<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><!-- generator="b2evolution/2.4.6" -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>In the News</title>
		<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php?blog=2</link>
		<description></description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
		<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://b2evolution.net/?v=2.4.6"/>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
				<item>
			<title></title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/09/04/title-6?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 17:00:59 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="main">Open Government</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">558@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;p&gt;VoSD &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/government/article_5bd95d8e-b6f6-11df-adfd-001cc4c03286.html&quot;&gt;Silence of the Thumbs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
...Yet in a growing number of cities, DeMaio wouldn't be allowed to use his personal Palm Pre with slide-out keyboard, or any other electronic device, personal or otherwise, to send or receive city-related messages during meetings. That's because legal and transparency questions have governments at various levels wringing their hands, and, in some cases, retreating...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This is the sort of thing a &lt;a href= &quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/07/28/test-1?blog=3&quot;&gt; sunshine ordinance can clarify.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/09/04/title-6?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>VoSD <a href="http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/government/article_5bd95d8e-b6f6-11df-adfd-001cc4c03286.html">Silence of the Thumbs</a><br />
...Yet in a growing number of cities, DeMaio wouldn't be allowed to use his personal Palm Pre with slide-out keyboard, or any other electronic device, personal or otherwise, to send or receive city-related messages during meetings. That's because legal and transparency questions have governments at various levels wringing their hands, and, in some cases, retreating...</p>

<p>This is the sort of thing a <a href= "http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/07/28/test-1?blog=3"> sunshine ordinance can clarify.</a></p><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/09/04/title-6?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/09/04/title-6?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>Another Reason for Sunshine: Bell</title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/08/03/another-reason-for-sunshine-bell?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:59:12 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="main">Open Government</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">555@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://calaware.typepad.com/calaware_today/&quot;&gt;Why Bell Happened and How to Prevent Repeats&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
OPEN GOVERNMENT -&lt;a href=&quot;http://voiceofoc.org/countywide/who_says_you_can_t_fight_city_hall/article_a7d8e4e2-9a78-11df-aefd-001cc4c03286.html&quot;&gt;- The explosive self-dealing scandal that has in a matter of weeks blown away the city of Bell's senior administrative tier was probably inevitable, given the gaps in the Brown Act and the newspaper publishing tradition that once provided small towns with a watchful eye and a to be reckoned with, notes a commentary in Voice of OC.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/08/03/another-reason-for-sunshine-bell?blog=2#more555&quot;&gt;Read more &amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/08/03/another-reason-for-sunshine-bell?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://calaware.typepad.com/calaware_today/">Why Bell Happened and How to Prevent Repeats<br />
</a><br />
OPEN GOVERNMENT -<a href="http://voiceofoc.org/countywide/who_says_you_can_t_fight_city_hall/article_a7d8e4e2-9a78-11df-aefd-001cc4c03286.html">- The explosive self-dealing scandal that has in a matter of weeks blown away the city of Bell's senior administrative tier was probably inevitable, given the gaps in the Brown Act and the newspaper publishing tradition that once provided small towns with a watchful eye and a to be reckoned with, notes a commentary in Voice of OC.</p>
<a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/08/03/another-reason-for-sunshine-bell?blog=2#more555">Read more &raquo;</a><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/08/03/another-reason-for-sunshine-bell?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/08/03/another-reason-for-sunshine-bell?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>Sol Beach Puts Hold on Staff Pay</title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/07/20/sol-beach-puts-hold-on-staff-pay?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 00:36:43 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="main">Budget</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">550@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;p&gt;Another local city sees its staff make concessions on staff compensation (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sbscuttlebutt.com/cgi-bin/newsscript/newsscript_mainwide.pl/?record=20&quot;&gt;Read SolBeachSB&lt;/a&gt;). &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Encinitas city staff were given a &lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2008/09/20/staff_is_wiser_than_the_council?blog=3&quot;&gt;15% raise over 4 years&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/07/20/sol-beach-puts-hold-on-staff-pay?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another local city sees its staff make concessions on staff compensation (<a href="http://www.sbscuttlebutt.com/cgi-bin/newsscript/newsscript_mainwide.pl/?record=20">Read SolBeachSB</a>). </p>

