City Finance Director Paul Navazio is recommending that the city consider three separate tax increases.
First he wants a public safety tax on the ballot sometime in 2009. Now City Councilmember Stephen Souza wants that on the ballot by November 2008 and made an impassioned plea as to why we need to fund police and fire immediately, however, that did not seem feasible to Mr. Navazio .
Second, Mr. Navazio wants a new sales tax on the ballot–asking for a renewal of the sales tax and an additional quarter-cent increase to pay for street and road maintenance. This would be placed before the voters in 2010.
Finally he wants to replace the parks tax with an increase in the municipal services tax in June of 2011.
So, the Davis voters will be looking at three new taxes over the next four years.
Mayor Sue Greenwald warned that seniors and others on fixed incomes are already stressed by the sales tax system, this increase could potentially put them at risk while really not adding much in additional revenue to the city.
However the most alarming statement came from Councilmember Don Saylor who proclaimed the end of the structural deficit.
“Today we really can look at the structural deficit as we refer to so often as something within our grasp. The numbers are so small that they will be taken care of by small increases in the economic development plans that are already underway.”
Councilmember Lamar Heystek remains very concerned about the structural deficit and is reluctant to support new taxes without a demonstration up front that we have improved things with current funds before we ask for additional funds.
The bottom line is that we really have not even dealt with the issue of a structural deficit.
According to Mayor Sue Greenwald
“We have a structural deficit, we haven’t really done anything to improve it, we’ve just changed our accounting principals, made them less conservative. But that also means it’s going to be more sensitive to downturns in the real estate market and other potentially recessionary phenomena.”
In fact the problem is far worse than that. She continued:
“We have not only not reduced it [structural deficit] but we’ve also made ourselves more vulnerable to our PERS contributions.”
If a problem occurs our payments may go up greatly increasing our structural deficit
We have also not begun to account our unfunded liability which would take $4.2 million a year to pay off.
The 800 pound gorilla, according to the Mayor, is the combined water and sewer capital improvement costs; current projections place costs around $335 million. What this means is that the tax increases in the next four years being proposed by council will be in a way dwarfed by the “fee” increases we will have to pay over the next 20 years in order to simultaneously expend money on a new water supply system and a sewer capital improvement system.
As one councilmember explained to me, we have not even really dealt with the structural deficit that is really looming–that of unfunded mandates in terms of employee retirement pensions. These are not even included on the books. So to suggest that we have solved our structural deficit is very misleading. We have not even touched on the real problems.
All of these tax increases are basically what is necessary to maintain current level of service with perhaps a small increase in police and fire with the public safety tax. None of these will deal with the ballooning entitlements we are handing out to city employees upon retirement. These are lifetime benefits that we are handing out and they are right now not even on the books. That does not mean that the problem is gone. It is simply a matter that this council is trying to get reelected and push off this problem to future councils and future generations.
To me that is the heart of fiscal irresponsibility. And, when the city’s budget director says:
“Our revenue and expenditures are getting pretty well balanced.”
And when the city’s only newspaper agrees with it and does not dispute that information:
“The city has slowly and diligently chipped away at that budget gap, bringing its spending plan more stability and reliability.”
We are not being well-served and we are really not aware of the burdens that are headed our way down the road.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
It is time for the public to ask for a town hall meeting on these issues. Funding lifetime health benefits for employees and not having this reflected on the books is completely irresponsible.
Where is the accountability and the transparency?
We do have to hold the council and city manager accountable, however, I would like to hear what they have to say.
It is time for the public to ask for a town hall meeting on these issues. Funding lifetime health benefits for employees and not having this reflected on the books is completely irresponsible.
Where is the accountability and the transparency?
We do have to hold the council and city manager accountable, however, I would like to hear what they have to say.
It is time for the public to ask for a town hall meeting on these issues. Funding lifetime health benefits for employees and not having this reflected on the books is completely irresponsible.
Where is the accountability and the transparency?
We do have to hold the council and city manager accountable, however, I would like to hear what they have to say.
It is time for the public to ask for a town hall meeting on these issues. Funding lifetime health benefits for employees and not having this reflected on the books is completely irresponsible.
Where is the accountability and the transparency?
We do have to hold the council and city manager accountable, however, I would like to hear what they have to say.
DPD – thanks for a great article on this.
We already pay a lot of extra taxes, as is, and it upsets me to learn that Navazio is promoting 3 new tax increases, not including the fee increases that will occur due to the updates for the water and sewer system.
As I recall, the City has a history of predicting budget deficits, some of which never materialized. That being said, with the downturn in the housing market and the economy in general, I don’t doubt that Davis revenues will take a hit. So, if we assume that the City is correct in its forecasts, the question is, “what do we do now?”
Further increasing the sales tax is crazy – our sales tax, at 7.75% is already at the highest tax level in yolo county:
http://www.boe.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rates.cgi?LETTER=Y&LIST=COUNTY
Increasing the sales tax will not only hurt local businesses, but it will also hurt those who can least afford it, as it’s a regressive tax.
I think Davis needs to really look at its budget and figure out where it can make cuts, rather than just asking the taxpayers to fork over more money. In the face of years of so-called budget deficits, has Davis ever really made any actual cuts? For instance, (1) city workers make far more than state workers do – why not have a freeze on salaries? (2) Why not ask the city to figure out ways to do the same services for less? I don’t believe that this has been a priority of the city in the last few years. (3) Is the city maximizing its receipt of state and federal grants? (4) Are there are services that the city currently provides that are nice to have, but not really essential? For example, the City routinely spends thousands of dollars on magazine ads promoting the City of Davis…is this really necessary? Does it really bring in business to the City? I doubt it.
My basic point is that it appears city staff automatically asks for tax hikes rather than look for ways to cut their own budget. Davis residents have been generous in the past by approving tax measures. Now is the time to stand up and force the City to become leaner and more efficient.
DPD – thanks for a great article on this.
We already pay a lot of extra taxes, as is, and it upsets me to learn that Navazio is promoting 3 new tax increases, not including the fee increases that will occur due to the updates for the water and sewer system.
As I recall, the City has a history of predicting budget deficits, some of which never materialized. That being said, with the downturn in the housing market and the economy in general, I don’t doubt that Davis revenues will take a hit. So, if we assume that the City is correct in its forecasts, the question is, “what do we do now?”
Further increasing the sales tax is crazy – our sales tax, at 7.75% is already at the highest tax level in yolo county:
http://www.boe.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rates.cgi?LETTER=Y&LIST=COUNTY
Increasing the sales tax will not only hurt local businesses, but it will also hurt those who can least afford it, as it’s a regressive tax.
