121 replies to this topic

[ducky]

You can't convince some, the puppet strings prevent them from having any independent thoughts. If one really was interested in the truth, they would ask so and so if they were involved in an Auto accident last August with a kid on a skateboard. I wouldn't think being involved in an auto accident would preclude anyone from serving on the city Council, so why NOT answer the question?

Have you noticed all some do is throw out questions to others, attacking the messenger, yet never seem to ask any revelant questions that might shed light onto any issue? Its obvious they don't want people to see the light!

A very loyal and close friend happens to be married to someone who is very close to a city Council member. This loyal friend is telling me they are hearing the same comments some are saying on here as they are hearing from a City Council member in private.

You and I and others, knew this all along. Its so obvious.

The good news is more and more and more citizens are opening their eyes to what has been going on in Folsom. This means more and more people are willing to join in on the recall next April. Hopefully by then, there may be some breaking news, that will put some nails in the coffins. Then when the citizens get their commnity back from the special interests, we can stop seeing other citys in the region getting ranked higher as a better place to live by a national magazine.

You gotta wonder why some are willing to help in demise of their own community? I guess having that inside connection is worth having their quality of life detoriate for some?

Robert, let's get this out in the open. I'm sick of your hyperbole and all this contributing to the "demise of their own city." Are you saying that I have puppetstrings and inside connections? Please be specific about what it is you think I have to gain here.

I have in no way helped Kerri's campaign. I don't have her sign in my yard, nor have I contributed financially. All I have said is I like that she returns emails and is happy to answer questions on myfolsom. I have not spoken or communicated with Kerri except to ask questions about how to attend meetings about the CBD goings on, which the last communication was about four weeks ago. My information comes from living here for almost 30 years.

If I read something on a public forum that an anonymous poster puts up from a friend who's married to somebody who heard from someone else some pretty insulting and derogatory gossip about you, would you rather I just be convinced and take an anonymous stranger's word for it, or should I ask questions and then call B.S. when they can't back it up?

I am not telling anyone how to vote. You are. My arguments here have to do with being tired of dirty attack campaigns not based in fact. We are talking about corruption in California cities. The only thing that's been posted so far that might possibly be relevant is if the police chief somehow got raises he shouldn't have. So far nobody has answered how one council member could be capable of accomplishing that.

So maybe you should change your moniker there about, "There are no dumb questions," to "Don't question me because I have no answers."
Also, I've noticed you read my posts, quite some time passes to maybe powwow, and then you and the others come back and respond; whereas, I post immediately after reading a lot of these posts. Who really has the puppetstrings here?

[MikeinFolsom]

And then you lump 'special interest groups' into the reason why the city is in the situation it is? I'm part of one of those 'special interest groups' that hasn't seen SQUAT

[crabcakes]

I remember the issue well. I seem to recall the employee working for another nearby city in the same capacity after she left Folsom. However, I thought her allegations were more related to sexual harassment and discrimination rather than political corruption.

What you may not know is that the former mayor who was eventually arrested for soliciting a prostitute and his wife (now ex-wife) maneuvered their way into the middle of the mess and tried to use it as an opportunity to discredit other council members. It was a political ploy that added to the ugliness of the issue, and looking back was a very sad time in the history of Folsom politics. Fortunately, the mayor was arrested within weeks of being appointed mayor, and shortly thereafter resigned from the city council. And, as previously mentioned on this forum, the one council member who posts on this forum (and who is up for re-election) allegedly continued a close friendship with him after his arrest and even accompanied him on a vacation. "Birds of a feather..."

You know the situation about which I refer, although it wasn't sexual harassment, per se. It was much uglier than that. My point, however, is that everyone has a price. If a skateboarder suffers a broken leg, even an outraged parent can be shut up with a big enough pay check. I guarantee it. Once said payoff is issued, a legal document is drawn up and signed, and no word is ever spoken by the recipients of this windfall. I know of several cases, not just in this city, but in municipalities everywhere, in which local coffers are utilized to hush up possible litigation and exposure to reputation-damaging information.