<p>Encinitas city staff were given a <a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2008/09/20/staff_is_wiser_than_the_council?blog=3">15% raise over 4 years</a>.</p><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/07/20/sol-beach-puts-hold-on-staff-pay?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/07/20/sol-beach-puts-hold-on-staff-pay?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>School District to go Shopping</title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/30/school-district-to-go-shopping?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:12:04 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="alt">School Districts</category>
<category domain="main">EUSD</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">546@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/encinitas/article_bd55099b-8141-5acb-8f74-790ca7789ab4.html&quot;&gt;ENCINITAS: School district will ask voters about renovation &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Voters in the Encinitas Union School District will decide in November whether to allow the district to borrow as much as $44.2 million for renovation work and technological upgrades at its nine campuses.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Trustees voted 4-1 Tuesday to put the bond measure on the ballot this fall, saying it was vital for the district to have modern classrooms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/30/school-district-to-go-shopping?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/encinitas/article_bd55099b-8141-5acb-8f74-790ca7789ab4.html">ENCINITAS: School district will ask voters about renovation </a></strong><br />
Voters in the Encinitas Union School District will decide in November whether to allow the district to borrow as much as $44.2 million for renovation work and technological upgrades at its nine campuses.</p>

<p>Trustees voted 4-1 Tuesday to put the bond measure on the ballot this fall, saying it was vital for the district to have modern classrooms.</p><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/30/school-district-to-go-shopping?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/30/school-district-to-go-shopping?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>Carlsbad Desal Looking for SDCWA Aggreement</title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/25/carlsbad-desal-looking-for-sdcwa-aggreem?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:35:34 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="main">Water Districts</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">545@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;div class=&quot;image_block&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/media/blogs/a/desal-plant.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; title=&quot;&quot; width=&quot;449&quot; height=&quot;353&quot; /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p&gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;SCV &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.surfcityvoice.org/2010/06/poseidon-desal-deal-govt-may-rescue-junk-bond-project/&quot;&gt;Poseidon Desal Deal? Govt. May Rescue Junk Bond Project&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Due to soaring cost estimates and lack of private financing for a proposed 50-million-gallon per day Carlsbad desalination project, a government water agency may negotiate a takeover deal with the project&amp;#8217;s developer, Poseidon Resources, Inc...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;But far from instilling caution in public water boards or city councils, Poseidon&amp;#8217;s risky business seems to have inspired them to bend over backwards&amp;#8212;at taxpayers&amp;#8217; expense&amp;#8212;to help keep the company&amp;#8217;s dreams alive...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;See Also: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nctimes.com/business/article_f68429fc-a33b-592e-885d-6aa6e8caa6c8.html&quot;&gt;NCT Water Authority to Explore Agreement&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/25/carlsbad-desal-looking-for-sdcwa-aggreem?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="image_block"><img src="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/media/blogs/a/desal-plant.jpg" alt="" title="" width="449" height="353" /></div><p> <br />
<strong>SCV <a href="http://www.surfcityvoice.org/2010/06/poseidon-desal-deal-govt-may-rescue-junk-bond-project/">Poseidon Desal Deal? Govt. May Rescue Junk Bond Project</a></strong><br />
Due to soaring cost estimates and lack of private financing for a proposed 50-million-gallon per day Carlsbad desalination project, a government water agency may negotiate a takeover deal with the project&#8217;s developer, Poseidon Resources, Inc...</p>

<p>But far from instilling caution in public water boards or city councils, Poseidon&#8217;s risky business seems to have inspired them to bend over backwards&#8212;at taxpayers&#8217; expense&#8212;to help keep the company&#8217;s dreams alive...</p>

