Chico City Council to give IAFF notice
Statty McStats

Oroville, CA

#21 Apr 11, 2014
Ken wrote:
<quoted text> If you could define "pensionable hours" and or give examples of current pension formulas used to calculate any Chico firefighter's pension, it would eliminate speculation. If you're not privy to those formulas please don't speculate.
At the last council meeting there was an issue on the agenda that excluded pensions from certain calculations. I don't know how they are calculated but I know there is a difference. Also when the contracts were ratified at the meetings since January some contracts contained nonpensionable bonuses. They called them cash backs. Fire had them and somebody else as well. I can't remember whom.

Not all pay is pensionable. That's what I was saying. I do not know or pretend to understand these details.

And the chiefs are not time management specialists with special training. That's my point. The other union they belong to is public safety management.
ken

Yuba City, CA

#22 Apr 12, 2014
There's a letter to the editor in today's ER singing the praises of Chico firefighters. They were very nice to the high school official while turning off a leak. I'm sure they are all nice people and their mothers love them very much.
OK, I'm going to vent and may go overboard. I happen to be close friends with the lady on Lincoln av who called in the water leak. She noticed the water rushing down lincoln av at about 9pm and because she didn't have the number of the high school maintenance man she called 911 hoping they would know who to notify at the high school. 911 sent the very nice fire department.
At over $12 million a year we pay $1,370/hr for the fire department, to turn off a valve and mop a floor? Why not call the maintenance department and call a cleaning crew?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.... they are all nice. But Chico shouldn't be paying $1370/hr to turn off a valve and mop floors!
ken

Yuba City, CA

#23 Apr 12, 2014
I was feeling the full force of my self righteous indignation, and misspoke, or miss-wrote, h-ll I probably misspelled (where is TWP when you need her/him/it). My friend called the non-emergency number for Chico police not 911. The phone answerer/dispatcher sent the fire department
ken

Yuba City, CA

#24 Apr 14, 2014
In a letter in today's ER, someone named Brooks complains about the City of Chico spending. Then Brooks places the blame for Chico's problems on 5 council members. There are a couple of obvious oversights in Brooks letter. First Tammi Ritter and Randall Stone are freshmen council members and not responsible for things that occurred prior to their election. Second is Brooks avoidance of blaming any previous conservative council member ie: Larry Wahl. And last is the elephant in the room, police and fire! Police take up over 50% of the budget and Fire eats up over 30% of the budget for a total of just over 80% of Chico's budget being drained by those two agencies. Police and Fire endorse and contribute to only conservative candidates and conservative candidates have always remained loyal to Police and Fire interests. The blame for Chico's problem is multilayered. Let's quit ignoring the elephant in the room.
The right is wrong

Sacramento, CA

#25 Apr 14, 2014
ken wrote:
I was feeling the full force of my self righteous indignation, and misspoke, or miss-wrote, h-ll I probably misspelled (where is TWP when you need her/him/it). My friend called the non-emergency number for Chico police not 911. The phone answerer/dispatcher sent the fire department
You omited important information. Why did your "friend" call the "non-emergency number"? Was the call an emergency? Did the dispatcher feel that it was an emergency? I'd rather the dispatcher err on the side of safety.
ken

Yuba City, CA

#26 Apr 14, 2014
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
You omited important information. Why did your "friend" call the "non-emergency number"? Was the call an emergency? Did the dispatcher feel that it was an emergency? I'd rather the dispatcher err on the side of safety.
Lincoln av is one of the streets that borders the high school. She saw a 2 foot wide stream of water flowing along the curb/gutter. Because of no rain for several days and because of recent construction at the high school she wanted to check to see if the high school was aware of the flowing water. I agree my rant was overboard, but I still think high school maintenance should have been called instead of the fire department
Statty McStats

Chico, CA

#27 Apr 14, 2014
Uh, yeah. The council was conservative until 2003. The sewer study was done in 1992. The conservatives buried the report so that nothing could be done about it. That way they didn't have to pay for it and they'd be the only ones who knew about it. The new staff find it and bring it to the council. Council acknowledges the report and sets up a plan to fix the problem. The conservative councilors all the while whine about how we shouldn't have spent our neighbors money on other things while paying the highest dollar for fewer cops and firefighters even though that's all they have been whining about for decades.

