I hate planning for the future. Yeah, I know it's a necessity, but that doesn't make futurethought any more pleasant. Recently, I have begun the dreaded process of investigating retirement. No, it won't happen for several years, but I thought it prudent to see if I could possibly make ends meet despite my ignorance of anything financial. It amazes me that more insurance agents, investment "professionals", and Nigerian banking scammers haven't contacted me. They would immediately think dollar signs and easy mark. To avoid reader's malaise, I checked things out, made a couple of adjustments to enhance my bottom line, and I think I'll survive if I move to Eagle Point, Montana and buy that one-room cabin with the outhouse and kerosene lamps. California isn't cheap, and with our beloved politicians and government managers on the job, the state should be fiscally solvent around the time dinosaurs return.
What oath do peace officers take upon being sworn in? The short form is "Serve and Protect," if I'm not mistaken. Unfortunately, it seems the majority of governators at both local and state levels added a few words to that oath. For that rather large and insulated group it now reads, "Serve (myself), Protect (my cash flow, retirement and benefits), and Pass (the bill onto us who pay taxes). This isn't a democrat or republican thing, but a general, "I deserve mine and you should be happy to pay it" thing.
I think I understand politics on a surface level. Whichever party is in control can't wait to finance pet projects for their constituents and heavy donors, not to mention themselves. Campaign rhetoric is just that -- rhetoric. Several years ago in the state's election for Governor, Gray Davis, a veteran Democrat with over 20 years of state government experience, soundly defeated Republican Dan Lundgren, who exhibited the intellectual depth and personal charm of a Bart Station parking lot. Time to rest easy? Wrong! Davis completely lost control of his party (not to mention his senses), and promptly placed the state into a budget deficit numbering in the untold billions. Excuses and blame circulated ad nauseum, but for the first time in state history, a sitting governor was recalled by the voters. In came Hollywood strong man Arnold Schwarzenegger to save the state. Guess where we are now? In nearly the exact same financial spot we were with Coach Davis. On top of that, the California Legislature (House and Senate)is a few months late submitting the state budget (as usual) because they can't agree on how to cover their spending addictions and avoid blame. Some things never change.
I have a sneaky premonition that if I biked to my friendly Wells Fargo branch, and explained that I needed several thousand dollars more in my account to cover my dreams of a beach condo and Giants' season tickets, they would either find the request laughable or have me committed. The world just doesn't work that way. Do you remember the House Banking Scandal in Washington, D.C. a few years back? It took me awhile to understand that, but in essence a large number of U.S. Representatives had developed a habit of cashing checks with their in-house bank. That was perfectly understandable, except that in many cases they didn't have enough cash in their accounts to cover the checks they wrote. The huffing, puffing, bloviations, and posturing that resulted would have topped any Johnny Carson monologue. Eventually, it all quieted down with promises of ethical purity in the immediate future. Somehow, I don't think banking establishments, outside the U.S. House of Representatives, would have extended the same courtesies to Joe and Janet Taxpayer.
It's not that I have any personal animosity for government movers and shakers. After all, I'm a state employee (teacher) myself. But I think many who enter the world of elections and appointments, deem themselves highly important and thus insulated from the mundane norms of everyday "civilian" functions. One of the most perplexing issues of this (and previous) elections continues to be health care. In a perfect world all medical expenses would be covered, all citizens would have complete access and be able to choose their own doctors and providers. The big rub is how to pay for this. It is bothersome for all politicians because there is no solution that satisfies all constituencies. Ironically, the one location that offers this medicinal valhalla is the Congress. Everything is paid for, including doctor choice and full access. If the rest of the citizenry could simply fall in behind the country's lawmakers and sign up, there would be one less campaign issue and both parties would have lower collective blood pressure. Any chance? Don't think so.
My final rant involves a story I first read about this past May. We have here (as do most other well-populated areas) a government agency, the Santa Clara Valley Water District. If I had known 20 years ago what I just discovered, I would have been sorely tempted to change career paths and take a civil service exam. The water district's primary function provides drinking water and flood protection for the million plus Santa Clara County residents. It manages to scrape by with a meager $364 million annual budget which is accrued through water bills and property taxes.
Well it seems there have been concerns and even complaints about excess spending and exorbitant salaries at the venerable SCVWD. Former CEO Stan Williams got the ball rolling when he hired then-board member Greg Zlotnick for a brand spanking new position at the modest salary of $184,000 per year. Stan forgot to advertise the position or tell any of the other board members (They must have been peeved at not getting the job). Eventually, Stan the Man resigned under fire, but not before the board gave him a 7% raise to a tidy $250,000, which coincidentally helped raise his pension. But the true heartwarming tale involves Stan's successor, Olga Martin Steele. She was piped aboard the ship as a TEMPORARY CEO in January. Her salary -- a meager $252,000. But she only works 32 hours a week and is considered a part-time employee. Why? Because she is also drawing a $180,000 per year pension from her previous government positions. If she worked full-time she would have to give that up. But don't think Olga isn't making sacrifices. She will have to make a decision on job or pension this coming January, because under state rules, she's only allowed to have BOTH for one year. In addition, she receives NO BENEFITS, has to pay for her own health care insurance, and gets NO VACATION. She was even denied the $750 per month car allowance old Stan received.Olga is a certain candidate for political sainthood. What a trooper! I love board chair Rosemary Kanei's comments in defending this mess. "...I think she's doing an excellent job. In a very short time frame she has been able to do a lot of good things," she babbled. Can you be a little more generic, Rosemary?
If Olga decides to hang it up and struggle along on her measly pension after January, I wonder what my chances would be of taking her place? I'd settle for $200,000, but I couldn't survive without the vacay and car swag. Incidentally, the board is planning on raising the "pump tax" (the fee to city agencies and farmers for pumping groundwater) an additional 9.5% this year. That particular "fee" has doubled over the past 10 years. Makes sense; after all the Stans and Olgas need their perks.
Before steam starts coming out of my ears, I should pay homage to writer Paul Rogers of the San Jose Mercury News. His diligence and reporting expertise provided the two articles that prompted this diatribe.
So I guess I should go back to the planning table and start selling pencils door-to-door in my spare time. After all, retirement is just around the corner. Should I call my representative and check on a car allowance?
Frustration!
MM
No comments:
Post a Comment