[JRudi]

And then you lump 'special interest groups' into the reason why the city is in the situation it is? I'm part of one of those 'special interest groups' that hasn't seen SQUAT

I appreciate and value the high quality services my family and I receive from the City of Folsom, including public safety, but I couldn't let this comment go without a response.

Historically, the Police and Fire unions have been very influential (politically) in this community, and have benefitted greatly from their activities. They both enjoy some of the highest salaries and benefits in the region, and during the recent recession and budget cutbacks, took the lightest hits of all city employee groups. For example, this last budget year, the City initially proposed to layoff more than 30 employees, none of whom were firefighters. Six sworn officiers were originally identified, but these were all brought back when the city approved the Police union's new contract. Two years ago (actually in early 2009) when the city was looking for help in reducing employee salary and benefit costs because of a reduction in revenues, the professional and miscellaneous employee groups in the city not only agreed to give back one pay raise that they were entitled to by contract, but they also agreed to one furlough day per month (equivalent to a combined 7 percent pay reduction). They agreed to this while their labor contracts were still in effect, which doesn't occur often in local government. (In other words, the volunteered to this pay reduction.) The Fire union's contract had expired at the time, and all the city was able to get out of that union through contract negotiations was to have the firefighters bank 20 percent of their overtime pay. This only resulted in a temporary savings because the agreement allowed the firefighters to cash out the "banked" time at some point in the future. This was effectively just a deferred compensation plan for the firefighters (allowing them to shelter some of their pay). The firefighters would undoubtedly argue that they gave up a considerable portion of their overtime budget a couple years ago when management decided to "blackout" an engine, but the assignment of overtime is a management perrogative and not a union right. In fact, city management decided a couple years before to eliminate practically all overtime for the miscellaneous employee groups. And, for those who have questioned the accuracy of the information I have posted in the past, this can all be verified by viewing the labor contracts (MOU's) available on the City's website.

Also, on the average, it costs Folsom about 40 to 50 percent more to put a police officer and a firefighter on the street than other cities in our area. (This can be verified by obtaining cost information compiled by the League of California Cities on their website - source was the State Controller's Office.) This is a bit confusing and disturbing because although Folsom does pay its public safety employees well, they do not pay 40 to 50 percent higher than other cities in our area. What can be concluded from this is that Folsom has a considerable amount of waste in their police and fire departments. The waste could possibly be attributed to excessive administrative costs, overtime costs, and perhaps even too many toys (like new Dodge Charger patrol cars, police "horses" and a rescue boat.) Just last budget year when the other city departments were working hard to control their budgets (and many completed the year under budget), the Police Chief spent almost $1 million over his budget.

We need to get to the bottom of this issue. And, although this information has been presented to City management and a couple council members, we have not seen any movement towards improving the efficiencies of our police and fire departments. Perhaps with the change at the two chief positions, it will allow an opportunity for those departments to be looked at in more depth.

[JRudi]

You haven't answered how a single council member is responsible for city employee pay increases. I'd really like to know how that works, because it just doesn't sound right to me.

It's simple. A City Manager's job security is dependent on maintaing support of a majority of council members (which in Folsom is three). When he/she is struggling to maintain majority support, he/she may be more inclined to try to appease the individual needs of certain council members, especially those that are most volatile (which are the ones who are more apt to change their vote if they don't get what they want). Also, it has not been uncommon for individual city employees in Folsom to develop close friendships with council members. The problem arises when these employees try to leverage their friendships for personal gain. Some have used them to get hired, while others for promotions. As an example, we currently have at least two high level city employees who were hired to their positions without having any prior city experience. These are both positions that pay $150k plus. This is unheard of in most cities.

[GCM]

politicians are and always will be corrupt, unless all data that city possesses is released to public domain, there is no way to see what the hell they are even doing!

[ducky]

It's simple. A City Manager's job security is dependent on maintaing support of a majority of council members (which in Folsom is three). When he/she is struggling to maintain majority support, he/she may be more inclined to try to appease the individual needs of certain council members, especially those that are most volatile (which are the ones who are more apt to change their vote if they don't get what they want). Also, it has not been uncommon for individual city employees in Folsom to develop close friendships with council members. The problem arises when these employees try to leverage their friendships for personal gain. Some have used them to get hired, while others for promotions. As an example, we currently have at least two high level city employees who were hired to their positions without having any prior city experience. These are both positions that pay $150k plus. This is unheard of in most cities.