I think Davis needs to really look at its budget and figure out where it can make cuts, rather than just asking the taxpayers to fork over more money. In the face of years of so-called budget deficits, has Davis ever really made any actual cuts? For instance, (1) city workers make far more than state workers do – why not have a freeze on salaries? (2) Why not ask the city to figure out ways to do the same services for less? I don’t believe that this has been a priority of the city in the last few years. (3) Is the city maximizing its receipt of state and federal grants? (4) Are there are services that the city currently provides that are nice to have, but not really essential? For example, the City routinely spends thousands of dollars on magazine ads promoting the City of Davis…is this really necessary? Does it really bring in business to the City? I doubt it.
My basic point is that it appears city staff automatically asks for tax hikes rather than look for ways to cut their own budget. Davis residents have been generous in the past by approving tax measures. Now is the time to stand up and force the City to become leaner and more efficient.
DPD – thanks for a great article on this.
We already pay a lot of extra taxes, as is, and it upsets me to learn that Navazio is promoting 3 new tax increases, not including the fee increases that will occur due to the updates for the water and sewer system.
As I recall, the City has a history of predicting budget deficits, some of which never materialized. That being said, with the downturn in the housing market and the economy in general, I don’t doubt that Davis revenues will take a hit. So, if we assume that the City is correct in its forecasts, the question is, “what do we do now?”
Further increasing the sales tax is crazy – our sales tax, at 7.75% is already at the highest tax level in yolo county:
http://www.boe.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rates.cgi?LETTER=Y&LIST=COUNTY
Increasing the sales tax will not only hurt local businesses, but it will also hurt those who can least afford it, as it’s a regressive tax.
I think Davis needs to really look at its budget and figure out where it can make cuts, rather than just asking the taxpayers to fork over more money. In the face of years of so-called budget deficits, has Davis ever really made any actual cuts? For instance, (1) city workers make far more than state workers do – why not have a freeze on salaries? (2) Why not ask the city to figure out ways to do the same services for less? I don’t believe that this has been a priority of the city in the last few years. (3) Is the city maximizing its receipt of state and federal grants? (4) Are there are services that the city currently provides that are nice to have, but not really essential? For example, the City routinely spends thousands of dollars on magazine ads promoting the City of Davis…is this really necessary? Does it really bring in business to the City? I doubt it.
My basic point is that it appears city staff automatically asks for tax hikes rather than look for ways to cut their own budget. Davis residents have been generous in the past by approving tax measures. Now is the time to stand up and force the City to become leaner and more efficient.
DPD – thanks for a great article on this.
We already pay a lot of extra taxes, as is, and it upsets me to learn that Navazio is promoting 3 new tax increases, not including the fee increases that will occur due to the updates for the water and sewer system.
As I recall, the City has a history of predicting budget deficits, some of which never materialized. That being said, with the downturn in the housing market and the economy in general, I don’t doubt that Davis revenues will take a hit. So, if we assume that the City is correct in its forecasts, the question is, “what do we do now?”
Further increasing the sales tax is crazy – our sales tax, at 7.75% is already at the highest tax level in yolo county:
http://www.boe.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rates.cgi?LETTER=Y&LIST=COUNTY
Increasing the sales tax will not only hurt local businesses, but it will also hurt those who can least afford it, as it’s a regressive tax.
I think Davis needs to really look at its budget and figure out where it can make cuts, rather than just asking the taxpayers to fork over more money. In the face of years of so-called budget deficits, has Davis ever really made any actual cuts? For instance, (1) city workers make far more than state workers do – why not have a freeze on salaries? (2) Why not ask the city to figure out ways to do the same services for less? I don’t believe that this has been a priority of the city in the last few years. (3) Is the city maximizing its receipt of state and federal grants? (4) Are there are services that the city currently provides that are nice to have, but not really essential? For example, the City routinely spends thousands of dollars on magazine ads promoting the City of Davis…is this really necessary? Does it really bring in business to the City? I doubt it.
My basic point is that it appears city staff automatically asks for tax hikes rather than look for ways to cut their own budget. Davis residents have been generous in the past by approving tax measures. Now is the time to stand up and force the City to become leaner and more efficient.
Unless there is a cooperation, by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions. We cannot rely on ambitious short-sighted Council members whose only interest is accumulating support for their future attempt at higher office.
Unless there is a cooperation, by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions. We cannot rely on ambitious short-sighted Council members whose only interest is accumulating support for their future attempt at higher office.
Unless there is a cooperation, by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions. We cannot rely on ambitious short-sighted Council members whose only interest is accumulating support for their future attempt at higher office.
Unless there is a cooperation, by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions. We cannot rely on ambitious short-sighted Council members whose only interest is accumulating support for their future attempt at higher office.
Davis Republican–
You are right on. But it’s worse than you think. See what they did not tell the public (and DPD did) is that they have already locked away much of the budget for non-discretion spending. So you have worker contracts and pensions that are already locked into place–for life for city workers.
So you have parks, public safety, and employees that account for basically all of the real spending in the city–Souza admitted this a few months ago at a council meeting. They just passed a parks tax last year. We are seeing the payout for that already. They are talking about a public safety tax. So where are you going to cut the budget?
At some point there is going to be a tax revolt in this town and I think the council knows it, but they know they can also forestall that until a future council is in place.
Davis Republican–
You are right on. But it’s worse than you think. See what they did not tell the public (and DPD did) is that they have already locked away much of the budget for non-discretion spending. So you have worker contracts and pensions that are already locked into place–for life for city workers.
So you have parks, public safety, and employees that account for basically all of the real spending in the city–Souza admitted this a few months ago at a council meeting. They just passed a parks tax last year. We are seeing the payout for that already. They are talking about a public safety tax. So where are you going to cut the budget?
At some point there is going to be a tax revolt in this town and I think the council knows it, but they know they can also forestall that until a future council is in place.
Davis Republican–
You are right on. But it’s worse than you think. See what they did not tell the public (and DPD did) is that they have already locked away much of the budget for non-discretion spending. So you have worker contracts and pensions that are already locked into place–for life for city workers.
So you have parks, public safety, and employees that account for basically all of the real spending in the city–Souza admitted this a few months ago at a council meeting. They just passed a parks tax last year. We are seeing the payout for that already. They are talking about a public safety tax. So where are you going to cut the budget?
At some point there is going to be a tax revolt in this town and I think the council knows it, but they know they can also forestall that until a future council is in place.
Davis Republican–
You are right on. But it’s worse than you think. See what they did not tell the public (and DPD did) is that they have already locked away much of the budget for non-discretion spending. So you have worker contracts and pensions that are already locked into place–for life for city workers.
