Keith Mashburn on Council Compensation

KEITH MASHBURN SUBMITTED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT REGARDING COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL.

In light of the situation in the City of Bell, the Acorn recently identified the salary of our council members at about $14,000 annually.  As it turns out this is not the total compensation the taxpayers provide to our Council members.

In addition to the salary,  a council member receives an additional $400 per month car allowance.  What most people are not aware of, is that council members also receive medical benefits as well as retirement benefits and other forms of benefits.  For them to be compensated with benefits from a part time PUBLIC SERVICE position, that is normally reserved for full time employment, is excessive.  A council members total compensation reaches about $53,000 per year.

I currently pay $1400 per month for my medical insurance.  I am not running for city council so the taxpayer can pay my medical insurance and provide me a second retirement for PART TIME work.  If elected, I will not accept these benefits and will move for their elimination.  And, under all circumstances, whenever the question is asked about pay, the total compensation package will be reported.

I am running for council because I want to give back, not receive….every citizen should rest in the fact that they get quality representation for the lowest cost possible; unfortunately that doesn’t seem to be happening on any level of government today.

The taxpayers of Simi Valley deserve to know exactly how much they are paying their elected officials.  After all, they are paying the bills.

————————————————–

UPDATE: This information has been publicly available on the Police Officers Association website for quite a while. You can see this information by clicking here. It’s also important to note that the Simi Valley POA has run paid advertisements in the Acorn publishing this data.

CITY HALL DISCLOSURE: In the wake of the City of Bell Scandal, the city has acknowledged the importance of detailing this data. The complete details of City Council compensation and all benefits were disclosed in the most recent City Council meeting. To see the webcast, click here and look at the meeting dated August 2, 2010.

45 thoughts on “Keith Mashburn on Council Compensation

  1. First and foremost, Mr. Mashburn undoubtedly wasn’t watching the Simi Valley City Council meeting Monday night, because if he had, he would have seen the City Council take action on the very item he is trying to make headlines with. Effective immediately the current salaries of the elected officials, city manager, city attorney and Chief of Police will be displayed on the cities website for all to see. So in all fairness and in the light of full disclosure, it would seem only fair that Mr. Mashburn do the same. So here are my questions: How many years did you work as a firefighter? How many hours of overtime did you get paid and what did that equal in pay? At what age did you retire? And did you ever go out on a workman’s comp and if so what was it for, and how much were you paid? Also, let’s talk about your retirement package. How much did the county (if you worked in the City of Simi Valley, your employer was the County of Ventura) pay into your retirement and how much did you contribute? What was your yearly percentage of salary increase negotiated by the Union? And what is your take home retirment paycheck per month?
    Thank you.

    Like

  2. I agree Tina. We moved from Los Angeles a few years ago. It is election season, so people go into trash the city mode. This happens in Los Angeles all the time.

    I love Simi Valley. I guess we can’t get away from everything we disliked about LA.

    Like

  3. Mike
    What I was reading in the Acorn was a jab at Bob Huber, but I didn’t see Paul Miller’s purpose to do that to as a defenseof his action while Mayor but as a chance to stick up for Steve Sojka…the same type of thing that Barbara did here. I don’t think that pointing out valid agruments to rational decisions the council has mad in the past is bad, but Barbara didn’t do that here, she is slinging mud…and Mayor Miller’s argument wasn’t compelling either. If E-Verify works 54% of the time and is free, why not use it? Instead we pay someone to do an evaluation on the E-Verify site? I would rather catch 54% than not use a tool to catch someone breaking the law. If they were concerned about inforcing the law, someone would do something about strawberry stands; that hurts local business. As a business owner that had to comply with ADA regulations and spend hundreds installing a wheelchair ramp near my business to operate here, I have yet to see a wheelchair ramp or ADA compliant restroom near any of the strawberry stands around town. Business friendly…I think not!