So are you saying that the other council members just "go along"? It still isn't making sense. In order for your theory to work you would also have to be saying the other council members, including the mayor, don't think for themselves.

[Robert Giacometti]

Robert, let's get this out in the open. I'm sick of your hyperbole and all this contributing to the "demise of their own city." Are you saying that I have puppetstrings and inside connections? Please be specific about what it is you think I have to gain here.

I have in no way helped Kerri's campaign. I don't have her sign in my yard, nor have I contributed financially. All I have said is I like that she returns emails and is happy to answer questions on myfolsom. I have not spoken or communicated with Kerri except to ask questions about how to attend meetings about the CBD goings on, which the last communication was about four weeks ago. My information comes from living here for almost 30 years.

If I read something on a public forum that an anonymous poster puts up from a friend who's married to somebody who heard from someone else some pretty insulting and derogatory gossip about you, would you rather I just be convinced and take an anonymous stranger's word for it, or should I ask questions and then call B.S. when they can't back it up?

I am not telling anyone how to vote. You are. My arguments here have to do with being tired of dirty attack campaigns not based in fact. We are talking about corruption in California cities. The only thing that's been posted so far that might possibly be relevant is if the police chief somehow got raises he shouldn't have. So far nobody has answered how one council member could be capable of accomplishing that.

So maybe you should change your moniker there about, "There are no dumb questions," to "Don't question me because I have no answers."
Also, I've noticed you read my posts, quite some time passes to maybe powwow, and then you and the others come back and respond; whereas, I post immediately after reading a lot of these posts. Who really has the puppetstrings here?

I've been avoiding responding to any of your posts even though you named me in them. People have been giving you answers, yet you choose to deflect and twist whatever they are saying. If you truly were interested in discovering the truth about things, then why haven't you asked the one Council member who posts on here specific questions that would enlighten you about the issue, instead of wanting those who are talking about it to provide you with the proof?

You claim you can think for yourself, yet Why haven't you asked Kerri regarding the sale of the surplus land, where was the announcement published informing potential bidders to submit a bid? Cmon Ducky, during the height of the real estate market craze, why were there only 2 bidders ( one of which couldn't build what they were wanting to build)? Does this sound logical to an independent thinker like yourself? Doesn't it seem logical that more bidders might generate a higher bid for that land and more revenue for all of us? You've seen Steves posts, why not ask him to ask his contact at City Hall these same questions?

Regarding all the planning costs for staff S50. You saw the post Kerri made saying the Landowners are paying for all the planning costs of staff and that additional information was going to be released. The City Clerks office confirmed there isn't any additional information to release. Staff have conmfirmed there isn't any system in place to track the costs. Why haven't you asked Kerri for the proof, to back up her claim? Instead you ask me to prove this when there isn't any way to track this and/or expect Ernie to provide you with the information about the Statement Kerri made.

Doesn't it trouble you there has been lots of talk about an accident involving a city council member hitting a kid on a skateboard and there has been NO DENIAL from anyone that this didn't happen, yet no one can find any record of this incident? Accidents happen, so why NOT either confirm or deny this incident happened? Why aren't YOU seeking information about this by asking so n so did this happen or not? If you were truly motivated to finding out the truth, you would be asking this question.

Its remarkable how you can find polls that discredit some, yet can't find other docments that might discredit the current regime. Given the fact you haven't asked the tough questions of the current regime, my gut feeling is this isn't a coincidence.

If one is truly motivated to getting to the bottom of things, they will be asking questions of both sides!

Our quality of life here in Folsom isn't what it was 10 years ago, given our enourmous amount of debt created by these incumbants things aren't going to get better anytime soon. If we continue to reelect them they may lead us into insolvency with their reckless pursuit of annexation of S50, when it doesn't pencil out financially to do so.