So you have parks, public safety, and employees that account for basically all of the real spending in the city–Souza admitted this a few months ago at a council meeting. They just passed a parks tax last year. We are seeing the payout for that already. They are talking about a public safety tax. So where are you going to cut the budget?
At some point there is going to be a tax revolt in this town and I think the council knows it, but they know they can also forestall that until a future council is in place.
Fiscal Hawk –
Let’s start the revolt now, and make this council do something about it!
Fiscal Hawk –
Let’s start the revolt now, and make this council do something about it!
Fiscal Hawk –
Let’s start the revolt now, and make this council do something about it!
Fiscal Hawk –
Let’s start the revolt now, and make this council do something about it!
“…we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions.”
While appearing attractive at first with low private bids for services, history shows that privatization results in cutbacks in service and ultimately does not result in savings as managers/owners/corporate shareholders take their generous “slice of the pie”.
“…we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions.”
While appearing attractive at first with low private bids for services, history shows that privatization results in cutbacks in service and ultimately does not result in savings as managers/owners/corporate shareholders take their generous “slice of the pie”.
“…we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions.”
While appearing attractive at first with low private bids for services, history shows that privatization results in cutbacks in service and ultimately does not result in savings as managers/owners/corporate shareholders take their generous “slice of the pie”.
“…we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services/functions.”
While appearing attractive at first with low private bids for services, history shows that privatization results in cutbacks in service and ultimately does not result in savings as managers/owners/corporate shareholders take their generous “slice of the pie”.
Anonymous at 9:01 a.m. said, “Unless there is a cooperation by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services /functions.”
Anonymous,
Privatization of city services is not the answer. As a matter of fact, it would cost the city more money, since there would be an increased need for more oversight of services and work provided by an outside agency.
Anonymous at 9:01 a.m. said, “Unless there is a cooperation by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services /functions.”
Anonymous,
Privatization of city services is not the answer. As a matter of fact, it would cost the city more money, since there would be an increased need for more oversight of services and work provided by an outside agency.
Anonymous at 9:01 a.m. said, “Unless there is a cooperation by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services /functions.”
Anonymous,
Privatization of city services is not the answer. As a matter of fact, it would cost the city more money, since there would be an increased need for more oversight of services and work provided by an outside agency.
Anonymous at 9:01 a.m. said, “Unless there is a cooperation by those salaried by the city, that changes are necessary as Davis’ financial belt is tightened, we will be heading down the path to privatization of most city services /functions.”
Anonymous,
Privatization of city services is not the answer. As a matter of fact, it would cost the city more money, since there would be an increased need for more oversight of services and work provided by an outside agency.
The city has done exceedingly bad when it has gone out of house. In fact, the failure to properly oversee operations and hold vendors accountable has added to our fiscal woes. I certainly do not agree with privatization. I definitely support better fiscal discipline and avoiding soaking the taxpayers.
The city has done exceedingly bad when it has gone out of house. In fact, the failure to properly oversee operations and hold vendors accountable has added to our fiscal woes. I certainly do not agree with privatization. I definitely support better fiscal discipline and avoiding soaking the taxpayers.
The city has done exceedingly bad when it has gone out of house. In fact, the failure to properly oversee operations and hold vendors accountable has added to our fiscal woes. I certainly do not agree with privatization. I definitely support better fiscal discipline and avoiding soaking the taxpayers.
The city has done exceedingly bad when it has gone out of house. In fact, the failure to properly oversee operations and hold vendors accountable has added to our fiscal woes. I certainly do not agree with privatization. I definitely support better fiscal discipline and avoiding soaking the taxpayers.
I agree fiscal hawk. Soaking the taxpayers while paying $75,000 for a park survey.
Go to the city’s website and you will see all of the surveys that they have commissioned and you then begin to wonder how much money each survey costs and who is conducting the survey. Is it another friend of a council member or city staffer?
There needs to be more transparency.
I agree fiscal hawk. Soaking the taxpayers while paying $75,000 for a park survey.
Go to the city’s website and you will see all of the surveys that they have commissioned and you then begin to wonder how much money each survey costs and who is conducting the survey. Is it another friend of a council member or city staffer?
There needs to be more transparency.
I agree fiscal hawk. Soaking the taxpayers while paying $75,000 for a park survey.
Go to the city’s website and you will see all of the surveys that they have commissioned and you then begin to wonder how much money each survey costs and who is conducting the survey. Is it another friend of a council member or city staffer?
There needs to be more transparency.
I agree fiscal hawk. Soaking the taxpayers while paying $75,000 for a park survey.
Go to the city’s website and you will see all of the surveys that they have commissioned and you then begin to wonder how much money each survey costs and who is conducting the survey. Is it another friend of a council member or city staffer?
There needs to be more transparency.
Agree with much that has been said and watching the Council Tues night felt the same then too. As I said in yesterday’s blog, city continues to ask for more, more, more RATHER than look at how what they do could be done differently, more efficiently, etc.
For instance, the designer sidewalks at intersections downtown, how much did that cost? Where could that money have gone? The greenbelts: is grass which needs ongoing maintenance the best way to plant? South Davis has more natural greenbelts with less maintenance needs; should we relook at our greenbelt planting? THe Council (with Lamar and Sue excepted) have a love feast with the city staff, always praising and rarely holding them accountable.
Agree with much that has been said and watching the Council Tues night felt the same then too. As I said in yesterday’s blog, city continues to ask for more, more, more RATHER than look at how what they do could be done differently, more efficiently, etc.
For instance, the designer sidewalks at intersections downtown, how much did that cost? Where could that money have gone? The greenbelts: is grass which needs ongoing maintenance the best way to plant? South Davis has more natural greenbelts with less maintenance needs; should we relook at our greenbelt planting? THe Council (with Lamar and Sue excepted) have a love feast with the city staff, always praising and rarely holding them accountable.
Agree with much that has been said and watching the Council Tues night felt the same then too. As I said in yesterday’s blog, city continues to ask for more, more, more RATHER than look at how what they do could be done differently, more efficiently, etc.
For instance, the designer sidewalks at intersections downtown, how much did that cost? Where could that money have gone? The greenbelts: is grass which needs ongoing maintenance the best way to plant? South Davis has more natural greenbelts with less maintenance needs; should we relook at our greenbelt planting? THe Council (with Lamar and Sue excepted) have a love feast with the city staff, always praising and rarely holding them accountable.
Agree with much that has been said and watching the Council Tues night felt the same then too. As I said in yesterday’s blog, city continues to ask for more, more, more RATHER than look at how what they do could be done differently, more efficiently, etc.
