more articles like this

Frank Hotchkiss Takes a Stand
updated: Feb 08, 2012, 9:00 PM

By Frank Hotchkiss

Dear Friend,

You may have heard: Mayor Schneider has proposed putting four measures on the city ballot for the upcoming November 2012 election.

The proposed measures are:

1. All city employees who participate in the California Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) should pay their full share for their retirement rather than only part of it, as they now do. This would save the city $2M-$2.5M a year. Requiring the police and fire and other city employees to contribute fully to their own retirement will take the issue off the table in future contract negotiations. This has been a bone of contention for a long time, and frankly has given the unions a black eye in the public purview.

2. Downtown businesses which serve liquor after 11 PM (pretty much only the clubs) would have a business license fee increase to pay for the cost of police enforcement there, since the police have to focus so much attention on this part of town as the bars close. This would raise about $250,000 annually.

3. Add a ½ cent sales tax citywide on everything purchased by all of us in the city (probably raising $10M annually).

4. Agreement to split the results of the tax increase described in (3) above evenly between the City and our schools;

Even in difficult economic times such as these, it may be desirable to seek more funds to accomplish civic goals, such as better and more successful handling of indigents, re-opening the Main Library on Monday, increasing the number of police on the street, and many other improvements. While the City Council could have undertaken these initiatives on its own, Helene has wisely (in my opinion) turned to the public at large to establish your preference.

What happens next?

First, all four of the initiatives must garner enough voter signatures to be placed on the ballot - approximately 9,000. These must be collected by early June.

Secondly, a majority of us - you, me and our fellow citizens - must approve the measures at the ballot November 6, 2012, assuming enough signatures are obtained. Thus we have two opportunities to state our preferences: Once re. signing on to this for the ballot, and a second time at the ballot itself.

Finally, the sales tax and the retirement contribution measures are inter-dependent. Both must pass, or neither passes. Either we are all contributing, including ourselves and our public employees, or none of us is.

As you can probably tell from the tone of this letter, I think the Mayor's initiatives are smart and courageous. She is putting herself in the cross-hairs of fire, police and other unions for the sake of the city at large. She understands that ANY suggestion of a new tax is not going to win immediate or universal approval. And obviously the downtown clubs are going to object vociferously, although they haven't been paying for their extra police coverage for years.

In closing, let me add that unfortunately Jerry Brown has emptied our purse for the sake of the state's poor economic policies by shutting down our Redevelopment Agency and taking all the money we saved in it over the years. These initiatives seek to make up the difference.

I think it would be great to eliminate PERS contributions from labor negotiations and have the employees contribute all they should to their own retirement, just as you and I must do for ourselves.

Our schools are operating in the red. Good schools are essential for a successful community. Without them, a city will deteriorate.

And I have always argued for more police and more effective social services to better handle the indigents who live - and die - on our streets. My goal remains to dramatically reduce -- or eliminate - our public streets as a place to dwell.

Thank you for taking the time to read such a lengthy letter.

For more on this, please go to www.InvestInSantaBarbara2012.com, where Helene explains it in greater detail.

