Ridgefield Press Letter to the Editor > Financing a New Library

Does Marty Heiser speak for the Board of Finance or is he just Bored of Finance? 

Regarding the notion of a new $20 million library, Mr. Heiser is quoted in the Ridgefield Press as stating: "I told them [if] they want to build their Carnegie Hall, they’ve got [to] find their Carnegie.” It looks to me like they have. His name is Heiser. 

Mr. Heiser, referring to the Board of Finance, said “...This board can help shape the deal.” I ask: What deal? 

Furthermore, in Heiser's world “...If it’s $15 million private and $5 million public, I can see getting behind that, because we’d have to spend $5 million to fix it, anyway.” I say: Really? If the library can raise $15 million, raising $5 million should be a breeze. 

And finally the former Board of Finance chairman stated “This thing’s got architect’s renderings and ads in the newspaper — this thing is coming.” So I say if 'this thing is coming', why should we waste money on a referendum? Let's just call it "Fiat by Marty". 

Here's some more of what I think. 

(1) If the library can only raise $15m, they should build something for $15m. 

(2) Their current rendering described in the Ridgefield Press & the Danbury News Times doesn't even include the old Webster bank building which could house a gift shop, a coffee house and other appropriate businesses that could help support their kingdom. 

(3) If, in fact, taxpayers are asked to chip in $5 million, the quid pro quo should be the gradual zeroing of the library's annual stipend which is $1.64 million this year and use that money to pay down the taxpayer $5 million contribution. 

(4) I dare any member of any board to raise these politically un-popular propositions publicly. It's always MORE, it's NEVER LESS.

Washington Post > D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee has launched a rigorous evaluation system that will make some District teachers have their job security tied to standardized test scores.

Finally some sanity may be seeping into our public school system. Read this important article here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• D.C. Fires 241 Teachers for Incompetence -- By: Daniel Foster (corner.nationalreview.com)
• Q-and-A with Michelle Rhee (thehill.com)
• New woes for D.C. teacher merit pay plan (washingtontimes.com)

High salaries lead to high pensions > Where does Ridgefield stand?

CA city seeks resignations of high-paid officials

By JOHN ROGERS, Associated Press Writer

BELL, Calif. – The City Council in this small, blue-collar suburb of Los Angeles intends to ask three administrators whose salaries total more than $1.6 million to resign Thursday or face possible firing.

The officials include Chief Administrative Officer Robert Rizzo, who earns $787,637 a year — nearly twice the pay of President Barack Obama — for overseeing one of the poorest towns in Los Angeles County.

The others are Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia, who makes $376,288 a year, and Police Chief Randy Adams, whose annual salary of $457,000 is 50 percent more than that of Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck.

Councilman Luis Artiga said the panel planned to request the resignations during a closed-door, afternoon meeting that was called to consider dismissing the officials. A public hearing is scheduled for Monday.

Rizzo was hired at an annual salary of $72,000 a year in 1993, and the council rapidly increased that amount over the years. His most recent raise boosted his salary more than $84,000 a year.

"All right, somebody wasn't paying attention to that," said Artiga, who joined the council a little more than a year ago. "But we are acting on that today."

Adams was recently hired at a relatively high salary, while Spaccia was paid $102,310 when she was hired in 2003 and received hefty raises since then, Artiga said.

All three officials under question have contracts that protect them from being fired without cause. If they refuse to quit, the city might have to shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy out their contracts.

Revelations about the pay in Bell has sparked anger in the city of fewer than 40,000 residents. Census figures from 2008 show 17 percent of the population lives in poverty.

Enraged residents have staged protests demanding the firings and started a recall campaign against some council members. "Woo-hoo, the salaries. Wow. What can I say? I think that's unbelievable," Christina Caldera, a 20-year resident of the city, said as she stood in line at a food bank. Caldera, who is struggling after recently losing her job as a drug and alcohol counselor, said she generally was satisfied with the way the city was being run but felt high-paid officials should take a pay cut. 

"What are they doing with all that money?" she asked. "Maybe they could put it into more jobs for other people."

Attempts to leave messages with city representatives seeking comment from Rizzo and Spaccia failed because their voicemails were full. A message left for Adams was not immediately returned.

The council members are paid well themselves — four of the five members, including Artiga, each make about $100,000 a year for the part-time work. The county district attorney's office is investigating to determine if the council's high salaries violate any state laws.

