“This is the fifth consecutive year that the Grand Jury has been one of the voices forcefully bringing this matter to the attention of the Supervisors and the public. The Supervisors consistently approved labor contracts covering the remaining 86% of the workforce that obligate the County to expenses that are not sustainable, and budgets that do not provide funds to pay down this obligation over time.

“The pattern has continued this year. Supervisors have said that they have learned their lesson, that they will do better, and that they are on the road to fiscal sanity. Their record says otherwise. In the past few months, three labor contracts have come up for approval, and in each case, the Supervisors as a group have failed to take any meaningful steps to address out-of-control health benefit costs, attributable largely to the generous union agreements.

“The Supervisors have been unable to maintain a united front because some supervisors have gone outside the “meet and confer” process, communicating directly with union leaders about matters that are being negotiated by the County’s negotiating team.”

In its June 24 response to the GJR, the BOS essentially agreed in principle to most of the findings of fact, then summarily rejected key recommendations.

The BOS claims it has implemented GJR recommendation (#1) to establish and promulgate its labor negotiation policy to its negotiation team, but rejected the recommendation (#2) that individual Supervisors should stop negotiating with labor leaders behind the backs of the body; nor would it agree to approve “fiscally prudent” labor contracts (#3)!

County leaders shined off the recommendation (#4) that a health benefit plan be developed and implemented—in German this is pronounced “Yah-Yah-Yah”—and rejected the recommendation (#5) that while OK for future non-union retirees, existing retirees ought not enroll in Medicare Part B but have the County pay for this til death do us part.

The BOS waved their hands dismissively and spoke German again to GJR recommendation (#6) to stick to the plan to reduce or contain OPEB costs (see #3 above), then rejected outright the recommendation (#7) to increase the 40% target level to 85%. The BOS claims that:

“Over time, the combination of current resource redirection, new tiers for new hires, and a budget for health care costs will fully fund the County’s liability.”

Excuse me? What manner of Supervisor speak is this?

These guys can’t even set a date certain for the blessed $20 million payment to the irrevocable OPEB trust account scheduled for sometime — somewhere in the 08-09 budget. Not to mention at least FIVE BIG IFs. According to Dan Borenstein’s research presented to the Contra Costa Taxpayers:

Even IF the BOS makes good on its promise to prefund $20 million; Even IF it ever gets around to adding a $588 million chunk by 2022-23; Even IF it can pay $100 million dollars a year thereafter; Even IF the County implements the proposed benefits changes to unrepresented workers, the County would still be $54 million short of 40-percent funding and still leave a 60 percent or $1.042 Billion balance due. Furthermore, even IF the BOS added the same benefits changes to unionized employees, the County would still owe $705 million after 30 years.

Sadly, this is what the BOS means by “fully” fund.

According to the Grand Jury, “It is imperative that the Supervisors take additional meaningful steps to get the County on a fiscally sound footing. The next key step involves establishing and holding tough negotiating positions with the unions that represent County employees. To do so will require a majority of supervisors who take seriously their duties to all, not just some, County taxpayers.”

Twa will also receive a $20,000 moving allowance to help ease the sticker shock of moving from the frozen tundra of Minneapolis to sunny California. And the County has offered $2,500 per month housing allowance for six months. He can receive up to a 5% percent increase or decrease in compensation per year based on performance, as well as receive cost of living adjustments (COLA) to his salary the along lines of any COLA given to other department heads.

C.30 SUPPORT Proposition 99, a ballot measure that will prevent governments from using eminent domain to take an owner-occupied home to transfer to a private party; and OPPOSE Proposition 98 a competing measure that will eliminate rent control and other renter protections, threaten development of public water projects, stymie local land use planning and impair environmental protection, as recommended by the County Administrator. (All Districts)

This smells like a typical John “Igor” Gioia weasel tactic that attempts to cover up government actions rather than offer voters transparency. No doubt, some League of Cities sock puppet will say that hiding crucial votes in the Consent Calendar is a time honored trick of crooked politicians that cannot stand challenge or debate. Beside, they will say, it’s legal if they don’t discuss the issue beforehand.