Cordially,

Frank Hotchkiss

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

ROGER DODGER	2012-02-08 09:13 PM
I know you may all say different things but in reality your all working together.
COMMENT 255286P	2012-02-09 04:15 AM
IF I understand this correctly, currently city employees pay 7% of their base salary into CalPers and the city pays 7%. A 50-50 split. What is being asked of these employees is to bare the full burden of this by voting themselves a 7% tax increase. Yea, that is going to fly, like a lead brick. I understand the reasoning but this simply not fair. Good luck getting that passed. Glad I don't work for or live the city.
COMMENT 255292	2012-02-09 06:54 AM
I'm glad the redevolment money is gone. This will stop the building of high density low cost housing. So my vote is still NO!
COMMENT 255295	2012-02-09 07:12 AM
Sounds like life in general in SB - if you want the good life here, you gotta pay for it. I think I'd vote yes for these measures.
COMMENT 255296	2012-02-09 07:15 AM
I was waiting for the library to open in my parents' hometown (in Riverside County) a few weeks back. The library there is only open about 4-6 hours a day, and it's closed entirely on Sundays and Fridays. There was a huge crowd of people waiting for it to open, and a mother was there with a small child. The kid asked "why can't we go in?" The mother said "it's not open yet. We have to wait." I would have been a bit more honest, were it not for social mores. I would have said "Because some people hate books and little kids--when these bad people were little, someone paid taxes so they could go to school, read books, go to the library, drive on nice streets, etc... But now that they're grown, they refuse to do the same for little kids like you."
COMMENT 255304	2012-02-09 07:34 AM
Agree with 286P. Asking public employees to pay all of their retirement contributions may seem reasonable, but the net results will be almost a 10% drop in pay for these workers. The basic truth is that we will see a city-wide strike before this will ever happen. I work for a private company here that matches our 401K contributions on a 2:1 basis and also has a pension plan that we pay nothing into...the company contributes 100%. It's not unheard of where the company contributes a lot towards retirement. So I think the mayor might have a better chance at acceptance if she asks for a 50-50 split of the the city's portion of the pension contributions.
COMMENT 255309	2012-02-09 07:43 AM
I have a business in the city, but live outside of city limits and therefore cannot vote on this issue--"taxation without representation". I think the mayor is taking a solid step. However, it is not going to undo years of abuse of taxpayers by city government whose workers receive pay and benefits that are totally off the charts compared to what private sector workers make. When will we all wake up to the reality that services are being cut due to the vast sums of money going out to retirees.
COMMENT 255310	2012-02-09 07:44 AM
Until waste is cut from our city budget, I can't support us all having to pay more taxes. The city should take a detailed look at employees in various departments and determine if they are necessary - for example the planning department. And, are their salaries and benefits fair but not more than the city can afford? It seems the city has a budgeting problem and are afraid to cut back. It's hard to do, but it's what we all have to do when the budget isn't there to get all we want. If the city has to lay people off because they're really not necessary considering our tight budget, that is what should happen. The responsibility of the city government should be to service the residents and the community, not to be an employment agency.
COMMENT 255313	2012-02-09 07:47 AM
Don't waste the ink!
COMMENT 255319P	2012-02-09 07:55 AM
286 et al: why should some city workers pay more into their retirements than others? This proposal would level that field --- all should pay the same percentage into the retirements instead of getting a freer ride. And it would save the city money that would/could go to other civic needs. Thanks, Frank Hotchkiss; I agree it's a gutsy move by the mayor, even though I do not agree on the raising of the sales tax.
COMMENT 255322P	2012-02-09 07:59 AM
Well if I had any doubts yesterday about how I felt, now that Frank H has weighed in, Im a solid NO!
COMMENT 255323P	2012-02-09 07:59 AM
After seeing this morning Indepedent I must take back part of what I said. City Cops and firefighters now pay only 3% to CalPers. If the new law gets passed they'd be required to pay the full 9%. Still, a 6% tax increase is big. The rest of my statement stands.
COMMENT 255335	2012-02-09 08:16 AM
The difference is private workers don't get the guarantee state workers do, no matter if your 401k works or not depending on market you will only get what you put in. To get near 80-85% of your final salary you would have to put in a contribution well beyond what your employer would match and your payout would only be what you put in. Public Employees are guaranteed their payout at taxpayers expense which is why CALPERS is 85 Billion underfunded by the states numbers. Also even our Democratic Governor is pushing for this to change while state workers pay more in its been noted that local workers are underpaying into the system. 296 yes they hate children, except this city which has no real population change from the 90's has about 75% more employees than it did then. We have two elected officials both admitting they need to get this in check, yet they and subsequent councils failed to stand up for this in "negotiations" with the employees.
