Page 2: House on fire
As I was driving home from Wednesday night’s Council meeting, I couldn’t help but get a little conspiracy theorist about the Town’s initial proposal to achieve solvency by reducing sworn staffing in the police department by 40%.
The analogy I thought of was the arsonist who sets the house on fire and then rushes in to save everyone.
Threaten to axe the department, get push-back from the public, save most of it and then use that as a pretext to dip into all those taxpayer-dedicated R & U funds, saying, “We didn’t want to abuse your trust and raid money you set aside for other things, but … you asked us to do it.”
Let’s cut to the chase here. Of all its tasks, any Council should be bound by two overarching commitments – to public safety and fiduciary responsibility. All the other promises a Council makes are subordinate to these considerations, and if a Council is smart, it won’t make a lot of other promises because any additional promise is a promise you’re at risk of not being able to fulfill.
Obviously, Council, or a combination of Councils past, couldn’t fulfill one of those overarching commitments – the trickle-down effect being it will have to break a lot of promises, not just one.
That is the reality.
It is disingenuous to think that Measures A, T, R, U, et. al. are somehow not in play. They’re all in play. It is hard for me to believe Council will compound failure to fulfill overarching commitment #1 via the sacrifice of overarching commitment #2 in order to preserve “political commitments” of lesser import.
It’s like saying, “Honey, I’m sorry I cheated on you … but I hope you notice that I remembered to mow the lawn.”
This is not something anyone wants to hear (that it’s all in play), for the simple reason that … it entrusts Council with more responsibility (redistributing the total pie versus allocating just a part) than the public may be comfortable granting at the moment.
It’s hard imagining an eight-year-old would trust Council to manage his/her piggy bank right now.
While some applaud Mayor Pro-Tem Wood for his comments suggesting the police are overpaid, an attorney suggesting anyone else is overpaid is … comical.
And consider … according to the National Vital Statistics Report, average U.S. life expectancy is 78.2 years.
Average life expectancy for police officers, according to the Police Policy Studies Council, is 59 years.
The National Center for Health Statistics says the average U.S. divorce rate is 43%.
For police officers, 70% according to the FBI.
You get the picture. This is a difficult, stressful job.
Wood (and Eastman), by the way, were in power during those boom-boom years when police salaries and benefits escalated in Viagra-like fashion. While the argument can be made this was happening all over California at the time and we needed to keep pace to attract and retain employees, the point is, no alarm was sounded then.
Bacon and Eastman were the ones who traded furlough days during the recession for an extension of all the union contracts that hamstring the Town today.
The alarm being sounded by Wood now regarding police compensation seems more like a diversionary tactic than anything else. As if it’s the cops’ fault that Rick decided to mess with Hot Creek.
And Wood making the excuse at the last meeting that he wasn’t on Council when the MLLA lawsuit was filed in Nov. 2006 … okay, technically correct. But he was on Council for the eight years before that and Mayor for I believe six of those years and had left office in July of that year.
Do I really believe that the problem just cropped up in July right after he left?
Point is, in the aftermath, Rick Wood does not get a free pass when it comes to attempting to rewrite history. The Hot Creek litigation is a prominent part of Rick’s history, and I will not play Jim Lehrer to his Mitt Romney and allow myself to get steamrolled as he tries to imprint his narrative upon the public consciousness.
Woodward’s solution
Local architect Bruce Woodward will not be mistaken for a Republican Presidential candidate based upon his comments Wednesday.
Woodward suggested the Town consider a blend of tax increases and spending cuts to fulfill its litigation settlement obligations.
A parcel tax of $150 per parcel per year would pretty much cover it, he said.
“I appreciate you and others proposing solutions,” responded Wood.
Random aside: You know, if we call Searles the Bear Whisperer, then here’s a nickname for Wood: Bear Stearns.
MLH raid
At one point, Wood asked about “whether we [Council] should touch the tax measures or not?”
Why ask the question when you know the answer? You already have.
According to Mammoth Lakes Housing Board member Bill Taylor, who spoke Wednesday, “By 2015, housing will donate 60% [of its dedicated Measure A funding] to non-housing services.”
“Threaten to axe the department, get push-back from the public, save most of it and then use that as a pretext to dip into all those taxpayer-dedicated R & U funds, saying, “We didn’t want to abuse your trust and raid money you set aside for other things, but … you asked us to do it.”
Resiting the opportunity to say, “I told you so” and any discussion about how the “Mediated Settlement” is not any better than going before the bankruptcy judge for his/her decision, I have yet another Modest Proposal.
Repeal all tax measures — A; the other A; T; U; R. Budget a fully staffed Police Department. Cut Tourism and Housing to zero funding. Sell the airport to any sucker that will buy it. Shut down the Whitmore facilities temporarily. Fund all other public services to their necessary level. Then go before the bankruptcy judge and show her exactly what money we have left over.
Forcing the kinds of austerity measures like those now being contemplated will make seasonal workers think twice about living here and working here. It will discourage businesses from starting and may even force some marginally successful businesses out of business. Letting people and businesses keep less of what little money they make is a sure recipe for economic collapse — then what? So the town staggers along for a few years under the burden of the judgement to MLLA? To what end? Why prolong this mess any longer. Why would any person or business want to establish themselves in Mammoth when they pay more of their hard earned money for nothing?
The economy is no longer the hyper-inflated boom town economy built on hyper-inflated real estate values and those days will not return for a long, long time. It’s time to simply be a simple town with aspirations to be simply a good place to live instead seeing ourselves in competition with places like Tahoe and Aspen that we will never be competitive with for various reasons.
So my suggestion is repeal all tax measures. Cut the Tourism, Housing and Airport out of the budget. Show the bankruptcy judge exactly what money we have left after those cuts. It wouldn’t make any sense for the bankruptcy judge to find a judgment that actually would bankrupt the town. Trying to squeeze even more money out of the citizens and businesses of Mammoth Lakes just to pay for the malfeasance of current and former town leaders is just not right.
And lastly, where the Hell is Rusty? The airport has been pursued at his urging for a decade. Now — the big silence? That just stinks….
I do support MLPD and think Rick Wood is an ass for saying that they are overpaid. But your statement that police die early is flat-out wrong.
Police live as long as anyone else according to CalPers (start at page 34): http://www.calpers.ca.gov/eip-docs/about/board-cal-agenda/agendas/bpac/201004/item03b-01.pdf
The local law enforcement do not move up here to serve the community. The majority of them tranfer here from other areas, where there is much more crime and work to be done. They are grossly overpaid here considering the work and level of their education. I have no simpathy for these guys. I would like to see how many of them can earn 150- 260k in the private sector. I guarantee not one could earn that level of income. Let the pink slips fly!