Tag Cloud
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Citizen Oversight Committee for Measure U
by Paayal Zaveri, published on October 1, 2012 at 5:33 PM
Storyline: city politics
City Council will consider a proposal Tuesday for a committee that would oversee any funds the city collects if Measure U, a proposed half-cent increase in sales tax, is approved by voters in the upcoming November election.
If approved, Measure U is expected to generate about $28 million per year, and the funds will be put into the city’s general fund to be used for things such as police and fire services, public safety, park maintenance and youth services.
The proposal that City Manager John Shirey will present to the council Tuesday calls for the committee to have five members, with specific requirements for each seat.
“Four out of the five seats require people with specific backgrounds and experience,” said Stephanie Mizuno, assistant city clerk.
Each seat represents a different interest that will be affected by increased sales tax.
- A public accountant with audit experience
- A representative for business interests
- A member from a neighborhood association
- A representative of a bona-fide taxpayer organization
- A member of the community at large
“I think that having a representative from a neighborhood association will increase accountability. It assures an independent view coming in and also a person that offers a neighborhood perspective,” said Sondra Bentancourt, from the Ben Ali Neighborhood Association in District 2.
Committee members will be expected to serve two-year terms and cannot be current city of Sacramento employees or council members. The city’s Personal and Public Employee Committee (P&PE) will be responsible for interviewing and nominating candidates. Based on the P&PE’s recommendations, the City Council will appoint the committee members.
The committee will have to review the city’s annual independent audit report. Additionally, it will be required to present a written report at City Council meetings stating:
- The amount of revenue generated by Measure U
- What programs and services are being funded by Measure U and how the funds are being distributed
- The review of the city’s annual independent audit report and how that relates to the use of Measure U funds
The full report regarding the committee guidelines can be found here.
What do you think about this? How will this help Measure U be more effective if passed?
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
Vote NO on Measure U: Restore city services via smart spending reforms, not a damaging tax hike.
Heck, I'd LOVE to be on the committee.
All the promises the city council members are now making to use the funds to restore essential services will die a hard death on November 7th, the day after the election, when the municipal unions dictate to the council how big the pay raises and benefits increases will be.
Measure U is nothing more than another funding opportunity fior the city unions.
I thought the Bee editorial on their no endorsement was quite good. http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/30/4864860/sacramentos-sales-tax-hike-measure.html
The general fund is one big commingled stew comprised of a dozens of different revenue sources which are in a constant state of flux, from rapidly rising utility taxes, slowly growing existing sales taxes, flat or falling property taxes, etc. Meanwhile, general fund revenues are spent in a thousand different ways, from rising pension and health care costs currently on autopilot, to step pay raises, to discretionary raises, to capital improvements and paper clips, making it impossible to trace how a fresh infusion of $28 million would be spent.
The committee would have no authority, no powers, no independent staffing, no resources and no accountability except to those council members who appointed them. It's nothing more than a bogus and deeply cynical Potemkin village to flash before unsuspecting voters to misled them into believing that in independent body of citizens will be looking after their interests.
If the city council is willing to dishonestly pass this off as as true independent oversight, how can anyone trust them not to blow higher taxes on fat union contracts approved in closed door session with zero opportunity for public input and zero disclosure or analysis of their long-term costs to city taxpayers?
Vote NO on Measure U: restore city services via smart spending reforms, not a damaging tax hike.
http://agency.governmentjobs.com/saccity/default.cfm
Click on the Police Officer (Lateral Posistion)
Salary: $26.82 - $32.60 Hourly
$2,145.45 - $2,607.82 Biweekly
$55,781.64 - $67,803.24 Annually
however those numbers don't match-up with:
"*Appointments may be made between $4,216.30 – $6,271.95 based on qualifications and/or incentives. Incentive pay begins on the first day of employment."
Now multiply by 12 months $50,595.6-$75,263.4. Starting base pay is ~$5,000 less than stated on the city's website and incentives, cert pay and experience drive the top pay up.
and add 32% onto those numbers... $66,786-$99,348
That's just for salary and pension....not any other benefits...and they walked away from the table? While almost everyone else stepped up.
Does anybody seriously believe that JB's pension reform bill with the new CalPERS formulas isn't going to be challenged Come January 1st? Ultimately groups will be paying 1/2 of their pension contribution? That's 16% for public safety gropus....
This measure fails on two fronts...the city did not get full signed and sealed participation from all bargaining units....due to SPOA.
Remember This? From June 8th?
City Council members discussed a proposed increase to the sales tax of one-quarter to one-half percent on Thursday – but said the measure won’t make it to the ballot unless the city and labor unions come to some agreement about pension cuts first.
“We need to demonstrate to our constituents that we have undergone pension reform,” City Councilman Rob Fong said. “It would not be responsible of us to go out and ask for more money from our citizens, if we’re not taking care of business on the cost side from a structural standpoint.”
Councilman Kevin McCarty said he agrees with Fong.
“Voters should go to the polls saying, ‘You’ve done everything on your end, Sacramento, before you asked me for more money,’ ” McCarty said.
http://sacramentopress.com/headline/69149/Council_members_say_no_to_sales_tax_increase_without_pension_cuts
With SPOA walking away, not agreeing to pay any of their 9%, even after receiving a 6 1/2% pay increase over the last 18 months....forcing the layoff of 19 sworn officers...the city DID TRY to get 100% participation...they didn't get it done.
If they won't pay 9% now...just imagine what their response will be to 16%.