Randall Stone has been yelling to cut salaries and benefits since day one. I feel bad for him that he has to fight these whiners on the council who throw more and more money at police and fire and not fix the problem. Stone has better things to do with his Tuesday nights. He's a smart guy in a sea of idiots. BK Brooks is just another idiot.
The right is wrong

Sacramento, CA

#28 Apr 14, 2014
ken wrote:
<quoted text>
Lincoln av is one of the streets that borders the high school. She saw a 2 foot wide stream of water flowing along the curb/gutter. Because of no rain for several days and because of recent construction at the high school she wanted to check to see if the high school was aware of the flowing water. I agree my rant was overboard, but I still think high school maintenance should have been called instead of the fire department
I think overall, the dispatcher made the right call. The fire department was readily available whereas it may have taken hours for school maintenance people who were on standby to get there. The fire department has the knowhow to shut off the water and the resources at hand to midigate any flooding.
The right is wrong

Sacramento, CA

#29 Apr 14, 2014
Should be "mitigate".
ken

Yuba City, CA

#30 Apr 14, 2014
The right is wrong wrote:
Should be "mitigate".
Oh God now we'll have to inure another TWP onslaught.
ken

Yuba City, CA

#31 Apr 16, 2014
I didn't attend last nights council meeting, I read in today's paper they voted 6-0 in favor of giving IAFF the 3 year notice of intent to consider other options. I don't know if or how any discussion went. If anyone else can elaborate, please do
Statty McStats

Chico, CA

#32 Apr 16, 2014
Motion by Stone. Second by Ritter. Criticized by Morgan to save his fire fighting buddies. Man he is shoved far up the fire department's but. He should almost have to recuse himself he's so wedded to them.

Stone's motion:

"I'll make a motion authorizing the City Manager to submit the letter of intent per section 5.7 of the memorandum of understanding with international association of firefighters local 2734. I will add that if it takes three years to potentially contract out then there's just doesn't seem to be any reason for the provision. And Mr. Kelso mentioned that city managers since evidently 1999 have kept adding this provision back in the(contracts) and they felt some value to it. And I think that's one of the things that most concerns me about a provision like this. We have this with no other bargaining groups. I'm very skeptical as to whether or not it would ever make sense to even contract out fire services or anything else. We've seen in some of the reviews such as with Caper Acres that it would it cost us $20,000 a year to two maintain Caper Acres (in house) it would cost us $28,000 a year if we if we had contracted out. That's a 40% increase. 40% more just doesn't make any sense for a lot of these things. And I think the IAFF is probably correct. I think this will help. Any review of these packages gives us more information and I think that probably means the IAFF is sitting pretty. But I'm skeptical of what has been done since 1999. Very skeptical. And I think that is why were in the position that we're in now (financially). And and I'd like to look at all available options. We hear so much as I mentioned earlier about if you need these salaries comparisons, or our salaries are such and such, or there's there's four dollars more per hour and it's being offered in another city. But their overtime is not included in there and their overtime hours are included, or there are so many different variables. That just by looking at these options we can evaluate an apples-to-apples comparison and that's the thing that's so frustrating - with government no question. I and the public want to know whether we're getting the best value added. As we heard about our user fees we we can't compare them city to city. But we can compare whether or not we're charging what we're supposed to be charging. The same thing with the fire department. You're great folks. But but we need to take a look at exactly how we are running the city and not depend on what's been done since 1999."

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php...

Clip begins at 1:23:00 and clickable from the 4.1 agenda item. Stone's motion begins at 1:51:11. Enjoy.
ken