    Like

  4. Look, I wasn’t “slinging mud”. It just seems that every time there is an election candidates all of a sudden find they have a terrible city council that we are on the take, that we are only in it for the $$. They think that is the only way to get elected, and personally I think it stinks! All of a sudden they have all the answers because its election time and they want to grab headlines. And you wonder why no elected officials blog.
    Oh and by the way Mr. Fishman, the City Council did try to do something about the “Strawberry stands” but the local residents would have no part of it. They want their local strawberry venders on the corner(s). Where were you to fight that battle?
    Did you come to the City Council and voice your opposition to allowing them to stay? If you did, you were in the minority. ADA is a FEDERAL law, and now I see why you are so angry…

    Like

  5. ADA is a federal law. For now on, just post on your business you refuse to serve the disabled. Any other groups you don’t want to serve?

    Please list your business here, so I don’t shop at such a bigoted place.

    Like

  6. E-Verify is in fact 96% accurate. That is indisputable. The exact Westat report that Glen Beccera, Mayor Miller and Barbra Willaimson have all sited, clearly states E-Verify is 96% accurate. It is a disgrace and shamefull that they have chosen to take one number in the report(that being the 54%) and twisted it to make it look like the accuracy is a “coin toss”.

    Read the short paragraph and you’ll see to say otherwise is completely disengenuise.

    “Westat estimates that overall, E-Verify queries result in an accurate response 96 percent
    of the time and an inaccurate response 4.1 percent of the time. But only 6.2 percent of
    all E-Verify queries relate to unauthorized workers. Westat estimates that, primarily
    due to identity fraud, approximately half (54 percent with a plausible range of 37 to 64
    percent) of unauthorized workers run through E-Verify receive an inaccurate finding of
    being work authorized. As a result, the 54 percent statistic relates only to the 6.2
    percent figure, as shown in Graph 1 above, and means that of all E-Verify queries, only
    approximately 3.3 percent are for unauthorized workers that were incorrectly found
    work authorized”.

    The simple fact is that our Council is trying to make it look like this program is a complete failure and thats why they haven’t adopted it. This is shameful!!!

    We the people need to stay informed and not let the dogma of our city leaders obscure the facts.

    Like

  7. I agree with the others. Simi Valley is a great place to live and our council is working hard in a tough environment.

    ADA existed when the economy was good. There are just a few bitter people trying to tear down the community to get elected.

    Like

  8. Paul Miller has served our community well for many years. He has widespread support in our community. Are you calling him a liar?

    Like

  9. Fishman,

    Thanks for the clarification. When I read “cronyism” I think of the argument against political appointments, so I misunderstood.

    Back to the original point, what is the primary concern regarding compensation? Is it a suggestion that the city isn’t transparent enough, or that the compensation is unfair? You’ll notice that I posted some updates at the end of the article referencing the POA website and related Acorn ads, along with the recent Council meeting where this data was disclosed to the public.

    I’m hoping Keith Mashburn can jump in and add some color from his standpoint.

    Thanks for keeping it clean!

    Like

  10. When the ADA was inacted or that me pointing out that our CITY made me upgrade the existing restroom which costs thousands or that they made me install a handicap ramp, have a handicap ramp painted and signed is neither bigoted or wrong…just a fact. Ms. Williamson I am asking for a level playing field; you are supposed to be the LEADER! I know it is a difficult and somtimes uncomfortable place to be but the council chambers holds what would be a fraction of the overall population of this city! The city enforces the federal ADA laws, they did on me but they don’t on strawberry stands, that is a double standard! When someone gets into and accident due to one of these stands being parked in a place that has cars stop in the middle of the street to buy (have watched it happen) who will be left paying for the damages? The taxpayer…because the city won’t have a legal leg to stand on! Then the rules will be changed…problem is that is not leadership Ms. Williamson. How many more years should we give this coucil to learn how to lead…another 8? 10? 12? I don’t think Keith is saying he has all the answers and for one I am ready to give the new blood a chance! I have lived here for decades…love this town too much not to want the best for it!