COMMENT 255342P	2012-02-09 08:27 AM
Funding Schools is a State issue. Other than the employer contribution, the CAL PERS is also a State issue - one that the Legistature is currently reviewing and will likely make significant changes. The employer contribution is a met and confer collective bargaining issue - that is the appropriate method.
COMMENT 255344	2012-02-09 08:30 AM
Raise the Sales Tax and watch as more people go out of the city to shop. Goleta isn't that far and people already go to Ventura to go to places like Target and Marshals. This will only further decimate the Malls like La cumbre which is already a wasteland and Paseo Nuevo. Cut the budget and bring costs down. Stop building bulb outs and roundabouts and brick cross walks that have to be ripped out after 3 months. More Money will only lead to more waste.
COMMENT 255345P	2012-02-09 08:32 AM
Who or what organization or deep pockets is funding this slick effort- obviously our Mayor isnt paying for the marketing and research thats happened out of her salary?!
COMMENT 255347P	2012-02-09 08:37 AM
I didn't vote for Schneider (or Hotchkiss for that matter), but this plan makes sense and I give both of them credit for proposing/supporting what's sure to be a less than politically expedient measure.
COMMENT 255352	2012-02-09 08:40 AM
We recognize that the city is in bad shape. Mayor Schneider is doing what she can. Having Conservatorship for my Great Aunt, I can state that as a civil employee, her PERS is what allowed her to survive and stay in her apt. She was bleeding money to cover the cost of her illnesses. PERS was part of her negotiated contract. Without the city covering insurance and their share of 401K contributions, we would just have to pay policemen, firemen, etc. more. Many of these civil workers would be grossly underpaid without it. Of course, this can't be severed from labor negotiations.
COMMENT 255355	2012-02-09 08:51 AM
I like the way the Mayor is going with this plan. As far as the above comment that you will drive to Goleta to avoid the half-cent tax. Really? You will drive our of your way to avoid 50 cents tax on a $100 purchase. I'm guessing most people shop based on were they can find the items they need- whether that is in SB or Goleta.
BECKY	2012-02-09 08:57 AM
As a former public employee, I'll offer my 2¢ again... It used to be that public employees were paid less than private employees, but had better benefits and better job security. That completely changed in the late 1990s (esp. in the IT field). Private sector jobs were lost in droves, and salaries went down significantly in most fields (in terms of real buying power). In the meantime, public sector salaries continued to go up, as did their benefits, all while maintaining their job security. It is now the case that public sector jobs are paid more, have better benefits, can retire earlier, and have better job security than private sector jobs. That's part of why the whole system is broken and must change. Public sector employees will have to pay more for their benefits, get paid less so their salaries are similar to private sector jobs, be downsized by half (losing their job security), and not be able to retire until the same age as the rest of us in order for the scales to be balanced again. [It would be nice if the private sector rewards could rise to public sector levels, but that's not how economics works when you're in a recession.] Few in government seem to get this or have the guts to enact it. Pain should be shared equally if we hope to recover our economy and get our country back on track. So... yes on 1 & 2, and no on 3 & 4... only they've already said that option isn't on the table. Like I said, government doesn't get it. Vote out all those who don't understand what's needed to fix it, and vote down plans to tax us more, rather than downsize government.
COMMENT 255377P	2012-02-09 09:27 AM
wow looks like the Helene backers are busy bees this morning.....all two of them...
COMMENT 255383	2012-02-09 09:39 AM
Here Schneider and Hotchkiss have their hands out, yet on Jan. 13, 2012, they "celebrated" the groundbreaking of yet another public housing project. I believe the latest public housing project, the Bradley Studios on Bath Street, will even give its residents free wi-fi. As a taxpayer (who pays for his own wi-fi), I find this their double-speak just plain offensive. I'll agree to the Schneider-Hotchkiss tax increase when they agree to stop building more free condos for the homeless, the addicts and the welfare recipients. Saving people from their own bad decisions is expensive. Let's cut first; tax last.
COMMENT 255396	2012-02-09 10:04 AM
Mayor Schneider, a tough row to hoe but I'm with you.
COMMENT 255409	2012-02-09 10:29 AM
We're short of funds because the corporate tax rate is at an all time low.
COMMENT 255412	2012-02-09 10:35 AM
You don't need all City empoyees to pay their entire contribution, you just need Police and Fire employees to pay what what all the other employees are paying. Non-safey city employees pay 7% of their salary into PERS. City Fire and Police pay basically nothing into their PERS, the City covers all of it - and it costs way more because they have 3% @ 50. Remember, employees are forced to participate in PERS, and cannot participate in Social Security. If you have employees pay all contributions, you will need to increase pay, or you will loose quality employees to the private sector.
COMMENT 255437	2012-02-09 11:47 AM