For instance, the designer sidewalks at intersections downtown, how much did that cost? Where could that money have gone? The greenbelts: is grass which needs ongoing maintenance the best way to plant? South Davis has more natural greenbelts with less maintenance needs; should we relook at our greenbelt planting? THe Council (with Lamar and Sue excepted) have a love feast with the city staff, always praising and rarely holding them accountable.
If enough Davisites believe that the City needs to be more economical with our money, we can force the City to tighten it’s belt. However, a concerned group of citizens needs to organize to effectively voice our opposition.
What would be the best way to go about doing this?
If enough Davisites believe that the City needs to be more economical with our money, we can force the City to tighten it’s belt. However, a concerned group of citizens needs to organize to effectively voice our opposition.
What would be the best way to go about doing this?
If enough Davisites believe that the City needs to be more economical with our money, we can force the City to tighten it’s belt. However, a concerned group of citizens needs to organize to effectively voice our opposition.
What would be the best way to go about doing this?
If enough Davisites believe that the City needs to be more economical with our money, we can force the City to tighten it’s belt. However, a concerned group of citizens needs to organize to effectively voice our opposition.
What would be the best way to go about doing this?
WE could abolish the pass thru agreement that the county seems set to renegotiate anyway.
WE could abolish the pass thru agreement that the county seems set to renegotiate anyway.
WE could abolish the pass thru agreement that the county seems set to renegotiate anyway.
WE could abolish the pass thru agreement that the county seems set to renegotiate anyway.
“What would be the best way to go about doing this?”
I view this as an education campaign for the citizens. Most people in this community are completely unaware that this city faces a fiscal trainwreck down the line.
Why is that? The majority of people do not follow closely what happens in their community and those who do read the Davis Enterprise, are fed deceptions and falsehoods such as the story that ran on Wednesday that suggested that this problem was well-in-hand when in reality it is anything but.
Until the citizens of Davis are aware of the fiscal problems that face this city, it will be difficult to organize and to hold the council accountable.
“What would be the best way to go about doing this?”
I view this as an education campaign for the citizens. Most people in this community are completely unaware that this city faces a fiscal trainwreck down the line.
Why is that? The majority of people do not follow closely what happens in their community and those who do read the Davis Enterprise, are fed deceptions and falsehoods such as the story that ran on Wednesday that suggested that this problem was well-in-hand when in reality it is anything but.
Until the citizens of Davis are aware of the fiscal problems that face this city, it will be difficult to organize and to hold the council accountable.
“What would be the best way to go about doing this?”
I view this as an education campaign for the citizens. Most people in this community are completely unaware that this city faces a fiscal trainwreck down the line.
Why is that? The majority of people do not follow closely what happens in their community and those who do read the Davis Enterprise, are fed deceptions and falsehoods such as the story that ran on Wednesday that suggested that this problem was well-in-hand when in reality it is anything but.
Until the citizens of Davis are aware of the fiscal problems that face this city, it will be difficult to organize and to hold the council accountable.
“What would be the best way to go about doing this?”
I view this as an education campaign for the citizens. Most people in this community are completely unaware that this city faces a fiscal trainwreck down the line.
Why is that? The majority of people do not follow closely what happens in their community and those who do read the Davis Enterprise, are fed deceptions and falsehoods such as the story that ran on Wednesday that suggested that this problem was well-in-hand when in reality it is anything but.
Until the citizens of Davis are aware of the fiscal problems that face this city, it will be difficult to organize and to hold the council accountable.
So, let’s organize such a campaign.
Seriously.
Who’s interested?
So, let’s organize such a campaign.
Seriously.
Who’s interested?
So, let’s organize such a campaign.
Seriously.
Who’s interested?
So, let’s organize such a campaign.
Seriously.
Who’s interested?
I would be interested.
Frankly this blog is a good start, even though I do not agree with everything on here, it at least makes an attempt to go beneath the surface and explore deeper issues.
I would be interested.
Frankly this blog is a good start, even though I do not agree with everything on here, it at least makes an attempt to go beneath the surface and explore deeper issues.
I would be interested.
Frankly this blog is a good start, even though I do not agree with everything on here, it at least makes an attempt to go beneath the surface and explore deeper issues.
I would be interested.
Frankly this blog is a good start, even though I do not agree with everything on here, it at least makes an attempt to go beneath the surface and explore deeper issues.
Whomever is interested in discussing this further, please e-mail me at: davisausterity@gmail.com
Whomever is interested in discussing this further, please e-mail me at: davisausterity@gmail.com
Whomever is interested in discussing this further, please e-mail me at: davisausterity@gmail.com
Whomever is interested in discussing this further, please e-mail me at: davisausterity@gmail.com
I agree much with what has been said already. The City council thought it was a wise choice for them to spend redevelopment funds on a new screen for the Varsity theatre.
Then in the next breath they ask us to open our wallets and trust them with more of our money. LIKE HELL I WILL!!
I think City Council members often forget whose hard earned money goes for their pet causes.
No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.
I agree much with what has been said already. The City council thought it was a wise choice for them to spend redevelopment funds on a new screen for the Varsity theatre.
Then in the next breath they ask us to open our wallets and trust them with more of our money. LIKE HELL I WILL!!
I think City Council members often forget whose hard earned money goes for their pet causes.
No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.
I agree much with what has been said already. The City council thought it was a wise choice for them to spend redevelopment funds on a new screen for the Varsity theatre.
Then in the next breath they ask us to open our wallets and trust them with more of our money. LIKE HELL I WILL!!
I think City Council members often forget whose hard earned money goes for their pet causes.
No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.
I agree much with what has been said already. The City council thought it was a wise choice for them to spend redevelopment funds on a new screen for the Varsity theatre.
Then in the next breath they ask us to open our wallets and trust them with more of our money. LIKE HELL I WILL!!
I think City Council members often forget whose hard earned money goes for their pet causes.
No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.
“No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.”
At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.
“No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.”
At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.
“No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.”
At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.
“No one on that council is exempt either. They all agreed on this. Therefore, all five have shown they have poor priorities.”
At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.
“At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.”
I believe it was Lamar Heystek. He is the best council member.
“At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.”
I believe it was Lamar Heystek. He is the best council member.
“At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.”
I believe it was Lamar Heystek. He is the best council member.
“At least one of the members argued against a tax proposal.”
I believe it was Lamar Heystek. He is the best council member.
You anonomous people are right on Lamar.
Quite frankly, I was suprised Lamar argured against a tax proposal, but I’m glad he did.
I noticed other council members following his lead.
I am disappointed with the council on the Varsity theatre.
I think Saylor/Souza sounded the most enthusiastic about tax increases, but I noticed Sue wanted them too.
I’ll say it again. I think Lamar shocked me the most when he said no to more tax increases without fiscal restraint. I hope he keeps his word.
You anonomous people are right on Lamar.