    Like

  11. Isn’t that a little high schoolish? You don’t like when someone ponts out that the facts don’t back story, so you resort to the old “are you calling me liar?”

    The facts are there clear as day in the same report Mayor Miller cited. People can come to their own conclusion as to what Mayor Miller’s intentions were.

    Like

  12. Mr. Fishman, what you failed to point out to the readers was the fact that you were upgrading your business and because of that the LAW required you to make it handicap accessible. The city didn’t just walk up to you one day and say Oh Mr. Fisherman we want you to become ADA compliant and spend thousands of dollars in the process. By the way, which “strawberry stands” are you speaking about? I know about the ones on the street corners whereby there is no structure, hence no need for ADA, so what are you referring to? I didn’t and do not support “street corner” business. Never have, and never will, not just because it is an election year (not for me) but because these people don’t pay workman’s comp, don’t support our city tax base, and are at the same time in competition with local venders, so what part of leadership have I failed to provide?

    Like

  13. Paul, please point out to me why you have such a problem with employment verification. Is/are there some businesses in town that you know of that employ illegals? If so, please, call me on my cell (805) 231-2497. I will personally make sure the City not only becomes aware of it, but that they will act immediately. And just so you know, anyone can report a business who hires illegal’s even you Mr. Fishman, but I know you don’t want to become THAT involved, you just want to complain about what a crummy job someone else is doing.

    Like

  14. Barbra, I think you may have missed the point of my article. If the city is going to be transparent, I feel all of the facts should be shared. In my opinion, it is not full disclosure to only publish the base pay as was done on the city website. It is my opinion, that the entire compensation package should be revealed to the people who pay for it, the local taxpayer.

    It is my opinion, that receiving health care and retirement benefits for a part time elected position is excessive. I further don’t feel a $400 per month car allowance is appropriate. I do believe that a stipend or pay of approximately $1400 per month is fair and appropriate.

    If the position of council member was full time, I may feel differently about the benefits offered.

    I stated that I would not accept the above benefits if elected. I am trying to show the differences between myself and other candidates for city council. I am offering my opinions so the electorate can make their decision.

    You apparently feel that me trying to demonstrate differences, stink. Well, thats ok cause that is your opinion. We both get to convey these opinions to the voters and they will make an educated decision.

    Your request for my personal retirement and pay information is, again, in my opinion, not the subject of my article/letter.

    Mature debate, discussions, and exchange of ideas, can only lead to a better end product for the citizens of Simi Valley.

    Like

  15. Barbra,

    I don’t have a problem with emplyment verification. I DO have a problem with our elected officials NOT taking advantage of a free, accurate and easy employment verification system administered by the Federal government, that adds a much needed layer of authentication using Dept. of Homeland secuity and Social Security data bases. A system which is MANDATED for use in federal contracts.

    Now if I take you up on your offer and call you on your cell to report a problem with a business hiring people who are not legal to work here, just exactly what are you going to do? Your probably going to place a call to the business and ask them if they are KNOWINGLY hiring illegals or something to that effect. And they of course are going to say no, or provide you with copies of the I-9 documentation they are required to collect. The same I-9 system that is so plagued by forgery and tha the only check and balance is the “employer ” verifying that the documents look ” reasonably” authentic. So how effective is that?

    So now we’ll have The Dept. of Barbra- Imigration and Enforcement right?

    The whole point is that you, Glen Becerra and Paul Miller cited that the only reason E-Verify was NOT being utilzed in Simi Valley was because of it’s accuracy. You even went on to state that should E-Verify become more dependable/accurate, you would pursue it’s implementaion (I’m paraphrasing).

    So the question is quite simple. Based upon the 96% accuracy in the Westat report, the SAME paragraph that YOU have cited from, why are you, Glen Becerra and Paul Miller opposed to it’s implimentation here in Simi Valley?

    For what it’s worth. I have a lot of respect for you for coming out here to take this issue head-on, as well as many other things you stand up for. But in this case I think you are absolutely on the wrong side of it.