<p>See Also: <a href="http://www.nctimes.com/business/article_f68429fc-a33b-592e-885d-6aa6e8caa6c8.html">NCT Water Authority to Explore Agreement</a></p><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/25/carlsbad-desal-looking-for-sdcwa-aggreem?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/25/carlsbad-desal-looking-for-sdcwa-aggreem?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>Real Pension Liablity to Hit Home?</title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/21/real-pension-liablity-to-hit-home?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 22:53:12 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="main">Pension</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">544@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SacBEE &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sacbee.com/2010/06/20/2835040/dan-walters-pension-fund-bombshell.html&quot;&gt;Pension Fund Bombshell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Governmental Accounting Standards Board has dropped a bombshell&lt;br /&gt;
with preliminary new rules that, if adopted, would force governments&lt;br /&gt;
to increase projections of pension liabilities by using tighter&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;discount rates&quot; &amp;#8211; effectively, lower assumptions of pension fund&lt;br /&gt;
earnings.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The huge California Public Employees' Retirement System, the&lt;br /&gt;
California State Teachers' Retirement System, the University of&lt;br /&gt;
California Retirement System and dozens of locally managed pension&lt;br /&gt;
funds would no longer be able to minimize unfunded liabilities by&lt;br /&gt;
adopting rosy scenarios of future earnings.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, through his financial aide, David Crane,&lt;br /&gt;
has waged a war of words with the union-controlled Cal- PERS, alleging&lt;br /&gt;
that the nation's largest public pension fund has been lowballing its&lt;br /&gt;
long-term liabilities.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Schwarzenegger has said he won't sign a new state budget without&lt;br /&gt;
pension reforms of some kind. A few days ago, the administration&lt;br /&gt;
reached agreement with four state worker unions on some mild pension&lt;br /&gt;
changes mostly affecting new workers...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The governor and Crane have touted a Stanford University study&lt;br /&gt;
suggesting that, in calculating future pension obligations, the three&lt;br /&gt;
state retirement systems stop using a discount rate that's the same as&lt;br /&gt;
their assumed rates of annual earnings return, 7.5 percent or higher.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/21/real-pension-liablity-to-hit-home?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>SacBEE <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/2010/06/20/2835040/dan-walters-pension-fund-bombshell.html">Pension Fund Bombshell</a><br />
<br />
</strong></p>

<p>The Governmental Accounting Standards Board has dropped a bombshell<br />
with preliminary new rules that, if adopted, would force governments<br />
to increase projections of pension liabilities by using tighter<br />
"discount rates" &#8211; effectively, lower assumptions of pension fund<br />
earnings.</p>

<p>The huge California Public Employees' Retirement System, the<br />
California State Teachers' Retirement System, the University of<br />
California Retirement System and dozens of locally managed pension<br />
funds would no longer be able to minimize unfunded liabilities by<br />
adopting rosy scenarios of future earnings.</p>

<p>Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, through his financial aide, David Crane,<br />
has waged a war of words with the union-controlled Cal- PERS, alleging<br />
that the nation's largest public pension fund has been lowballing its<br />
long-term liabilities.</p>

<p>Schwarzenegger has said he won't sign a new state budget without<br />
pension reforms of some kind. A few days ago, the administration<br />
reached agreement with four state worker unions on some mild pension<br />
changes mostly affecting new workers...</p>