Quite frankly, I was suprised Lamar argured against a tax proposal, but I’m glad he did.
I noticed other council members following his lead.
I am disappointed with the council on the Varsity theatre.
I think Saylor/Souza sounded the most enthusiastic about tax increases, but I noticed Sue wanted them too.
I’ll say it again. I think Lamar shocked me the most when he said no to more tax increases without fiscal restraint. I hope he keeps his word.
You anonomous people are right on Lamar.
Quite frankly, I was suprised Lamar argured against a tax proposal, but I’m glad he did.
I noticed other council members following his lead.
I am disappointed with the council on the Varsity theatre.
I think Saylor/Souza sounded the most enthusiastic about tax increases, but I noticed Sue wanted them too.
I’ll say it again. I think Lamar shocked me the most when he said no to more tax increases without fiscal restraint. I hope he keeps his word.
You anonomous people are right on Lamar.
Quite frankly, I was suprised Lamar argured against a tax proposal, but I’m glad he did.
I noticed other council members following his lead.
I am disappointed with the council on the Varsity theatre.
I think Saylor/Souza sounded the most enthusiastic about tax increases, but I noticed Sue wanted them too.
I’ll say it again. I think Lamar shocked me the most when he said no to more tax increases without fiscal restraint. I hope he keeps his word.
The Enterprise reporting on both the unfunded benefits liability and last week’s long-range financial planning was (and I am not entirely blaming the reporter, who had to cover the story while ill) abysmal.
I am hoping that the Enterprise editor will assign someone to cover the story in depth, and, most importantly, give them the time to delve into it.
First, as David Greenwald quoted, we have not been chipping away at our structural deficit. We have just changed the assumptions in our forecast model.
The Enterprise reporter chose only to paraphrase the rosy interpretation of the council majority, and did no analysis of the data presented by the finance director, and made no mention my own, less rosy, interpretation.
To start with, Paul Navazio presented a chart which showed that, even if we add no additional taxes, homeowners will be paying about $3,032 a year on SUPPLEMENTARY taxes and water, sewer and garbage fees in seven and a half years. This is over and above the base property tax, and it doesn’t count the taxes from the existing community college and Davis school district facilities bond, which vary depending on your home’s Prop 13 determined assessed value.
Remember, this is WITHOUT the new taxes being proposed by the city, or any new taxes or bonds that might be proposed by the school district or county.
Additionally, in my view, it probably underestimates the surface water project costs. Also ignored is the fact that we still do have a structural deficit, that we also have huge unfunded pension and retiree medical costs, and that our current long-term budget forecast makes such rosy assumptions about our willingness limit future salary increases to not much more than cost of living adjustments.
Paul Navazio did present this data. It was contained in his first data slide. The problem is that the reporter did not focus on the importance of laying out where we stand now fiscally, and she quoted and paraphrased only the council majority.
We have important choices to make as a cummunity, and we need a forthright, community-wide discussion on our long-term financial planning. And the discussion has to start with an honest presentation of where we stand now.
The Enterprise reporting on both the unfunded benefits liability and last week’s long-range financial planning was (and I am not entirely blaming the reporter, who had to cover the story while ill) abysmal.
I am hoping that the Enterprise editor will assign someone to cover the story in depth, and, most importantly, give them the time to delve into it.
First, as David Greenwald quoted, we have not been chipping away at our structural deficit. We have just changed the assumptions in our forecast model.
The Enterprise reporter chose only to paraphrase the rosy interpretation of the council majority, and did no analysis of the data presented by the finance director, and made no mention my own, less rosy, interpretation.
To start with, Paul Navazio presented a chart which showed that, even if we add no additional taxes, homeowners will be paying about $3,032 a year on SUPPLEMENTARY taxes and water, sewer and garbage fees in seven and a half years. This is over and above the base property tax, and it doesn’t count the taxes from the existing community college and Davis school district facilities bond, which vary depending on your home’s Prop 13 determined assessed value.
Remember, this is WITHOUT the new taxes being proposed by the city, or any new taxes or bonds that might be proposed by the school district or county.
Additionally, in my view, it probably underestimates the surface water project costs. Also ignored is the fact that we still do have a structural deficit, that we also have huge unfunded pension and retiree medical costs, and that our current long-term budget forecast makes such rosy assumptions about our willingness limit future salary increases to not much more than cost of living adjustments.
Paul Navazio did present this data. It was contained in his first data slide. The problem is that the reporter did not focus on the importance of laying out where we stand now fiscally, and she quoted and paraphrased only the council majority.
We have important choices to make as a cummunity, and we need a forthright, community-wide discussion on our long-term financial planning. And the discussion has to start with an honest presentation of where we stand now.
The Enterprise reporting on both the unfunded benefits liability and last week’s long-range financial planning was (and I am not entirely blaming the reporter, who had to cover the story while ill) abysmal.
I am hoping that the Enterprise editor will assign someone to cover the story in depth, and, most importantly, give them the time to delve into it.
First, as David Greenwald quoted, we have not been chipping away at our structural deficit. We have just changed the assumptions in our forecast model.
The Enterprise reporter chose only to paraphrase the rosy interpretation of the council majority, and did no analysis of the data presented by the finance director, and made no mention my own, less rosy, interpretation.
To start with, Paul Navazio presented a chart which showed that, even if we add no additional taxes, homeowners will be paying about $3,032 a year on SUPPLEMENTARY taxes and water, sewer and garbage fees in seven and a half years. This is over and above the base property tax, and it doesn’t count the taxes from the existing community college and Davis school district facilities bond, which vary depending on your home’s Prop 13 determined assessed value.
Remember, this is WITHOUT the new taxes being proposed by the city, or any new taxes or bonds that might be proposed by the school district or county.
Additionally, in my view, it probably underestimates the surface water project costs. Also ignored is the fact that we still do have a structural deficit, that we also have huge unfunded pension and retiree medical costs, and that our current long-term budget forecast makes such rosy assumptions about our willingness limit future salary increases to not much more than cost of living adjustments.
Paul Navazio did present this data. It was contained in his first data slide. The problem is that the reporter did not focus on the importance of laying out where we stand now fiscally, and she quoted and paraphrased only the council majority.
We have important choices to make as a cummunity, and we need a forthright, community-wide discussion on our long-term financial planning. And the discussion has to start with an honest presentation of where we stand now.
The Enterprise reporting on both the unfunded benefits liability and last week’s long-range financial planning was (and I am not entirely blaming the reporter, who had to cover the story while ill) abysmal.
I am hoping that the Enterprise editor will assign someone to cover the story in depth, and, most importantly, give them the time to delve into it.
First, as David Greenwald quoted, we have not been chipping away at our structural deficit. We have just changed the assumptions in our forecast model.