    Like

  16. I completely agree with Mashburn’s point of view!! He has the right attitude and focus. Our City Council members should only receive a stipend. I mean seriously, I have attended a council meeting where all they talk about is serving pancakes, how to feed the pets of the homeless, and cheerleading competitions..REALLY??? I think Simi Valley tax payers should attend at least one of these public forums and see it for themselves just how “hard” they work for us.

    Like

  17. That is so ignorant. City council is singlehandedly working my new business through the system because city staff is too inept to do it. I would be up the creek without them, and you think we need to introduce inexperience to the council because someone mentioned pancakes? Dumb. Keep the council, fire the staff. I would bet my shoes the new advocate is being hired to clean house.

    Like

  18. Paul, you’re entitled to your opinion about E-verify and I am entitled to mine, and had it not been for Bob Huber, you would have never even of heard of E-Verify. And Tim, Mr. Mashburn was so intent on disclosure I just though he would be willing to disclose. Evedently that is not the case.

    Like

  19. Barbra: Wouldn’t you agree that there is a difference between personal disclosure and public? The compensation paid to elected officials by taxpayer funds, particularly since the elected body sets their own compensation, clearly needs to be disclosed. I know you agree with that.

    I suspect you also agree that no candidate for City Council should be required to bare their personal finances. You would be right in rejecting a call for that from you, and I suspect you would defend any other council member asked to do the same.

    Am I wrong?

    Like

  20. It sounded to me like Barbra took on a bit of an elitist attitude concerning her “true” pay as a council member. I think that might have been a knee jerk reaction on her part, but all the same I hope that is not how she reacts on the council……
    Mr. Walsh says that the City Council is singlehandedly working on his new business……… REALLY?????
    I don’t know about you but I did not vote for this council to hand hold certain business’s through the inept “system”.
    I believe true leaders and quality council members would have fixed the inept system years ago. It has been widely known for years that Simi Valley’s “system” is broken beyond repair and yet it still marches on as usual.
    Now they want to hire someone else to be a liason between the business owner and the system?????? Come on, just FIX the system instead of throwing money at it.
    I for one felt that Mr. Mashburn made a good and rational point and I would be very interested to hear more from this candidate.

    Like

  21. Well put Mike!

    Ms. Williamson, I don’t want to continue off point. I do agree with you about the reasons we should not support roadside stands. In addition they violate the city’s sign ordinance. The problem is the truck is their “building”; where are they going to the restroom and are they washing their hands when dealing with food? It’s wrong in so many ways…No need to go on, but it should be changed! By the way if I do recall Mr. Mashburn did attend that council meeting you speak of and spoke out in opposition of the strawberry stands. Maybe this is an issue that will be revisited when the NEW council is seated!

    I think Mrs. Foster and Mr. Bacerra and the larger council by default are in for a wake up call. This single election could change the entire make-up of the council and I don’t know why that is such a bad thing. We don’t need career politicians. $53K that is a lot of money!

    Thank you for engaging in the discussion Ms. Williamson…that is much more than your counterparts seem to be doing!

    Like

  22. Barbra, you’re right. I would not have heard about E- Verify if not for Bob Huber. So now that I’ve read about it myself I feel passionately that this is just one more great tool available for use by our City.

    I am disappointed that our council has continued to circle the wagons around the completely disingenuous claim that the program has a 50-50 accuracy rate. I don’t think that position will serve you well. But as I’ve said before, I do respect you for engaging the conversation.