<p>...</p>

<p>The governor and Crane have touted a Stanford University study<br />
suggesting that, in calculating future pension obligations, the three<br />
state retirement systems stop using a discount rate that's the same as<br />
their assumed rates of annual earnings return, 7.5 percent or higher.</p><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/21/real-pension-liablity-to-hit-home?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/21/real-pension-liablity-to-hit-home?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>Taxpayers Going Postal Over Public Employee Pensions, Perks. Unions&#8217; miscalculation: Opting for secrecy.</title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/18/taxpayers-going-postal-over-public-emplo?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:07:52 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="main">Budget</category>
<category domain="alt">Open Government</category>
<category domain="alt">Pension</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">542@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.firstamendmentcoalition.org&quot;&gt;BY PETER SCHEER&lt;/a&gt;&amp;#8212;For public employee unions&amp;#8211;those representing police, firefighters, teachers, prison guards and agency workers of all kinds at the state and local level&amp;#8211;these are the worst of times.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Despite record high membership and dues, and years of unparalleled clout in state capitols, public sector unions find themselves on the defensive, desperately trying to hold on to past gains in the face of a skeptical press and angry voters. So far has the zeitgeist shifted against them that, on one recent weekend, government employees were the butt of a Saturday Night Live skit, followed, the next day, by a New York Times magazine cover article proclaiming the &amp;#8220;Teachers&amp;#8217; Unions&amp;#8217; Last Stand.&amp;#8221;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Public unions&amp;#8217; traditional strength&amp;#8211;the ability to finance their members&amp;#8217; rising pay and benefits through tax increases&amp;#8211;has become a liability. Although private sector unions always have had to worry that consumers will resist rising prices for their goods, public sector unions have benefited from the fact that taxpayers can&amp;#8217;t choose&amp;#8211;they are, in effect, &amp;#8220;captive consumers.&amp;#8221;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;At some point, however, voters turn resentful as they sense that: (1) they are underwriting, through their taxes, a level of salary and benefits for government employment that is better than what they and their families have; and (2) government services, from schools to the DMV, are not good enough&amp;#8212;not for the citizen individually nor the public generally&amp;#8212;to justify the high and escalating cost.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;We are at that point.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In California, government sector unions, once among the most entrenched and powerful labor groups in the country, mainly have themselves to blame. For most of the post-war period, they were a force for progressive change, prospering by winning over public support for their agenda.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In the 1970s and 80s they backed laws like the Public Records Act and Brown Act to make state and local government more transparent. Because unions enjoyed broad-based political support, efforts to enhance government accountability and responsiveness to voters were seen&amp;#8211;correctly&amp;#8211;as benefiting the unions and their members.The public interest and public employees&amp;#8217; interests were aligned.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;But the unions switched strategies. Although the change was gradual, by the 1990s California&amp;#8217;s government unions had decided that, rather than cultivate voter support for their objectives, they could exert more influence in the Legislature, and in the political process generally, by lavishing campaign contributions on lawmakers. Adopting the tactics of other special interest groups, government unions paid lip service to democratic principles while excelling at the fundamentally anti-democratic strategy of writing checks to legislators, their election committees and PACs.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;While not illegal (in fact, such contributions are constitutionally protected), the unions&amp;#8217; aggressive spending on candidates puts them on the same moral low ground as casino-owning tribes, insurance companies and other special interests that have concluded that the best way to influence the legislative process is to, well, buy it.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Public unions in California turned distrustful of voters and ambivalent about government transparency. In the mid-1990s unions backed improvements to the Brown Act, California&amp;#8217;s open meeting law, but also inserted a provision assuring that the public would have no access to collective bargaining agreements negotiated by cities and counties&amp;#8212;often representing 70% or more of their total operating budgets&amp;#8212;until after the agreements are signed.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;What happens when voters and the press have no opportunity to question elected officials about how they propose to pay for a lower retirement age, healthcare for retirees&amp;#8217; dependents, richer pension formulas and the like? The officials make contractual promises that are unaffordable, unsustainable (and, in general, don&amp;#8217;t come due until after those elected officials have left office). In the case of Vallejo, in northern California, this veil of secrecy, and the symbiotic relationship it fosters, has led to municipal bankruptcy.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The biggest blow to unions&amp;#8217; public support has come from revelations about jaw-dropping compensation and pension benefits. Police have received unwelcome attention for budget-busting overtime and the manipulation of eligibility rules for &amp;#8220;disability pensions,&amp;#8221; which provide higher benefits and tax advantages. Other government employees, particularly managers, have been called out for &amp;#8220;pension-spiking:&amp;#8221; Using vacation time, sick pay and the like to boost income in the last years of employment, which are the basis for calculating retirement benefits.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Such gaming of the system boosts starting pensions to levels that can approach, and even exceed, employees&amp;#8217; salaries. Some examples from the reporting of the Contra Costa Times&amp;#8217; Daniel Borenstein: A retired northern California fire chief whose $185,000 salary morphed into a $241,000 annual pension; a county administrator whose $240,000 starting pension was 98 per cent of final salary; and a sanitary district manager who qualified for a $217,000 pension on a salary of $234,000. At a time when most Californians anticipate an austere retirement (if they can afford to retire at all), government pensions are a source of real voter anger.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The harm to the credibility of public employee unions from these excesses is made far worse by the unions&amp;#8217; attempts to hide them. The revelations about pay and pension abuses have surfaced only as a result of lawsuits. (Disclosure: The First Amendment Coalition has been a plaintiff in several of these cases.) Public employee unions, rather than taking the lead to stop abusive compensation practices, have vigorously opposed disclosure of individual employees&amp;#8217; salaries and pension amounts.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Public employee unions need to reboot. The old strategy of cynically buying political influence and excluding the public from decision-making has run its course. Unions can rebuild public support by recommitting to an agenda of open government in the public interest. If they don&amp;#8217;t, they will be further marginalized.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/18/taxpayers-going-postal-over-public-emplo?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.firstamendmentcoalition.org">BY PETER SCHEER</a>&#8212;For public employee unions&#8211;those representing police, firefighters, teachers, prison guards and agency workers of all kinds at the state and local level&#8211;these are the worst of times.</p>

