportunity to demand voting records and explanations from the incumbents, and specific details and pledges from the new candidates. Have they stood with small business? Will they? Don’t settle for double speak – there’s too much at stake for us this November and the generations that follow.

Kabateck is President of Kabateck Strategies with nearly twenty-five years of leadership with strategic coalition development and implementation in California’s public policy and political arenas, with an emphasis on the full spectrum of business and job creator sectors. He has served as California Executive Director of the National Federation of Independent Business, California’s and the nation’s leading organization serving only small businesses; Senior Legislative Director and Vice President of the California Restaurant Association; a Chief of Staff in the California Legislature; Director of Coalitions for Governor Pete Wilson’s successful re-election campaign, then Wilson’s Chief Deputy Appointments Secretary; and as Governor Schwarzenegger’s Director of External Affairs.

Residents urged to speak against Contra Costa Water District deal on Delta Tunnels, Wed., April 6

By Leave a Comment

Restore the Delta says to tell the Contra Costa Water Board “Say no to back room deals that sell out Delta water 1uality for the region”

By Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director, Restore the Delta

The Contra Costa Water District Board of Directors will soon be reviewing the settlement agreement that they recently signed with the Delta Tunnels plan effort. The settlement drops CCWD’s protest against the tunnels plan in exchange for a separate pipeline to deliver drinking water to its customers. We are urging all concerned residents to attend the meeting.

This may be your only opportunity to register a public comment on how you feel about CCWD’s self-interested approach to secure a water supply at the expense of the community it serves.

What: CCWD Public Board Meeting
When: Wednesday, April 6, 2016, 6:30 to 9:00 pm. (Come at 6:00 pm if you would like to organize with us prior to the meeting)
Where: 1331 Concord Ave., Concord, CA.   

The Contra Costa Water District, is choosing to exchange its present contract for Delta water deliveries for an intake above the Delta that will remove even more fresh water from the estuary. This not only puts all other Delta communities at risk for even worse water quality, but also leaves their own customers within their own district with degraded Delta water for other uses. Additionally, their decision leaves the San Francisco Bay Estuary with degraded water quality which will negatively impact that magnificent ecosystem.

Contra Costa County residents recreate in high numbers in the Delta, live around its water ways, and have regular contact with the water.  Environmental justice communities and recreational anglers fish Delta waterways for sustenance and professional tournaments, and Contra Costa County farmers depend on quality Delta water for their businesses.

Furthermore, the impacts will be exacerbated for residents in Discovery Bay for all water uses — from toxic algal blooms to waterways polluted with salt, Selenium and human carcinogens. Reducing flow through the Delta will put the estuary in a state of “permanent drought.”

CCWD’s willingness to settle is an indictment of how bad the Delta Tunnels plan really is. The Tunnels Project will have egregious water quality impacts in the Delta. CCWD should drop the settlement, and rejoin the unified opposition to the Tunnels plan launched by the entire Bay-Delta community, not cut a self-serving back room deal!

Lastly, Restore the Delta and collaborating environmental groups have in the past supported an expansion of Los Vaqueros Reservoir (and an intertie between Contra Costa Water District and Santa Clara Valley Water District) as ways to meet water needs for the greater Bay Area.  However, we are reconsidering our support of such measures seeing that Contra Costa Water District would now become a party to depriving the Bay-Delta estuary of needed flows through the Delta tunnels project. CCWD is effectively transforming the expansion of Los Vaqueros from a solution to a tool of the Bay-Delta estuary water grab.

Read our opposition to this settlement here.

If you have questions, about this alert, please feel free to call our office at 209-475-9550.  We will see you, our members, at 6 pm in order to organize before the meeting on April 6, 2016. If you cannot make the meeting, submit a public comment here.

Thank you for your continued support.

The Contra Costa Water District service area includes Antioch, Bay Point, Brentwood (portion), Clayton, Clyde, Concord, Martinez (portion), Oakley, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill (portion), Port Costa and Walnut Creek (portion). To find your Director on the Board visit http://www.ccwater.com/426/Division-Map—Find-Your-Director.  If you can’t attend the meeting you can email your Director by visiting http://www.ccwater.com/416/Board-of-Directors.