    Like

  23. Tim, all elected officials have to disclose their financial standing.. It’s called a 700 form and has to be filled out yearly. Mr. Mashburn receives his pension/retirement from the State of California and as such it was derived from your tax dollars. So my question still remains, he is collecting workman’s comp? Is he collecting a pension like Randy Adams? Did he retire at 50 and collecting 90% of his salary? I think the public has a right to know.
    Mike, let’s not get snotty. Candidates are going to say what you want to hear. Just look at Obama and what he promised. Now that he’s in the job look what you’re getting. Stop drinking the kool-aid.
    Fishman: (please call me Barbra) you make good points about the bathrooms and washing their hands. My main reason not supporting this was because they don’t have the same costs as businesses that have stationary businesses, again, the residents came out in force to keep the strawberry venders, so the Council, who is accused of not listening, did in fact listen to the residents and let the vender(s) stay. Sometimes you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t!!! I don’t recall Mr. Mashburn being at the meeting, however he may very well have been.
    Sedell Soldier: I don’t remember saying it was 50/50% accuracy. I believe it is much higher accuracy; the problem is if we make a mistake, the cost could be overwhelming. Look, I am not trying to justify everything the CC does; I have always voted my conscience as does the rest of the Council. We are your neighbor, not the enemy. When we make a decision it affects us the same way it affects you.

    Like

  24. Excellent point Mr Mashburn! Thank you for bringing some transparency to our local government. I have been following you for sometime now, and I must say that I am impressed. Our current council needs a wake up call! We need sombody to shake things up and bring in fresh ideas…not the “cronynism” that has been going on for sometime now.

    Ms. Williamson..your calling out of Mashburn is exactly what we are all tired of. We dont want the same old mud-slinging and we are done with the elitest additude.
    We remember your 2009 comments in the Star:

    “They don’t even have a clue how much it takes to run a campaign. They think the money is going to fall from the heavens,” she said

    Read more: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2009/feb/10/simi-councilwoman-fined-over-illegal-donations/#ixzz0vmQigAsg
    – vcstar.com

    It’s nice to know what you think of the voters. I think you need to “stop drinkning the kool-aid” and realize that we are the “they” that elected you!

    Like

  25. So I attempt to gain full disclosure on the total compensation package of a local elected city council, and then I’m turned into the villain by one of the council members. So this is government of the people for the people?

    Like

  26. Oh I see, its ok to put a false light on the City Council, but Mr.Masburn gets a free ride? I would expect that from a supporter. And yes, the City Council took a reduction in pay same as the police officers. My 2009 Income tax from the City of Simi Valley to the IRS showed I earned $16,500.(this figure included my car allowance) Like all businesses the city paid for the workmans comp and my medical insurance. I don’t know what that comes to because I don’t see it. Does that answer your question? Its a public document so you can call the city and get it,its not a top secret file. Since I don’t follow Mr. Mashburns career, I have no idea of his age or when he retired or if he’s been on workmans comp…its only a question and since he’s a candidate for City Council I as the voting public want to know, just like you have the right to know about me.
    No Mr. Mashburn you’re not a villain, do you feel like one?

    Like

  27. Wow. I’m very concerned Ms. Williamson. You fail to see why Simi is becoming a worse community than it was just 10 years ago. you fail to recognize that Mr. Sedell controls you, despite the fact he works for you. You fail to address the real issues facing our community. I find it perplexing that you don’t know how much all those other benefits cost, since “you don’t see” the costs on your check. Well, they do add up. Such as Mr. Sedell’s near FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR TOTAL COMPENSATION PACKAGE! )$400,000…..yes, it’s true, and if you don’t know it, then SHAME on you.

    Mr. Mashburn is raising issues that need to be discussed. So I will turn it on you. Did you ask Mr. Miller all those questions about what age he retired from the Simi Police Department? How much of his retirement the City has been paying all these years? All the same questions (medical costs / disability etc..) of the Mayor? You’re deflecting, and the reality is, your career dissipation light is blinking. We will see how you look in a few short years when you are back on the ballot. Reality is coming. By the way, I am glad to pay all those benefits to people who risk life, limb and property to help others. As a part timer, you should be ashamed to talk to people in the rude manner you do.

    Like

  28. Thanks to the City of Simi Valley staff, I was able to obtain the figures I was looking for. If you will go to the city website, you will find that a council person makes a salary of $14,938 and benefits come to $38,051.16 for a total of $52,920.16 (if my math is correct). So, when I keep my word, and I always have, I will be saving the city taxpayers about $38,051.16 per year. Wow if all five on the council did the same, that should be about $264,600 (if my math is correct). A couple police officers? A few public works people?

