Board Votes 5-0 For Moorlach Proposal
Posted by: Jubal | 07/31/2007 12:48 PM
The Board of Supervisors just voted 5-0 to approve Item 27, Sup. Moorlach's proposal to "consider indicating intent to rescind the retroactive portion of the 3% at 50 pension increase to all Public Safety employees..."
Just as I predicted.
The original motion was amended so the matter will come back to the Board on September 18 rather than September 11. It was also amended at Sup. Bates request to allow for an independent review of Sup. Moorlach's case during the intervening seven weeks.
Now we shall see what happens in those intervening two months. Listening to all five supervisors, clearly they found the constitutional argument most compelling. I'd say the AOCDS' best hope is on trying to punch big legal holes in that argument, not in the "widows and orphans" approach. I don't think any of the supervisors are unmoved by the human cost in this matter, but if AOCDS continues to use the examples of dead deputies it will come across to the Board as exploitative and backfire on attempts to sway them.
If I were to make an instant prediction based on what I just watched, I'd say the Board votes to move forward with rescission come Sept. 18 and most likely by a 5-0 vote. Any chance of a Board majority voting NOT to rescind will depend almost entirely on the independent review coming back with a negative assessment of the legal case for rescission, because any Supervisor who gets cold feet about going forward will need that sort of political cover.
Mr. Ayer registered as a Republican to be electable in an interim election with no incumbents. He did...
AOCDS swaying the board is not the problem, finding out if it was legal or not is the problem which will require judicial review and decision.
what if the review comes back opposite of Moorlach's review, then what ? do they go ahead and get real judical review?
if it is determined as illegal, what happens to those on the board who passed it? do they get away free? do they get charged and tried?
Supe Moorlach shouldn't have made that pseudo apology to Sheriff Carona in public. It made him (Moorlach) look bad.
OUTSTANDING NEWS! We finally have a board vote where they all got it right. Way to go Supervisors!
This was an especially courageous vote for Janet Nguyen. She is the only one of the five not in a safe seat. Kudos to Janet for standing on principle.
They really haven't accomplished much at this point. The vote by the supervisors was far from courageous it was only a delay of action. Basically what they said was, "okay John. We'll hire someone to look at your theory...someone that isn't your chief of staff or Chris Norby's brother".
John Moorlach's initial proposal was watered down so it could pass muster, and allow the other supervisors to walk a narrow path. The real test of courage is yet to come.
I say we take 30% of the Sups pension away, yea!
how about giving up 30% of yours Jubal? That is if you have one!
Matt,
I predicted that too!
I hope Moorlach is right about all this. God knows he has always been right before.
The Deputies and their union leaders need to understand that they don't have ANY votes on the Board. They need to try to get along - or else they will keep coming up short.
The Johnmeister kicking some Quint butt! The Johnster putting AOCDS inept leadership on notice - no more backroom deals! The Johndude looking out for the taxpayers! The Johnman walking his post in a military manner taking charge of all government property in view! The John John doing the right thing!
The Johnmeister!!!
Smiley:
I'm self-employed. Nobody takes care of me except me.
Does anyone know which of the Supervisors take the pension and which don't? My guess is Moorlach does since he has been a bureaucrat for over 12 years with the county. If the county Supervisors want to stand on principle and be the leaders of pension reform they should all opt out of the costly defined benefit. I imagine this information may be discovered through a Public Information Request?
One has to question why Moorlach chose not to consult with other elected officials such as the Sheriff and the DA about this proposal way before July 17. Especially when it impacts their employees. He then has the audacity to apologize to the sheriff at the meeting this morning for not consulting him before. Used a "lack of communication" excuse. Oh please! Moorlach hates the sheriff and everyone saw that demonstrated today. One also has to question why Moorlach wants force the retirees to pay the outrageous premiums for the county's medical plans that they provide for non-sworn retirees. Retired deputies can get far better coverage with the AOCDS group plans and it costs less to boot.
"Retired deputies can get far better coverage with the AOCDS group plans and it costs less to boot."
Well there you go! There's the answer we've all been waiting to hear and knew all along. Stop trying to suck more of my tax dollars and use YOUR OWN money to take care of YOUR medical and retirement needs.
"Stop trying to suck more of my tax dollars and use YOUR OWN money to take care of YOUR medical and retirement needs."
I'm sure the deputies will be sure to remember that when you are in your next accident, are calling 911 for the LA hoods doing the home invasion robbery on your Coto home or when you wonder why it's not safe to walk along the shores of Irvine Lake.
Wouldn't want to suck up your tax dollars to pay for those calls of service the deputies provide. Better hope the libs in Sacramento start legislating back your 2nd Amendment rights.
Nick, how come whenever somebody questions their pay or benefits cops and emergency services personnel always reply with the standard refrain: "just wait 'til you have to call 911."
Well, who else are we going to call? You have a monopoly. Please stop confusing our emergency with your own value. The latter is created in a political environment where your unions can buy and sell electeds.