I don't give a rats behind WHO serves on the council, I'm just interested in doing what is right for our community. Yet some on the Council try to twist this into sommething personal, simply because they can't argue the facts of their record while serving!

[ducky]

I've been avoiding responding to any of your posts even though you named me in them. People have been giving you answers, yet you choose to deflect and twist whatever they are saying. If you truly were interested in discovering the truth about things, then why haven't you asked the one Council member who posts on here specific questions that would enlighten you about the issue, instead of wanting those who are talking about it to provide you with the proof?

People haven't been giving answers. They have been passing along gossip, speculation, and innuendo. I am not twisting what they are saying. I don't need to ask the council member questions other than as they relate to city business I am concerned with. First off, if she denies everything you all are saying you will just call her a liar. If everything you are saying is true, then it will come out through some sort of official and proper procedure. Innocent until proven guilty, remember that?

You claim you can think for yourself, yet Why haven't you asked Kerri regarding the sale of the surplus land, where was the announcement published informing potential bidders to submit a bid? Cmon Ducky, during the height of the real estate market craze, why were there only 2 bidders ( one of which couldn't build what they were wanting to build)? Does this sound logical to an independent thinker like yourself? Doesn't it seem logical that more bidders might generate a higher bid for that land and more revenue for all of us? You've seen Steves posts, why not ask him to ask his contact at City Hall these same questions?

The land deal happened. Do I wish the city got more money? Of course. I've seen Steve's post and it makes sense to me. Do I think only one council member should be held accountable because the others choose to remain silent about it? No. I think you very hypocritical in targeting only one.

Regarding all the planning costs for staff S50. You saw the post Kerri made saying the Landowners are paying for all the planning costs of staff and that additional information was going to be released. The City Clerks office confirmed there isn't any additional information to release. Staff have conmfirmed there isn't any system in place to track the costs. Why haven't you asked Kerri for the proof, to back up her claim? Instead you ask me to prove this when there isn't any way to track this and/or expect Ernie to provide you with the information about the Statement Kerri made.

I figure Kerri was passing along the info she got from the city. Just like Ernie, she doesn't do the books for the city. Ernie is passing along the same information because that was all that was provided to him. Why is it when Ernie says the same thing it's okay, but not Kerri. I've said before we should make sure we get any money back that the city is entitled to. Wouldn't that be somebody on the city staff's job?

Doesn't it trouble you there has been lots of talk about an accident involving a city council member hitting a kid on a skateboard and there has been NO DENIAL from anyone that this didn't happen, yet no one can find any record of this incident? Accidents happen, so why NOT either confirm or deny this incident happened? Why aren't YOU seeking information about this by asking so n so did this happen or not? If you were truly motivated to finding out the truth, you would be asking this question.

Again, what's the point, Robert? You will just, yet again, call her a liar. I don't ask because I'm not the one perpetuating the rumor and that's all it is to me. If there is anything real there it will come out.


Its remarkable how you can find polls that discredit some, yet can't find other docments that might discredit the current regime. Given the fact you haven't asked the tough questions of the current regime, my gut feeling is this isn't a coincidence.

So that's all you have to go on a gut feeling? You still haven't answered what it is you think I have to gain here. I haven't found a poll to discredit anyone. Not sure what you are talking about there.


If one is truly motivated to getting to the bottom of things, they will be asking questions of both sides!

Our quality of life here in Folsom isn't what it was 10 years ago, given our enourmous amount of debt created by these incumbants things aren't going to get better anytime soon. If we continue to reelect them they may lead us into insolvency with their reckless pursuit of annexation of S50, when it doesn't pencil out financially to do so.

I disagree. Our quality of life here is pretty great. I think we've done a better job than some of our surrounding communities.

I don't give a rats behind WHO serves on the council, I'm just interested in doing what is right for our community. Yet some on the Council try to twist this into sommething personal, simply because they can't argue the facts of their record while serving!

As far as I can tell you and your cohorts are the only ones that are making things personal and, in my opinion, pretty slimy.

[MikeinFolsom]

Jrudi, you try to come across as being a 'well informed' citizen in Folsom. Too bad when you're talking to someone on the inside that knows the facts, I can tell you know sheet from shinola.

