Friday, January 16, 2009

Trustees to delay 67% pay increase for themselves

You’ll recall that, last month, the SOCCCD trustees were all set to dramatically increase their monthly stipend, from $400 per meeting to $750. (See Trustees set to nearly double their stipend.) 

Ah, but the media caught wind of that, and so, prior to the meeting, they tabled the item.

The item's back, but with a new recommendation.

Check out page 7 of the SOCCCD Board of Trustees meeting agenda for Tuesday night: SOCCCD Board Agenda (pdf).

Item 6.17 is Mathur's original proposal to boost trustees’ compensation per meeting from $400 to $750. (See graphic above.) As the OC Reg’s Marla Jo Fisher reported (see), that’s a 67% increase in pay.

Impolitic.

During the closed session portion of December's meeting, trustees had a preliminary vote on the union's proposed contract, and it was approved. As you know, since then, trustee Tom Fuentes has pulled out all the stops in his effort to prevent a faculty pay adjustment (a 9% increase over three years—but 5% of this is a state-wide COLA from last year) on Tuesday.

Last we heard, that item has been pulled.

I looked deeper into the trustee stipend agenda item—on page 257!—and found that, in fact, the new recommendation (for Tuesday night) is to delay this increase "until the economic situation becomes more certain...." See graphic below.

Weird miracles

JURY ROOM MIRACLE. Weird news today. First, late this morning, to everyone’s astonishment, Mike Carona was acquitted of all but one count against him.

Said Carona, “What you are watching is an absolute miracle. If you don't believe in God, now you should.” (See Reactions in the OC Reg.)

It’s a miracle that he was acquitted? If he were innocent and then acquitted, that wouldn’t be a miracle, now would it? It would just be appropriate.

Face it, it’s only a "miracle" when he’s as guilty as sin and anybody with half a brain can see it. Then, astonishingly, a jury looks at all the facts and says "hey, um, he's innocent."

There’s your miracle.

Shouldn't Mike be thanking the devil?

According to the Reg, the jury decided as follows:
Count One: Conspiracy
Jury verdict: Not guilty

Count Two: Mail Fraud Depriving the Public of the Right of Honest Services of a Public Official
Jury verdict: Not guilty

Count Three: Mail Fraud Depriving the Public of the Right of Honest Services of a Public Official
Jury verdict: Not guilty

Count Four: Mail Fraud Depriving the Public of the Right of Honest Services of a Public Official
Jury verdict: Not guilty

Count Five: Witness Tampering
Jury verdict: Not guilty

Count Six: Witness Tampering
Jury verdict: Guilty

Huh? He’s not guilty of all these felonies, but he IS guilty of messing with a witness to keep the court from finding out how guilty he is of the felonies?

One of the jurors, an African American, even forgave the Mikester for his frequent use of the word “nigger.”

That’s sweet.

I believe in miracles

FACULTY CONTRACT UPDATE:

Then, just before 5:00 p.m. today, SOCCCD faculty union President Lee Haggerty sent out the following email to membership:

Because of the rapidly deteriorating economic conditions of the state and the rapidly deteriorating political situation in the south orange county area, the Faculty Association leadership has been notified that the Board of Trustees has decided to pull the faculty contract from its agenda for consideration at the January 20, 2009 Board meeting. The Association leadership has been assured that the contract will be brought back for consideration at a Board meeting in the very near future.

Because the Board will not consider the contact [sic] at this upcoming meeting, faculty members are asked to not attend this January 20th meeting to speak in support of the contract and the Boosters pre-meeting is also being canceled.

The Association will keep you updated and share all additional and new information with you as it becomes available.

We are very concerned about this development, as we are sure you are, and we have committed ourselves to resolving this issue and protect your wages, benefits and work conditions.

Thank you again for your continued support of the Faculty Association and the negotiations team.

What's this about the “rapidly deteriorating political situation in the south orange county area”? Does he mean specifically the area occupied by the seven trustees?

Gosh, that Lee sure can be hazy.

A New Rose

Ah!
I get a feelin’ inside of me
It's kinda strange like a stormy sea
I don’t know why, I don’t know why
I guess these things have gotta be

Chorus:
I gotta new rose, I got her good
Guess I knew that I always would
I can’t stop to mess around
I gotta brand new rose in town

See the sun, see the sun it shines
Don’t get too close or it’ll burn your eyes
Don’t you run away that way
You can come back another day

(Chorus)

I never thought this could happen to me
This is strange, why should it be?
I don't deserve somebody this great
I'd better go or it'll be too late....

Storm over the contract vote

Wow. Yesterday, Tom Fuentes’ anti-contract blitz swung into high gear. Recently, Reg Opiner Steven Greenhut has been blasting trustee John Williams regarding his support of the faculty union contract offer recently voted upon in a closed session board vote. Then, yesterday, came this Reg editorial:

Editorial: Republicans ignore their principles:
Community college board with conservative majority approves huge pay raise
It's hard to believe – given the dire situation with the state budget, which is running a potential $40-billion-plus deficit, and the terrible state and national economic climate – that any public agency with the slightest shred of fiscal responsibility would be pushing forward large raises for public employees. Yet that's not only happening at a local community college district, but at one that has a board with a supposed conservative Republican governing majority. Are government officials this out of sync with reality?