<p>Despite record high membership and dues, and years of unparalleled clout in state capitols, public sector unions find themselves on the defensive, desperately trying to hold on to past gains in the face of a skeptical press and angry voters. So far has the zeitgeist shifted against them that, on one recent weekend, government employees were the butt of a Saturday Night Live skit, followed, the next day, by a New York Times magazine cover article proclaiming the &#8220;Teachers&#8217; Unions&#8217; Last Stand.&#8221;</p>

<p>Public unions&#8217; traditional strength&#8211;the ability to finance their members&#8217; rising pay and benefits through tax increases&#8211;has become a liability. Although private sector unions always have had to worry that consumers will resist rising prices for their goods, public sector unions have benefited from the fact that taxpayers can&#8217;t choose&#8211;they are, in effect, &#8220;captive consumers.&#8221;</p>

<p>At some point, however, voters turn resentful as they sense that: (1) they are underwriting, through their taxes, a level of salary and benefits for government employment that is better than what they and their families have; and (2) government services, from schools to the DMV, are not good enough&#8212;not for the citizen individually nor the public generally&#8212;to justify the high and escalating cost.</p>

<p>We are at that point.</p>

<p>In California, government sector unions, once among the most entrenched and powerful labor groups in the country, mainly have themselves to blame. For most of the post-war period, they were a force for progressive change, prospering by winning over public support for their agenda.</p>

<p>In the 1970s and 80s they backed laws like the Public Records Act and Brown Act to make state and local government more transparent. Because unions enjoyed broad-based political support, efforts to enhance government accountability and responsiveness to voters were seen&#8211;correctly&#8211;as benefiting the unions and their members.The public interest and public employees&#8217; interests were aligned.</p>

<p>But the unions switched strategies. Although the change was gradual, by the 1990s California&#8217;s government unions had decided that, rather than cultivate voter support for their objectives, they could exert more influence in the Legislature, and in the political process generally, by lavishing campaign contributions on lawmakers. Adopting the tactics of other special interest groups, government unions paid lip service to democratic principles while excelling at the fundamentally anti-democratic strategy of writing checks to legislators, their election committees and PACs.</p>

<p>While not illegal (in fact, such contributions are constitutionally protected), the unions&#8217; aggressive spending on candidates puts them on the same moral low ground as casino-owning tribes, insurance companies and other special interests that have concluded that the best way to influence the legislative process is to, well, buy it.</p>

<p>Public unions in California turned distrustful of voters and ambivalent about government transparency. In the mid-1990s unions backed improvements to the Brown Act, California&#8217;s open meeting law, but also inserted a provision assuring that the public would have no access to collective bargaining agreements negotiated by cities and counties&#8212;often representing 70% or more of their total operating budgets&#8212;until after the agreements are signed.</p>