    Like

  29. I must say that I appreciate the fact that Barbra Williamson has been participating in this and other blogs on this site. My question, however, would be where are the rest of the council members?
    I know we are only the citizens of this city, and not the developers, but we should still be important to the council members, especially those that are up for re-election.
    At this point it sounds to me like Mr. Mashburn has the right idea. Recent events in Bell and elsewhere, should be a wake up call about giving the public FULL disclosure. Not partial, not half but FULL and COMPLETE disclosure. Circling the wagons will no longer be tolerated by the public.

    Like

  30. I’ll do this first: Barbara Williamson, you should step up and offer back all your perks. You should make your own car payment. I won’t go so far as to say you should reimburse us taxpayers for you prior years of medical costs, but as a “pension reformer,” you should decline to accept your PERS retirement you’ve “earned” as a part timer. The rest of the council should do the same. The City Manager can’t effectively manage people, and although he is full time, the city should lop off two of the assistant CM’s and reduce his several retirement plan package back into a simple PERS Management plan! Compensate the employees fairly well to get good ones. Sedell is overcompensated. Time to go!

    Like

  31. Monty,
    You are spot on. There is a reason that all the Dept. Heads call it ” The Sedell Show”. Morale is at an all time low at the City. Staff is completely frustrated at the lack of leadership, and right now everyone is watching in amazement how deep Sedell is involving himself in this election.

    When a City manager is having almost daily behind closed door meetings with Council Members who are up for election and refers to challengers as ” the other camp”, we have crossed over into an area where we now have City personel, information and resources being used in an election
    for the incumbents. This is completely ILLEGAL.

    Like

  32. Mike,

    You really should look closely at the TOTAL compensation of our top city administrators. The city manager, city attorney and their assistants. I hear it is MUCH higher than their base salaries.

    Like

  33. Jim D,

    You are spot on here. If the drunk from Bell was making 800k, which is absurd, is Sedells. Near 400k any less corrupt? I’ll cut Randy Adams a little slack. Bells plan, that he was specifically hired for, was to demolish three police departments and merge into one. If you did the math, each chief was making 160,000 per year, you multiply by three and potentially, the taxpayers are saving paying one guy 400k, versus 3 guys 160 each….yes I know, Charlie Beck and Sheriff Baca run large agencies for less…I’m just looking at the logic behind the decisions. By contrast, Sedell makes more than his counterparts in TO, Camarillo and Ventura. He’s right up there with Santa Clarita, which is significantly different and more challenging.

    Like

  34. Mike

    I think the City didn’t post the benefits until yesterday afternoon. I had seen the Acorn article or ad with the benefits, but did not want to quote something I had not received first hand from the City. I asked the question and the City came through. Needless to say, asking a member of the council on this blog would not suffice.

    Like

  35. Hey Barbra Williamson, do you want to disclose all the special favors you have done for people? Do you want to disclose what all of the people who have donated to your campaign expect in return?

    Could you disclose the names of businesses which cover an employee’s health benefits for a PART-TIME position? Most businesses require a person to work 32+ hours to be covered.

    The Simi Valley website does not seem to mention ALL of the compensation, do you want to disclose why that is?

    Do you want to disclose how you left the bank that you used to work for?

    Do you want to disclose all the times that you have not paid businesses for services in a timely fashion as other customers do?

    Do you want to disclose all of your associations with a particular side which has and will prevent you from doing your job on City Council?

    Do you want to disclose that you are the only one found guilty of illegal campaign contributions?

    Do you want to disclose why you think that the City Council should get involved in the costs that a business has? Perhaps a list of donors might shed some light on that subject.

    All of your “questions” just amount to a personal attack and I do not think it is acceptable. It does show your bias and the fact that you dislike outsiders. Most of the questions are private, personal issues and none of your business. What the City pays IS the business of ALL the residents in Simi Valley. That is part of the problem since you do not seem to get that.