Guest Commentary: Enough already, let’s keep BART running

By Leave a Comment

By East Bay Leadership Council

Arousing fear and outrage has proven to be an effective strategy, especially during this political season.

The past few weeks have seen a great deal of hand-wringing and outrage in the media over BART’s woes.  The service disruption between North Concord and Bay Point has brought back traumatic memories of the 2013 strike, and old animosities have resurfaced.

The East Bay Leadership Council (EBLC) hopes to put that animosity aside and focus on keeping BART running. But just as we get the government we deserve, we also get the infrastructure we deserve.  Let us be worthy of the inheritance left to us by past generations and not squander it for the sake of pithy tweets or political posturing.

The system’s age is contributing to the current problems.  Suggesting that this claim only serves some ulterior motive is false and is a distraction from the real issues.

The core BART system will soon be half a century old.  The system suffers $9.6 billion dollars’ worth of deferred maintenance and critical components now require replacement.  This work has to be paid for, and neither the State of California nor the federal government is likely to bail us out any time soon.

Whether you believe the system has been mismanaged or not; whether you ride along the screeching decades-old tracks or not; whether you personally suffer through overcrowded cars and service interruptions or not, we all benefit from a system that eases commutes, connects people to jobs, provides mobility to those with limited means, and helps keep our air clean.

The alternative is longer commutes, more polluted air, a weaker economy, and a diminished quality of life.  This is our reality.

The EBLC believes it is reasonable to question labor practices and compensation at BART.  We encourage the Board of Directors and senior management to work diligently to address these issues, and we call on the California legislature to contribute to a solution.  It is our collective civic duty to hold our leaders accountable.

Broken infrastructure is just as bad for riders as a BART strike.  We hope that BART and our region’s leaders get the message: come together and keep BART running.

We also hope that the region’s citizens recognize that investing in our infrastructure is responsible civic engagement when the system is in need of public investment.  The Bay Area is among the world’s largest economies and requires a reliable world-class transit system befitting its status.

Ultimately, vilifying public servants is no more productive than vilifying elected leaders.  Both result in a race to the bottom where the only participants left are those comfortable with a good public shaming.

It is ridiculous to think that choking off BART’s resources will lead to a better BART.

ABOUT THE EAST BAY LEADERSHIP COUNCIL

The East Bay Leadership Council (EBLC) is a private-sector, public-policy organization that advocates on issues affecting economic vitality and quality of life and represents leaders of business, industry, education, government and the nonprofit community. www.eastbayleadershipcouncil.com

Op-Ed: Right to Die vs Right to Live

By Leave a Comment

By Rev. Austin Miles

The California legislature recently passed the right-to-die law, and Governor Brown signed it into law. It becomes effective on June 9th. This bill allows physicians to supply the pills that will end a life that has become intolerable.

This bill was spurred on by 29 year old Brittany Maynard who suffered painful brain cancer, pleaded to have her life ended to put her out of her misery.

Since California had no such law, she and her husband took up residence in Oregon where euthanasia is legal. Her husband returned to push the Right to die legislation in Sacramento.

While it is understandable that when a life is destined to end, and consists of excruciating pain that cannot be soothed, the individual should be able to make the choice for death with dignity. However, there must be strict guidelines throughout this process.

For example in several countries that have adopted this law, involuntary euthanasia rose, where one is arbitrarily put to death, as laws became more permissive. This has created a mechanism where someone who has become too expensive to government health care assistance, or is simply in the way, a Pandora’s box is flung open. I remember a video showing a man about to be euthanized screaming, “No I don’t want to die.”  Didn’t matter, he was in the way. This is deplorable.

In the Netherlands, 1,040 people have died without their consent. Before legalization, doctors would euthanize patients and then falsely sign the death certificates as “natural causes.”This gives meaning to the Death Panels that Sarah Palin worried about.  Actually we already have active death panels with involuntary euthanasia.  It is called abortion.

The only way this law should go forward, is to add a stipulation that physician assisted suicide can only take place with the consent to that procedure from the individual targeted, not by  a death panel, not a relative nor anybody else.  This addition to the legislation is mandatory.

Miles is a resident of Oakley, CA