Yuba City, CA

#33 Apr 16, 2014
Statty McStats wrote:
Motion by Stone. Second by Ritter. Criticized by Morgan to save his fire fighting buddies. Man he is shoved far up the fire department's but. He should almost have to recuse himself he's so wedded to them.
Stone's motion:
"I'll make a motion authorizing the City Manager to submit the letter of intent per section 5.7 of the memorandum of understanding with international association of firefighters local 2734. I will add that if it takes three years to potentially contract out then there's just doesn't seem to be any reason for the provision. And Mr. Kelso mentioned that city managers since evidently 1999 have kept adding this provision back in the(contracts) and they felt some value to it. And I think that's one of the things that most concerns me about a provision like this. We have this with no other bargaining groups. I'm very skeptical as to whether or not it would ever make sense to even contract out fire services or anything else. We've seen in some of the reviews such as with Caper Acres that it would it cost us $20,000 a year to two maintain Caper Acres (in house) it would cost us $28,000 a year if we if we had contracted out. That's a 40% increase. 40% more just doesn't make any sense for a lot of these things. And I think the IAFF is probably correct. I think this will help. Any review of these packages gives us more information and I think that probably means the IAFF is sitting pretty. But I'm skeptical of what has been done since 1999. Very skeptical. And I think that is why were in the position that we're in now (financially). And and I'd like to look at all available options. We hear so much as I mentioned earlier about if you need these salaries comparisons, or our salaries are such and such, or there's there's four dollars more per hour and it's being offered in another city. But their overtime is not included in there and their overtime hours are included, or there are so many different variables. That just by looking at these options we can evaluate an apples-to-apples comparison and that's the thing that's so frustrating - with government no question. I and the public want to know whether we're getting the best value added. As we heard about our user fees we we can't compare them city to city. But we can compare whether or not we're charging what we're supposed to be charging. The same thing with the fire department. You're great folks. But but we need to take a look at exactly how we are running the city and not depend on what's been done since 1999."
http://chico-ca.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php...
Clip begins at 1:23:00 and clickable from the 4.1 agenda item. Stone's motion begins at 1:51:11. Enjoy.
For those who use Statty's link the IAFF issue is discussed from time stamp 1:24 to time stamp 2:03. thanks statty there's a lot of information in there I hadn't heard before.
ken

Yuba City, CA

#34 Apr 17, 2014
There's another letter to the editor in support of the IAFF in today's ER. This letter is form Linda Murphy, and is a rebuttal to Mike Jones' letter. Lynda implies That Chico would be giving up control of the fire department if it contracted to Cal Fire. That is absolutely false. She claims Cal Fire could pull Chico's fire department out of Chico to fight fires elsewhere. While it is a common practice for fire fighters from different municipalities to help each other when one has a large fire, that practice is not contingent on whether or not the fire department is contacted through IAFF or Cal Fire. I usually find myself disagreeing with Mike Jones, especially the way he always spins everything to try to blame all the worlds ills one one political philosophy.
I certainly hope Chico will have more than 2 options to look at when they finally have the chance to consider other options. Going to Cal Fire will not stop overtime abuses nor pension spiking.
ken

Yuba City, CA

#35 Apr 17, 2014
This will be my last post on Chico Forum Topix. Thanks everyone, it's been fun. I' m going off looking for Krankenstine, to see if he'll take me and TWP fishing.
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#36 Apr 17, 2014
ken wrote:
This will be my last post on Chico Forum Topix. Thanks everyone, it's been fun. I' m going off looking for Krankenstine, to see if he'll take me and TWP fishing.
Sorry to see you go. Seems every week one of the "Middle of the road" types leaves, leaving us with the likes of the knankster, loco progun and el therpo.

Sorry to see you go ...and best of luck.
ken

Yuba City, CA

#37 Apr 17, 2014
The right is wrong wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry to see you go. Seems every week one of the "Middle of the road" types leaves, leaving us with the likes of the knankster, loco progun and el therpo.
Sorry to see you go ...and best of luck.
ditto
Chico Bad Boy

Yuba City, CA

#38 Apr 17, 2014
Wat da?
The right is wrong

Lincoln, CA

#39 Apr 17, 2014
ken wrote:
<quoted text>
ditto
Oh ma-gawd! Have I been fooled all this time by a "ditto" head? I don't think so, Laughing out loud!
Statty McStats

Chico, CA

#40 Apr 17, 2014
I think Linda Murphy is Mike Murphy fire apparatus engineer with Chico Fire's mother. The letter is the same story that the firefighters were saying at the meetings.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Richvale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Bob that thinks everyone is Bob. 13 min Resistance to Trump 10
A Trump MELTDOWN FOR THE AGES 14 min Resistance to Change 8
A Storm is Coming! 17 min Resistance to Change 4
Golden State has highest conetration of Hate Gr... 23 min All in One 2
He is MAKING AMERICA GREAT Alright!!! 38 min a-citizen 13
Did Blacks own slaves? 15 hr Godfrey 1
TWO crazy NUTS 17 hr Bob Is A Fool 31

Richvale Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Richvale Mortgages