They certainly seem to be at the South Orange County Community College District, which already pays some of the highest salaries in the state. According to recent estimates, the district pays the 10th-highest salaries out of 72 districts, but the board voted 4-3 in closed session to move forward a 9-percent salary increase for faculty members and 11-percent increase for part-time instructors, both over three years. These well-paid jobs, which come with some of the finest pension and other benefits, are sought after, so it's hard to believe there's a retention issue. But the board nevertheless is likely on Jan. 20 to give away the store to the faculty union….

The editorial extends the critical focus to trustee Nancy Padberg, who (reportedly) also supported the contract offer, and it slams Williams’ “rebuttal” to Greenhut’s criticisms:

…Ironically, Ms. Padberg is a prominent Republican, and Mr. Williams, another well-known Republican, is the elected public administrator for the county. Mr. Williams rebuts our criticisms by pointing to his long-running Republican credentials, but he doesn't deny that he favors the huge taxpayer-funded salary boosts.

He uses distinctly liberal reasoning: the district has a large budget surplus and the employees are underpaid compared to some other districts. He expects more federal funds to flow in given the importance of community college education and is worried about keeping the best employees. Some of the turnover problems Mr. Williams refers to are the result of overly generous pension benefits, which push people out of the classroom and onto the golf course at early ages. We'd certainly like to see hard evidence that the district is having retention problems before inflating pay, especially for those at the tail end of their careers….

On Wednesday, Jubal of Red County (Who Says The Union Lost The SOCCD Trustee Elections?) offered this:

Although Fuentes and Lang triumphed at the polls [in November], the union still seems to [have] won the election because four of the seven trustees are supporting a new contract that hands district faculty a whopping 9% pay increase, courtesy of Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer.

I don't know Milchiker and Jay, but it is practically impossible to attend an OC Republican event without seeing Williams and Padberg on hand. John Williams is a very nice man, and Nancy Padberg is...well, let's just say John Williams is a very nice man.

But John is also a union guy who is two-and-a-half dipping at the public till: retired county marshal, current county Public Administrator and SOCCD trustee. He enjoys union support in his trustee campaigns, and it's not hard to see why.

So I'm not really surprised John is supporting this contract. Disappointed, yes: a lot of taxpayers are cutting back their family budgets even as John wants to plow their money into a fatter union contract.

But not surprised….

Then, yesterday, Jubal (The Curious Case Of Nancy Padberg) switched focus to Nancy Padberg:

As it stands now, the contract is likely to be adopted on a 4-3 vote -- with the fourth vote for the contract coming from Trustee Nancy Padberg.
...
Padberg is a member of the OC GOP Central Committee and a fixture of local Republican events - and a self-described "Reagan Republican."

Giving a 9% pay increase in this economic environment, when SOCCD is looking at declining revenues in coming years, not only is not Reagan-like -- it is fiscally reckless. Padberg and the other three pro-union contract trustees need a serious reality check.

That Padberg is providing the fourth vote to put the union contract over the top is particular ironic considering the rhetoric in this "reader rebuttal" she published in the OC Register last September, heatedly denying she was a "union backer":

"Greenhut states Padberg, Milchiker and Jay support the union. In fact, I have voted against union proposals 96 percent of the time. I never voted to increase teacher salaries by 10 percent."

And Padberg's been as good as her word, bravely holding the line at 9% -- and not a penny more for that...that...union!

Ms. Padberg continues:

"I have fought tirelessly to contain all salaries, especially the salaries of administrators."

Given that she's supporting a 9% pay spike, Ms. Padberg has apparently stumbled onto a new definition of the word "tirelessly" no one else knew about.

Padberg closes her screed with:

"I defy anyone to prove my record is anything but that of a fiscal conservative and taxpayer watchdog."

Nancy Padberg has a golden opportunity to walk that talk by voting against the union contract on Tuesday. Otherwise, Padberg will be voting to rebut her own rebuttal.

Coincidentally, Padberg Is Up For Re-Election

Every two years, the OC Republican Party conducts its local elected officials endorsement process. In 2006, I observed ann [sic] endorsement committee meeting at which, aong [sick] other things, they considered an endorsement request from a candidate for one of the south coastal cities (I think it was San Clemente). This woman had been a registered Democrat at one time, and had apparently publicly endorsed a Democrat for a partisan [sic] office. Padberg mercilessly harangued the committee [sic] on these points, demanding they not endorse her.

Should Padberg actually cast the fourth vote on Tuesday, she ought to be held up to the same scrutiny she applied to that candidate. Personally[sic], I'll take an honest convert over a political Pharisee any day of the week.

Well, to top it off, yesterday, Chancellor Mathur emailed all SOCCCD employees, providing a link to the Reg editorial. What a guy!

Tuesday night’s meeting will be a humdinger.

Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...