<p>What happens when voters and the press have no opportunity to question elected officials about how they propose to pay for a lower retirement age, healthcare for retirees&#8217; dependents, richer pension formulas and the like? The officials make contractual promises that are unaffordable, unsustainable (and, in general, don&#8217;t come due until after those elected officials have left office). In the case of Vallejo, in northern California, this veil of secrecy, and the symbiotic relationship it fosters, has led to municipal bankruptcy.</p>

<p>The biggest blow to unions&#8217; public support has come from revelations about jaw-dropping compensation and pension benefits. Police have received unwelcome attention for budget-busting overtime and the manipulation of eligibility rules for &#8220;disability pensions,&#8221; which provide higher benefits and tax advantages. Other government employees, particularly managers, have been called out for &#8220;pension-spiking:&#8221; Using vacation time, sick pay and the like to boost income in the last years of employment, which are the basis for calculating retirement benefits.</p>

<p>Such gaming of the system boosts starting pensions to levels that can approach, and even exceed, employees&#8217; salaries. Some examples from the reporting of the Contra Costa Times&#8217; Daniel Borenstein: A retired northern California fire chief whose $185,000 salary morphed into a $241,000 annual pension; a county administrator whose $240,000 starting pension was 98 per cent of final salary; and a sanitary district manager who qualified for a $217,000 pension on a salary of $234,000. At a time when most Californians anticipate an austere retirement (if they can afford to retire at all), government pensions are a source of real voter anger.</p>

<p><strong>The harm to the credibility of public employee unions from these excesses is made far worse by the unions&#8217; attempts to hide them. The revelations about pay and pension abuses have surfaced only as a result of lawsuits. (Disclosure: The First Amendment Coalition has been a plaintiff in several of these cases.) Public employee unions, rather than taking the lead to stop abusive compensation practices, have vigorously opposed disclosure of individual employees&#8217; salaries and pension amounts.</strong></p>

<p>Public employee unions need to reboot. The old strategy of cynically buying political influence and excluding the public from decision-making has run its course. Unions can rebuild public support by recommitting to an agenda of open government in the public interest. If they don&#8217;t, they will be further marginalized.</p><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/18/taxpayers-going-postal-over-public-emplo?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/18/taxpayers-going-postal-over-public-emplo?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>Top Adminstrator Position Candidates to Go Public</title>
			<link>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/16/top-adminstrator-position-candidates-to?blog=2</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 03:35:26 +0000</pubDate>			<dc:creator>eta</dc:creator>
			<category domain="main">City Admin</category>			<guid isPermaLink="false">541@http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/</guid>
						<description>&lt;p&gt;KPBS &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/jun/08/sd-school-board-pushes-forward-superintendent-sele/&quot;&gt;School Board Sup Candidates to be Public&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
The SD School District is including the public in an open process to select a new top administrator. The pool of candidates is narrowed down behind closed doors to three candidates and after that the public will get to interview and help vet these top candidates. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The City of Encinitas could benefit from doing something similar when hiring a new top administrator, who's job it is to serve the entire community.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;item_footer&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;small&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/16/top-adminstrator-position-candidates-to?blog=2&quot;&gt;Original post&lt;/a&gt; blogged on &lt;a href=&quot;http://b2evolution.net/&quot;&gt;b2evolution&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>KPBS <a href="http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/jun/08/sd-school-board-pushes-forward-superintendent-sele/">School Board Sup Candidates to be Public</a><br />
The SD School District is including the public in an open process to select a new top administrator. The pool of candidates is narrowed down behind closed doors to three candidates and after that the public will get to interview and help vet these top candidates. </p>

<p>The City of Encinitas could benefit from doing something similar when hiring a new top administrator, who's job it is to serve the entire community.</p><div class="item_footer"><p><small><a href="http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/16/top-adminstrator-position-candidates-to?blog=2">Original post</a> blogged on <a href="http://b2evolution.net/">b2evolution</a>.</small></p></div>]]></content:encoded>
								<comments>http://encinitastaxpayers.org/blog/index.php/2010/06/16/top-adminstrator-position-candidates-to?blog=2#comments</comments>
		</item>
			</channel>
</rss>