Excuse me? There was no discussion? How did it get on the agenda unless there was a head count before hand? It had to be discussed in committee, no? How could it get to the consent calendar then if there was no discussion in committee?

To sneak around and pass “official” County pronouncements concerning upcoming ballot propositions without benefit of full promulgation of committee reports, and without public notice, and without public debate is a violation not only of the spirit and letter of the Brown Act, but a clear violation of the trust of the electorate.

In a report to the BOS last Tuesday—much to the dismay of Rollie Katz, Mr Big of Local One and head puppetmaster of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (BOS)—Dr Walker concluded that:

a) Reducing the County Health Care services by $10 million is improbable given the mandatory staffing requirements and County employee sweet heart deals including pay and benefits.

b) Reducing the number of indigent may not be feasible or result in keeping significant resources from getting poured down the drain (see item “a” above).

c) To maintain existing services and meet budgetary “constraints,” an alternative approach ought to be considered.

Ergo: Close the CCRMC inpatient unit and issue RFPs to contract out some non-critical County services. Walker suggested the County hire a Community Based Organization to oversee fulfillment of contracts for non-critical service areas including: detention health, inpatient psychiatric, security, medical records, housekeeping, landscaping, facility maintenance, lab work, and collections.

Oh My. From what we saw from the peanut gallery, Mr Big looked like he had eaten a bad oyster, and several Supes were apoplectic, shaking their heads in disbelief before the presentation was even over!

The Supervisor’s spouse, David Piepho, who also serves on LAFCO as well as the Discovery Bay CSD, is under fire for possible conflicts of interest from Disco Bay residents. According to the Discovery Bay Press, citizens argue that with two Piephos potentially voting on some LAFCO business, the BOS would have undue influence that would violate the checks and balances the State tried to build into the agency structure.

The BOS has been using salary only to compare public employee compensation with other governmental entities. Not only should the BOS have been using the full compensation package including salary and benefits, but they should also currently be comparing compensation with similar activities in the private sector as well. The call for comparing full compensation is not new, in fact, CoCoTax called for using the full compensation package in February of 2005.

What kind of time warp do the Supervisors live in, anyways?

This recommendation comes after several important labor negotiations. Hello? And why on earth would County government limit its salary comparisons only to other inflated public agency salaries and benefits instead of also looking at private sector compensation to produce better efficiency?

Sadly, we notice Supervisors, including Mary Piepho, are currently enamored with the overused buzz word “best practices.” Yet any MBA text-book management analysis would describe Contra Costa’s fiscal incompetence as mismanagement or fraud. The recommendation moans that it’s just so hard to track comparable salaries across public agencies because records are not readily available. Maybe because they too are incompetent and need better oversight and management instead of bending over for SEIU?

The BOS crows that this recent recommendation shows how Contra Costa is “leading the way among public agencies for calculating compensation costs.” This isn’t leading, this is half-measure and CYA.

First, straight from the BOS playbook, Shirley dismisses expert financial analysis by the Contra Costa Council and Contra Costa Taxpayers. Then he parrots Mary Piepho’s dissembling that—someday, when pigs fly— the BOS, here and there, when it can, will try real hard to make at least a small contribution to some mythic $588 million payment. This is what “commitment” means in BOS-speak.

In realityland, what the BOS mean by “commitment” to pay down the debt is so riddled with loopholes and backdoor wiggle room, it’s difficult to understand such willfull misleading of the public to mean anything other than the BOS have no intention of making any payments at all unless they see peasants with pitchforks. Which we’ll all be if we don’t pay down County debt sooner than later.

Finally, the dam bursts and the drool is agusher as Shirley slavishly repeats the irresponsible BOS and union boss fairytale about how Universal Healthcare (!) will magically make the County’s $3 BILLION financial obligation disappear. At this rate, once Contra Costa County goes bankrupt, the only thing Universal Healthcare will do is finish the job at the State and National levels.