The Enterprise reporter chose only to paraphrase the rosy interpretation of the council majority, and did no analysis of the data presented by the finance director, and made no mention my own, less rosy, interpretation.
To start with, Paul Navazio presented a chart which showed that, even if we add no additional taxes, homeowners will be paying about $3,032 a year on SUPPLEMENTARY taxes and water, sewer and garbage fees in seven and a half years. This is over and above the base property tax, and it doesn’t count the taxes from the existing community college and Davis school district facilities bond, which vary depending on your home’s Prop 13 determined assessed value.
Remember, this is WITHOUT the new taxes being proposed by the city, or any new taxes or bonds that might be proposed by the school district or county.
Additionally, in my view, it probably underestimates the surface water project costs. Also ignored is the fact that we still do have a structural deficit, that we also have huge unfunded pension and retiree medical costs, and that our current long-term budget forecast makes such rosy assumptions about our willingness limit future salary increases to not much more than cost of living adjustments.
Paul Navazio did present this data. It was contained in his first data slide. The problem is that the reporter did not focus on the importance of laying out where we stand now fiscally, and she quoted and paraphrased only the council majority.
We have important choices to make as a cummunity, and we need a forthright, community-wide discussion on our long-term financial planning. And the discussion has to start with an honest presentation of where we stand now.
I should have added that the the existing supplementary tax/fee table excludes the supplementary sales tax(because it is no part of the annual property tax bill) as well community college and school district bonds, which are part of the annual property tax bill.
I should have added that the the existing supplementary tax/fee table excludes the supplementary sales tax(because it is no part of the annual property tax bill) as well community college and school district bonds, which are part of the annual property tax bill.
I should have added that the the existing supplementary tax/fee table excludes the supplementary sales tax(because it is no part of the annual property tax bill) as well community college and school district bonds, which are part of the annual property tax bill.
I should have added that the the existing supplementary tax/fee table excludes the supplementary sales tax(because it is no part of the annual property tax bill) as well community college and school district bonds, which are part of the annual property tax bill.
Sue-
What do you propose to do in order to eliminate the structural deficit?
And what has the city done in the past few years to fix the structural deficit, other than the recent sales tax and park tax increase? Has the city looked at ways to cut its budget or cut back on non-essential services?
I think this is a critical issue and citizens of Davis need to make the council aware of our position.
Sue-
What do you propose to do in order to eliminate the structural deficit?
And what has the city done in the past few years to fix the structural deficit, other than the recent sales tax and park tax increase? Has the city looked at ways to cut its budget or cut back on non-essential services?
I think this is a critical issue and citizens of Davis need to make the council aware of our position.
Sue-
What do you propose to do in order to eliminate the structural deficit?
And what has the city done in the past few years to fix the structural deficit, other than the recent sales tax and park tax increase? Has the city looked at ways to cut its budget or cut back on non-essential services?
I think this is a critical issue and citizens of Davis need to make the council aware of our position.
Sue-
What do you propose to do in order to eliminate the structural deficit?
And what has the city done in the past few years to fix the structural deficit, other than the recent sales tax and park tax increase? Has the city looked at ways to cut its budget or cut back on non-essential services?
I think this is a critical issue and citizens of Davis need to make the council aware of our position.
“davis republican said…”
In short: By far, the largest expenditures are salaries and benefits on the operations and maintenance side, and the proposed new wastewater treatment plant and surface water project on the capital expenditures side.
I think that there are things we could have done in the past,and should do in the future,that would have been and could be both fair and responsible concerning both of these areas.
Obviously, describing this will be a long post, and one I will try to find time to compose.
“davis republican said…”
In short: By far, the largest expenditures are salaries and benefits on the operations and maintenance side, and the proposed new wastewater treatment plant and surface water project on the capital expenditures side.
I think that there are things we could have done in the past,and should do in the future,that would have been and could be both fair and responsible concerning both of these areas.
Obviously, describing this will be a long post, and one I will try to find time to compose.
“davis republican said…”
In short: By far, the largest expenditures are salaries and benefits on the operations and maintenance side, and the proposed new wastewater treatment plant and surface water project on the capital expenditures side.
I think that there are things we could have done in the past,and should do in the future,that would have been and could be both fair and responsible concerning both of these areas.
Obviously, describing this will be a long post, and one I will try to find time to compose.
“davis republican said…”
In short: By far, the largest expenditures are salaries and benefits on the operations and maintenance side, and the proposed new wastewater treatment plant and surface water project on the capital expenditures side.
I think that there are things we could have done in the past,and should do in the future,that would have been and could be both fair and responsible concerning both of these areas.
Obviously, describing this will be a long post, and one I will try to find time to compose.
Oops! I know how to spell “anonymous” and “argued”. My bad!
Anyway, Sue’s report here is one more reason noone on that council should be considering levying more tax increases of any kind.
On another note, Sue’s report is a good argument against measures P and Q, but I guess it is too late now.
Oops! I know how to spell “anonymous” and “argued”. My bad!
Anyway, Sue’s report here is one more reason noone on that council should be considering levying more tax increases of any kind.
On another note, Sue’s report is a good argument against measures P and Q, but I guess it is too late now.
Oops! I know how to spell “anonymous” and “argued”. My bad!
Anyway, Sue’s report here is one more reason noone on that council should be considering levying more tax increases of any kind.
On another note, Sue’s report is a good argument against measures P and Q, but I guess it is too late now.
Oops! I know how to spell “anonymous” and “argued”. My bad!
Anyway, Sue’s report here is one more reason noone on that council should be considering levying more tax increases of any kind.
On another note, Sue’s report is a good argument against measures P and Q, but I guess it is too late now.
Another tax? A tax increase? At some point it cannot be sustained.
I had grave concerns about Measure Q – accompanied by the dire warning from the school board “not to punish our children for the misdeeds of the school district/board”. Then we hear from DPD about “Martygate”. I certainly wasn’t surprised.
A tax increase is usually the solution suggested by most politicians to correct fiscal mismanagement/lack of financial responsibility.
When taxpayers can’t pay anymore – they sell up and move – out of town. That ought to bring real estate prices lower!
It is long past time for a taxpayer revolt. A recall might be in order at this point. Citizens have got to make politicians accountable, as the Valley Oak charter proponents did.
Another tax? A tax increase? At some point it cannot be sustained.
I had grave concerns about Measure Q – accompanied by the dire warning from the school board “not to punish our children for the misdeeds of the school district/board”. Then we hear from DPD about “Martygate”. I certainly wasn’t surprised.
A tax increase is usually the solution suggested by most politicians to correct fiscal mismanagement/lack of financial responsibility.