I support just about anything Mayor Schneider proposes, including this. I also think the Council should place a single-use bag ban on the ballot in June or November. Finally, how sad that they gave in to the Veronica Meadows developer and placed that ballot measure - to give away our parkland and creek habitat for a private developer to pave over - on the June (republican primary) ballot instead of November, when history indicates there will be almost twice the voter turn out. How sad the Grant House and 4 other council members, in their zeal to approve this project, placed the developer's measure on the ballot in June instead of November. But I support the Mayor's plan!
COMMENT 255488	2012-02-09 02:14 PM
NO MORE TAXES. Most City employees already pay the whole amount. We are talking about Police and Fire. I think these guys deserve the benefit.
COMMENT 255529	2012-02-09 03:58 PM
Municipal employees will not leave in droves, from the admin assistants, planning on up they are paid far more than their counterparts in private industry while largely being immune from performance quotas. I would challenge any of those posting in favor to show how the municipal jobs pay less than their private sector not even counting benefits package which is above almost all private positions. As for the fact municipal employees not paying social security thats about a 12% chunk off the private employees wages, they pay 7% total and if a private sector person wants a 401k its another contribution so while private sector may pay 16-18% per pay period for SS + 401k, public employees pay 7% for a superior plan supported by the private sector employees. Is that fair?
COMMENT 255532	2012-02-09 04:20 PM
Not happy about added sales tax when the real problem is Prop 13. So I pay more sales tax while certain homeowners and business entities don't pay their fair share of property tax. These are all band aids to try to fix what Prop 13 has done.
COMMENT 255552	2012-02-09 06:07 PM
Hello...? ANYONE want to discuss the Billions of CA Taxpayer dollars going to support illegals in our State? From Birth, Education,Subsidized Housing, Food Debit Cards, uninsured and unlicensed drivers, the costs are EPIC! At least City employees are paying taxes and into their retirements.
COMMENT 255559	2012-02-09 06:43 PM
Amen, Becky. As a former tech manager, in private industry, I saw jobs disappear, and salaries shrink to half what they were before, because there were way too many of us trying to land way too few jobs. Lots of those jobs that used to pay $100k or more went to India. Lots. 401k's became 1/10th of their former value in some cases. Pensions have mostly been eradicated in the private sector. The public sector wages, meanwhile, continued steady, or rose, along with benefits. It probably would be fine to have this status quo in the public sector, had not the Great Recession hit the reset button on private wages and benefits that halved people's incomes and wiped out their retirement savings. Now the public sector wages and benefits look very out of whack against the private sector.
COMMENT 255599	2012-02-09 08:33 PM
Agree public sector is getting too many benefits, retirement wise, but ever consider all the paid holidays? How about the sick days? My private boss came to my desk (drafting table) on the one or two total days I ever called in sick, so "see how I was doing". The public employees stay home with their kids, call in sick to extend paid vacations days off, etc. Other people's money is the clue to how this all goes down. If that were a private employers money going out the door in large quantities, it would be stopped. OPM = other peoples' money. Plus, the city workers start at 8:30, get 1.5 hours off at lunch, and quit at 4:30. But notice the counters and lights become dim at about 4pm. They really have a fantastic work situation compared to the private sector. They must pay more, or this discourse will never end.
COMMENT 255607	2012-02-09 08:57 PM
don't cut your nose to spite your face...public employee benefits gives the necessary competition for other employers to keep their employee benefits competitive. Once public employee benefit is cut so will everyone else's benefits on the private market...Keep it strong and private market benefits will steadily improve. Instead of fighting to break down these great public employee pensions-fight for them to keep it alive so someday it might improve your own.
COMMENT 255630P	2012-02-10 06:57 AM
Well, we see that Frank The Tank Hot Chicks cannot resist sending out political opinions in mass emails again. That did not work so well last time when he threw a hissy fit about Sharon Byrne.
COMMENT 255665P	2012-02-10 08:24 AM
First get your own house in order. Do a major pension, salary and benefit reform at the city. Only after that is done would I ever consider any kind of tax increase. The schools have their own property tax iniative going on the ballot. They do not need the Mayors tax, nor did I ever hear the school board mention it. Makes me think th Mayor included school funding as a way to get a yes vote for more funding for the city. So for now, that is a big NO vote from me.
COMMENT 255693	2012-02-10 09:23 AM
Not happy about added sales tax when the real problem is Prop 13. So I pay more sales tax while certain homeowners and business entities don't pay their fair share of property tax. These are all band aids to try to fix what Prop 13 has done.
COMMENT 255770P	2012-02-10 02:01 PM
Schneider and Hotchkiss agreeing on something -- that just proves how out of step this is with the feelings of our community.
COMMENT 255921	2012-02-11 08:56 AM
Yes,its much better to have both sides squabbling and not agreeing on anything, so worried about their micro-constituencies that they cannot even consider compromise and drive us to the brink of insolency. Sound familiar?

34% of comments on this page were made by Edhat Community Members.