Miscellaneous employees gave back raises they were entitled to in their contracts. Great. Fire DIDN'T have raises to give back!!! We negotiated ZERO raises for the next three years in our contract. No cost of living. Nada. Oh yeah, when city departments were expanding at rapid rates during the 'boom' years, if you would notice, Fire hasn't expanded one bit. 4 stations in the 80s, 4 stations now. Same number of people on each apparatus as there have been since 1990. Oh yeah, if you wish to look at comparables, you do know what comparables are, don't you....you'd see Folsom is 4th out of the 5 comparable departments in the area. EDH, Roseville, Sac Metro, Sac City and Folsom. But you already knew that, didn't you? Of course you did.

Fire should take reductions in employees eh? Well educated one Jrudi, goes to show again how uneducated you actually are on many fronts. Who are you going to cut? I could go into required staffing on each apparatus, but you being the professor you claim to be, you'd already know Fire is running at bare minimum staffing and has been for the last several years.

You stand on your soap box and proclaim to know every detail about all departments in the city but I now can see you're the type that stands on the side lines and lobs grenades to see where they land. I can now see where you're coming from and what type of person you are. All show and no go.

[JRudi]

Jrudi, you try to come across as being a 'well informed' citizen in Folsom. Too bad when you're talking to someone on the inside that knows the facts, I can tell you know sheet from shinola.

Miscellaneous employees gave back raises they were entitled to in their contracts. Great. Fire DIDN'T have raises to give back!!! We negotiated ZERO raises for the next three years in our contract. No cost of living. Nada. Oh yeah, when city departments were expanding at rapid rates during the 'boom' years, if you would notice, Fire hasn't expanded one bit. 4 stations in the 80s, 4 stations now. Same number of people on each apparatus as there have been since 1990. Oh yeah, if you wish to look at comparables, you do know what comparables are, don't you....you'd see Folsom is 4th out of the 5 comparable departments in the area. EDH, Roseville, Sac Metro, Sac City and Folsom. But you already knew that, didn't you? Of course you did.

Fire should take reductions in employees eh? Well educated one Jrudi, goes to show again how uneducated you actually are on many fronts. Who are you going to cut? I could go into required staffing on each apparatus, but you being the professor you claim to be, you'd already know Fire is running at bare minimum staffing and has been for the last several years.

You stand on your soap box and proclaim to know every detail about all departments in the city but I now can see you're the type that stands on the side lines and lobs grenades to see where they land. I can now see where you're coming from and what type of person you are. All show and no go.

First, Fire didn't negotiate a three-year contract. Their previous contract expired on December 31, 2008, and their new contract expires at the end of this calendar year (for a total of only two years). So, they did not give up pay increases for three years. (Also, look at your contract for compensation studies - it guarantees that those are done during the course of this contract. Then, look at the other employee group contracts - those studies were deferred.)

Also, the "Constant Staffing Model" is nothing more than a scam to justify overtime. Everywhere else in City government when someone calls in sick or goes on vacation no one is called in to work overtime. You just suck it up, and someone already at work picks up the slack.

Also, there's no way that anyone can dispute the numbers from the State Controller's Office. Folsom's public safety departments are extremely inefficient. As I stated in my earlier post, it costs Folsom 40 to 45 percent more, on the average, to put a sworn police officer and a firefighter on the street than other cities in our area. And, we are approaching the amount that it costs Vallejo (the city that declared bankruptcy because of its failure to control public safety costs). The reality is if we don't get a handle on our public safety costs, we are destined to the same fate as Vallejo. We will not be able to fund any services, including public safety. No one wants this.

Also, do you care to comment on the "double time" that is guaranteed in Fire's contract for "forced" overtime? No one receive two-times their pay anywhere else for working overtime. This abuse of public funds has got to stop!

[JRudi]

So are you saying that the other council members just "go along"? It still isn't making sense. In order for your theory to work you would also have to be saying the other council members, including the mayor, don't think for themselves.