When taxpayers can’t pay anymore – they sell up and move – out of town. That ought to bring real estate prices lower!
It is long past time for a taxpayer revolt. A recall might be in order at this point. Citizens have got to make politicians accountable, as the Valley Oak charter proponents did.
Another tax? A tax increase? At some point it cannot be sustained.
I had grave concerns about Measure Q – accompanied by the dire warning from the school board “not to punish our children for the misdeeds of the school district/board”. Then we hear from DPD about “Martygate”. I certainly wasn’t surprised.
A tax increase is usually the solution suggested by most politicians to correct fiscal mismanagement/lack of financial responsibility.
When taxpayers can’t pay anymore – they sell up and move – out of town. That ought to bring real estate prices lower!
It is long past time for a taxpayer revolt. A recall might be in order at this point. Citizens have got to make politicians accountable, as the Valley Oak charter proponents did.
Another tax? A tax increase? At some point it cannot be sustained.
I had grave concerns about Measure Q – accompanied by the dire warning from the school board “not to punish our children for the misdeeds of the school district/board”. Then we hear from DPD about “Martygate”. I certainly wasn’t surprised.
A tax increase is usually the solution suggested by most politicians to correct fiscal mismanagement/lack of financial responsibility.
When taxpayers can’t pay anymore – they sell up and move – out of town. That ought to bring real estate prices lower!
It is long past time for a taxpayer revolt. A recall might be in order at this point. Citizens have got to make politicians accountable, as the Valley Oak charter proponents did.
I am not trying to speak against all new taxes. I am just trying to let people understand where we are now, and suggest that we will have to start thinking in terms of priorities, and perhaps even postponing some of the larger projects.
I am not trying to speak against all new taxes. I am just trying to let people understand where we are now, and suggest that we will have to start thinking in terms of priorities, and perhaps even postponing some of the larger projects.
I am not trying to speak against all new taxes. I am just trying to let people understand where we are now, and suggest that we will have to start thinking in terms of priorities, and perhaps even postponing some of the larger projects.
I am not trying to speak against all new taxes. I am just trying to let people understand where we are now, and suggest that we will have to start thinking in terms of priorities, and perhaps even postponing some of the larger projects.
You, WE should all be on the lookout for a UUT, or utility users tax which would be huge windfall for the city as in our modest home we normally pay $100-$160 month JUST for PG&E. They would also seek a neglible tax(to only increase even as other revenues increase keep in mind…)on phone, cable and most likely even your cell phone.
You should all do yourselves a favor and take a peek at the contracts the city has already signed off on and look at the pay increases coming down the pike. None of those can be taken back or erased. The only thing they care about is empty chatter about how to fix the financial woes while the real game is on to fool the average inattentive voter into taxing themselves for more services that have become all-consuming of finances.
-Fred W
I await ALL of you to argue the counterpoint. Go ahead and convince me how necessary it is to solely concentrate on the revenue side. Tell me where the city is making a concerted effort at reducing costs-on anything at any level!
You, WE should all be on the lookout for a UUT, or utility users tax which would be huge windfall for the city as in our modest home we normally pay $100-$160 month JUST for PG&E. They would also seek a neglible tax(to only increase even as other revenues increase keep in mind…)on phone, cable and most likely even your cell phone.
You should all do yourselves a favor and take a peek at the contracts the city has already signed off on and look at the pay increases coming down the pike. None of those can be taken back or erased. The only thing they care about is empty chatter about how to fix the financial woes while the real game is on to fool the average inattentive voter into taxing themselves for more services that have become all-consuming of finances.
-Fred W
I await ALL of you to argue the counterpoint. Go ahead and convince me how necessary it is to solely concentrate on the revenue side. Tell me where the city is making a concerted effort at reducing costs-on anything at any level!
You, WE should all be on the lookout for a UUT, or utility users tax which would be huge windfall for the city as in our modest home we normally pay $100-$160 month JUST for PG&E. They would also seek a neglible tax(to only increase even as other revenues increase keep in mind…)on phone, cable and most likely even your cell phone.
You should all do yourselves a favor and take a peek at the contracts the city has already signed off on and look at the pay increases coming down the pike. None of those can be taken back or erased. The only thing they care about is empty chatter about how to fix the financial woes while the real game is on to fool the average inattentive voter into taxing themselves for more services that have become all-consuming of finances.
-Fred W
I await ALL of you to argue the counterpoint. Go ahead and convince me how necessary it is to solely concentrate on the revenue side. Tell me where the city is making a concerted effort at reducing costs-on anything at any level!
You, WE should all be on the lookout for a UUT, or utility users tax which would be huge windfall for the city as in our modest home we normally pay $100-$160 month JUST for PG&E. They would also seek a neglible tax(to only increase even as other revenues increase keep in mind…)on phone, cable and most likely even your cell phone.
You should all do yourselves a favor and take a peek at the contracts the city has already signed off on and look at the pay increases coming down the pike. None of those can be taken back or erased. The only thing they care about is empty chatter about how to fix the financial woes while the real game is on to fool the average inattentive voter into taxing themselves for more services that have become all-consuming of finances.
-Fred W
I await ALL of you to argue the counterpoint. Go ahead and convince me how necessary it is to solely concentrate on the revenue side. Tell me where the city is making a concerted effort at reducing costs-on anything at any level!
Yeah, stop boondoggles like $75,000 asking people how they “use parks.”
Maybe cut a few of those young incompetent planner-staffers, too, to help the budget, before all this wild talk about raising taxes.
Yeah, stop boondoggles like $75,000 asking people how they “use parks.”
Maybe cut a few of those young incompetent planner-staffers, too, to help the budget, before all this wild talk about raising taxes.
Yeah, stop boondoggles like $75,000 asking people how they “use parks.”
Maybe cut a few of those young incompetent planner-staffers, too, to help the budget, before all this wild talk about raising taxes.
Yeah, stop boondoggles like $75,000 asking people how they “use parks.”
Maybe cut a few of those young incompetent planner-staffers, too, to help the budget, before all this wild talk about raising taxes.
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
What does this mean?? Elaborate please-more than one of us who frequent this site for news and information would like to know what you mean.
Thanks in advance
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
What does this mean?? Elaborate please-more than one of us who frequent this site for news and information would like to know what you mean.
Thanks in advance
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
What does this mean?? Elaborate please-more than one of us who frequent this site for news and information would like to know what you mean.
Thanks in advance
Some of you folks live in an ugly, depressing world.
What does this mean?? Elaborate please-more than one of us who frequent this site for news and information would like to know what you mean.
Thanks in advance
“First he wants a public safety tax on the ballot sometime in 2009. Now City Councilmember Stephen Souza wants that on the ballot by November 2008 and made an impassioned plea as to why we need to fund police and fire immediately, however, that did not seem feasible to Mr. Navazio.”