    Like

  36. I would also like to see all the additional appointments/positions that a City Council member gets because they are a City Council member, such as being on other boards. This can create a conflict of interest and could be considered compensation due to their elected position.

    Like

  37. Sedell Soldier Said on Aug 7,

    “When a City manager is having almost daily behind closed door meetings with Council Members who are up for election and refers to challengers as ” the other camp”, we have crossed over into an area where we now have City personel, information and resources being used in an election for the incumbents. This is completely ILLEGAL.”

    And this is why? Because every thing that goes on in the City, every press release, every decision, every council vote, every agenda item . . ., everything, to include the “selection” of vacant seats on the council, is done from the perspective of perpetuating the continued power base of one man. Guess who? Why, it’s the man behind the curtain. And the official line remains, “nothing to see here, move along . . .”

    Like

  38. Last night it was mentioned that the City Council has managed to get all the benefits that they do by claiming a low hourly rate and that it is a full time position. There are a couple of serious problems with this though.

    According to the State of CA the current minimum wage is $8/hour. If you calculate the hourly rate that the City Council is getting, it comes out to $7.18 ($14,937.96 / 2080). This means that the hourly rate is BELOW the CA Minimum wage and suggests that they are not following the law. No, I am not suggesting that they get a raise.

    The next issue is that if they are claiming it is a full-time, 40 hours per week, job, then I would like to see proof that they are actually working full-time and not abusing their “full-time” position. Most of the City Council have other jobs, which seems to be a conflict to me in that they can not work at their “full-time” City Council position.

    It seems that this “fraud” is known in City Hall, but it has not been mentioned to the public nor any action taken to correct the matter.

    Like

  39. Thanks for the POA website link, Mr. Judge. Checked out the pension figures, looks like the same Acorn ad they ran a long time ago, the same one few cared about way back when. Ho hum, same old negative PR tactics, like scaring kids by protesting a private residence. They really need a better PR firm.

    When it gets down to it, Council members work 60 hours per week, often more, sometimes a few hours less per week, but very rarely fewer than 40 per week. Take your highest payment figure (from the total compensation package), and they get less than $20 per hour for everything they do for our community.

    To Mr. Sandberg, I would just say that the “Part Time” thing is just semantics, wording on file on the job description. It does little to truly describe the hours the job commands. A simple fix is to change the job description to just call it Full Time, with no wording on how many hours are required. Since they are elected, it is their choice if they want to work 1 hour or 100 hours per week, since in the end voters are their boss anyway.

    There, problem solved, they would be so-called “Full Time.” Would that make you happy? So many people on this blog are so foaming at the mouth about the part-time versus full-time thing. They are elected officials. It DOES NOT MATTER how they are labeled. They are at-will employees: at the will of the voters. Why even call them employees at all? Just call them elected officials and leave it at that.

    Like

  40. Ok, so make it a full-time position and then force those who have a conflicting full-time position to resign that job. There is a serious problem when you make conflicting claims as to whether it is a full-time position (to get the benefits) or part-time (to justify taking another full-time position). I am not sure of that is so hard to understand.

    I have to wonder about the claim of 60 hours per week when you consider that some of the people have a 40 hour job, then are on the boards of many companies and agencies. How does that work? Do they have a magic time machine? Do they have some means not not sleeping at all?

    I would love to see the claim of 40-60 hours per week documented and proven.

    Like

  41. If you listened to the incumbents talk, then you should have heard that if the people find the benefits unacceptable, they, Becerra & Foster, will get rid of them. Of course, there is no discussion scheduled, at least not that I know of, nor is there a means for people to vote on it, so the words are meaningless.

    If there really was full transparency, then all those questions would be answered.

    I have no problem with full-time benefits, IF they quit their other jobs and work full-time. Otherwise, in my opinion it is fraud.

    Based on the response in another thread, it seems that some people don’t want this information coming out. Then again, you just need to search for the comment about the “shoo” posts to see what some people don’t like and can’t respond to.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s