In a city manager form of government, typically only the city manager serves at the pleasure of the city council. All other city employees are hired and fired by the city manager. As for department heads, they are at-will (i.e. not protected by public employmnet laws), and as a result they often have employment contracts. This is where the city manager can incoroporate pay increases and other unique benefits. These contracts are not approved by the City Council (in fact council members are often prohibited by local ordinance to have any say in these contracts - they are purely at the discretion of the city manager).

As I explained in my previous post, if a city manager is concerned with his job security, he may be more vulnerable to being influenced by a minority of the council, especially if he perceives a particular council member being a swing vote to retain him or fire him. In these cases, he may be more apt to try to appease a particular council member, especially those he may view as more volatile.

[ducky]

In a city manager form of government, typically only the city manager serves at the pleasure of the city council. All other city employees are hired and fired by the city manager. As for department heads, they are at-will (i.e. not protected by public employmnet laws), and as a result they often have employment contracts. This is where the city manager can incoroporate pay increases and other unique benefits. These contracts are not approved by the City Council (in fact council members are often prohibited by local ordinance to have any say in these contracts - they are purely at the discretion of the city manager).

As I explained in my previous post, if a city manager is concerned with his job security, he may be more vulnerable to being influenced by a minority of the council, especially if he perceives a particular council member being a swing vote to retain him or fire him. In these cases, he may be more apt to try to appease a particular council member, especially those he may view as more volatile.

You can stop being coy. We all know you are saying the volatile council member is Kerri. I still stand by my question. If Miklos, Morin, Starsky, and Sheldon want to keep the city manager, how could one council member (Kerri) change that?

We have some strong personalities on the council right now. If one or more of them didn't approve of the pay increases or the city manager, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be shy about saying so.

[MikeinFolsom]

Sometimes I feel like I am talking to my three year old when I respond to you. Constant staffing. You seem educated on the whole deal, explain why it is an overtime scam and not beneficial to the thousands of cities around the country using this model. If you come close, maybe it'll justify a response. Do your homework though.....

Also, explain to me how an engine company is just going to 'suck it up' as you stated when one of the three guys calls in sick or takes a vacation for the day. Going to run the engine with only two guys there smarty pants?

Better yet, how about when one of the two guys on an ambulance calls in sick, you going to 'suck it up' and run the ambulance with only one guy? I guess when the guy running the copy machine, ie you, calls in sick, copies just don't get made that day. Whole different ballgame on this one, eh professor?

Yeah, your arguments make complete sense to me now. Just like all of your previous posts, you try to come across as 'being in the know' when in all reality you probably get your information from the Sacramento News and Review.

Since your previous posts seem to mirror your last one, it definitely appears that talking with my three year old actually makes more sense than responding to your posts.

[JRudi]

Sometimes I feel like I am talking to my three year old when I respond to you. Constant staffing. You seem educated on the whole deal, explain why it is an overtime scam and not beneficial to the thousands of cities around the country using this model. If you come close, maybe it'll justify a response. Do your homework though.....

Also, explain to me how an engine company is just going to 'suck it up' as you stated when one of the three guys calls in sick or takes a vacation for the day. Going to run the engine with only two guys there smarty pants?

Better yet, how about when one of the two guys on an ambulance calls in sick, you going to 'suck it up' and run the ambulance with only one guy? I guess when the guy running the copy machine, ie you, calls in sick, copies just don't get made that day. Whole different ballgame on this one, eh professor?

Yeah, your arguments make complete sense to me now. Just like all of your previous posts, you try to come across as 'being in the know' when in all reality you probably get your information from the Sacramento News and Review.

Since your previous posts seem to mirror your last one, it definitely appears that talking with my three year old actually makes more sense than responding to your posts.

Why not use one or two of the Battallion Chiefs as back-up? Aren't there five or six of them, and at least one is dedicated exclusively to training? Can this really be a full-time job? Or, what is wrong with allowing an engine to go out-of-service occasionally? You're doing this now, aren't you? Or, why not use part-time or seasonal firefighters, similar to what Cal Fire does? There has to be a more cost-effective approach to the status quo. The cost to support public safety is just too high, and some changes need to be made to the "culture" of how the services are provided.