I would laugh so hard if that made it onto the November ’08 ballot. Why? Well, students might vote in that election. And it would be quite possible for them to say “F— the Police” in the ballot box. You can bet that even the more liberal and community oriented amongst them will not necessarily support a tax such as this one, because of historical relations with the DPD.
And Souza wants to get re-elected. Lordy.
“First he wants a public safety tax on the ballot sometime in 2009. Now City Councilmember Stephen Souza wants that on the ballot by November 2008 and made an impassioned plea as to why we need to fund police and fire immediately, however, that did not seem feasible to Mr. Navazio.”
I would laugh so hard if that made it onto the November ’08 ballot. Why? Well, students might vote in that election. And it would be quite possible for them to say “F— the Police” in the ballot box. You can bet that even the more liberal and community oriented amongst them will not necessarily support a tax such as this one, because of historical relations with the DPD.
And Souza wants to get re-elected. Lordy.
“First he wants a public safety tax on the ballot sometime in 2009. Now City Councilmember Stephen Souza wants that on the ballot by November 2008 and made an impassioned plea as to why we need to fund police and fire immediately, however, that did not seem feasible to Mr. Navazio.”
I would laugh so hard if that made it onto the November ’08 ballot. Why? Well, students might vote in that election. And it would be quite possible for them to say “F— the Police” in the ballot box. You can bet that even the more liberal and community oriented amongst them will not necessarily support a tax such as this one, because of historical relations with the DPD.
And Souza wants to get re-elected. Lordy.
“First he wants a public safety tax on the ballot sometime in 2009. Now City Councilmember Stephen Souza wants that on the ballot by November 2008 and made an impassioned plea as to why we need to fund police and fire immediately, however, that did not seem feasible to Mr. Navazio.”
I would laugh so hard if that made it onto the November ’08 ballot. Why? Well, students might vote in that election. And it would be quite possible for them to say “F— the Police” in the ballot box. You can bet that even the more liberal and community oriented amongst them will not necessarily support a tax such as this one, because of historical relations with the DPD.
And Souza wants to get re-elected. Lordy.
“Ugly”? “Depressing”?
Remind you of someone whose bankbook isn’t big enough?
“Ugly”? “Depressing”?
Remind you of someone whose bankbook isn’t big enough?
“Ugly”? “Depressing”?
Remind you of someone whose bankbook isn’t big enough?
“Ugly”? “Depressing”?
Remind you of someone whose bankbook isn’t big enough?
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
How specifically is Legion full of crap? Maybe you really think students support the PD?? Maybe on paper they do but in the privacy of the voting booth I wouldn’t count on significant support for a PS tax. As it stands now, I won’t be voting for it either. I think for the most part, most people really support public safety in the community. That support is several miles wide but only a few inches deep. I haven’t seen the evidence that we need PD staffing (at all times) to handle large parties that get out of control. The real key is how many case numbers have been assigned. That is the one thing that can’t be fudged…if its documented it gets a case number. If traffic cites are stagnant and case numbers aren’t increasing then there is a lot of preventive patrol going on and that too is good. Remember current personnel always want others on board as it creates less work, per officer and seniority dates get more spread out which also has many advantages. A larger organization also has more promotional opportunities. Regular street patrol does not keep most motivated indefinitely.
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
How specifically is Legion full of crap? Maybe you really think students support the PD?? Maybe on paper they do but in the privacy of the voting booth I wouldn’t count on significant support for a PS tax. As it stands now, I won’t be voting for it either. I think for the most part, most people really support public safety in the community. That support is several miles wide but only a few inches deep. I haven’t seen the evidence that we need PD staffing (at all times) to handle large parties that get out of control. The real key is how many case numbers have been assigned. That is the one thing that can’t be fudged…if its documented it gets a case number. If traffic cites are stagnant and case numbers aren’t increasing then there is a lot of preventive patrol going on and that too is good. Remember current personnel always want others on board as it creates less work, per officer and seniority dates get more spread out which also has many advantages. A larger organization also has more promotional opportunities. Regular street patrol does not keep most motivated indefinitely.
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
How specifically is Legion full of crap? Maybe you really think students support the PD?? Maybe on paper they do but in the privacy of the voting booth I wouldn’t count on significant support for a PS tax. As it stands now, I won’t be voting for it either. I think for the most part, most people really support public safety in the community. That support is several miles wide but only a few inches deep. I haven’t seen the evidence that we need PD staffing (at all times) to handle large parties that get out of control. The real key is how many case numbers have been assigned. That is the one thing that can’t be fudged…if its documented it gets a case number. If traffic cites are stagnant and case numbers aren’t increasing then there is a lot of preventive patrol going on and that too is good. Remember current personnel always want others on board as it creates less work, per officer and seniority dates get more spread out which also has many advantages. A larger organization also has more promotional opportunities. Regular street patrol does not keep most motivated indefinitely.
To Legion:
You’re full of crap.
How specifically is Legion full of crap? Maybe you really think students support the PD?? Maybe on paper they do but in the privacy of the voting booth I wouldn’t count on significant support for a PS tax. As it stands now, I won’t be voting for it either. I think for the most part, most people really support public safety in the community. That support is several miles wide but only a few inches deep. I haven’t seen the evidence that we need PD staffing (at all times) to handle large parties that get out of control. The real key is how many case numbers have been assigned. That is the one thing that can’t be fudged…if its documented it gets a case number. If traffic cites are stagnant and case numbers aren’t increasing then there is a lot of preventive patrol going on and that too is good. Remember current personnel always want others on board as it creates less work, per officer and seniority dates get more spread out which also has many advantages. A larger organization also has more promotional opportunities. Regular street patrol does not keep most motivated indefinitely.
Spooky,
You are completely erroneous in your statements and thinking. Don’t believe everything you think.
Spooky,
You are completely erroneous in your statements and thinking. Don’t believe everything you think.
Spooky,
You are completely erroneous in your statements and thinking. Don’t believe everything you think.
Spooky,
You are completely erroneous in your statements and thinking. Don’t believe everything you think.
To Spooky San,
I just read you’re reply to anon who said legion is full of crap. That was incorrect. It should have read that you and legion are both full of crap.
To Spooky San,
I just read you’re reply to anon who said legion is full of crap. That was incorrect. It should have read that you and legion are both full of crap.
To Spooky San,
I just read you’re reply to anon who said legion is full of crap. That was incorrect. It should have read that you and legion are both full of crap.
To Spooky San,
I just read you’re reply to anon who said legion is full of crap. That was incorrect. It should have read that you and legion are both full of crap.