The City Council also intends to review city salaries, including those of its own members, according to Artiga and Mayor Oscar Hernandez.

"We are going to analyze all the city payrolls and possibly will revise all the salaries of the city," Artiga said. 

However, both men said they considered the City Council pay to be justified.

"We work a lot. I work with my community every day," the mayor said, as he shook hands with and embraced people leaving the food bank Thursday.

Council members are on call around the clock, and it is not uncommon for them to take calls in the middle of the night from people reporting problems with city services, Artiga said.

Though many residents are poor, Hernandez said they live in a city they can be proud of, one with a $22.7 million budget surplus, clean streets, refurbished parks and numerous programs for people of all ages. He pointed proudly down a street to a park filled with new exercise equipment.

When Rizzo arrived 13 years ago, Hernandez said, the city was $13 million in debt and on the verge of bankruptcy. Rizzo obtained government grants to aid the city, the mayor said.

The Los Angeles Times reported the salaries last week, prompting a large protest Monday at City Hall in which residents shouted and demanded that Rizzo be fired.

If Rizzo leaves, he still would be entitled to a state pension of more than $650,000 a year for life, according to calculations made by the Times. That would make Rizzo, 55, the highest-paid retiree in the state pension system.

Adams could get more than $411,000.

Spaccia, 51, could be eligible for as much as $250,000 a year when she reaches 55, though the figure is less precise than for the other two officials, the Times said.

Essay > Boo! Another surprise & it's not even Halloween

Once upon a time there was free parking at the Branchville train station. As we know, it's a small lot with about 150 available spaces. It has a few ruts in it.... oh... and a speed bump. 

Then poor little Ridgefield got into financial trouble by spending beyond its means so it starting looking around for more income. 

Sensing a possible revolt of two thirds of its residents if property taxes continued to rise unabated, it turned to another possible source of income -- the Parking Authority -- to come up with a plan. 

And lo & behold, it did...... in the form of parking permits for the Branchville Station. But, as usual, how the fees were computed didn't make any sense. We have a history with this kind of miscalculation. 

At the BoS meeting at which these parking fees were introduced, it was suggested that a $250 annual fee & a $6.00 daily fee were reasonable. The parking permits would be decided by lottery. A variety of people stood up to say they were comfortable with this arrangement. A fair number of these people were from Redding. 

I asked (1) how this fee structured had been calculated and (2) why was it necessary this year, it being another difficult year financially. 

The Answers: (1) By comparison, the fees were higher in neighboring towns. (2) Our Highway Department had to fix the ruts in the parking lot out of their current budget. No one added this had caused any hardship, that the time it took to do it was excessive or that this project had put the department over budget. 

Since no one was getting my drift, I decided to change tactics & stated that I thought we were going about the process 'bass ackward' [sic]; that it made more sense to first figure the costs of whatever was required to maintain the lot (or we wanted to do to improve it) & from that, to extrapolate a parking fee to support the project, thus causing no expense to slop over to anyone except those who used the facility, i.e. commuters. 

'Oh', said, the First Selectman, 'we know the costs: repaving costs about three thousand dollars and we are thinking about putting in new lights and a few other amenities so we pretty much know what it's going to cost'. JR: 'Oh.... and how much is that'? RM: 'Like I said: three thousand dollars to repave the parking lot'. 

So now you know how the fee was calculated. 

I don't know about you but I feel better now. 

Well, here's another suggestion. A committee comprised of a Parking Commission member, the First Selectman, the head of the Highway Department, some commuters, the town engineer & the Financial Director sit in a room and they: 

1. make a list of all the improvements wanted or needed 

2. cost out those improvements 

3. figure annual maintenance to keep it all in tip top shape, another selling point for Ridgefield 

4. decide on the simplest system using the least amount of time/energy to administer it (parking kiosk or a lottery?) 

5. create a spreadsheet to see how these costs could be absorbed by the users, i.e. commuters w/o any costs to non-commuters. 

Suppose I said that by doing it this way, we could reduce the $250 parking fee to $200? 

Or suppose I said that, as a result of this exercise, we discovered that the suggested fees would not cover the costs so those extra costs would have to be added as an expense line in the town budget & thus paid for by property owners (in which case, we would also be paying for commuting Reddingites)? 

Or suppose I said, the one & only reason this subject has come up at all is that Ridgefield is looking for extra income via a back door (like the Police Department tried with the flagman episode) & that this fee is not really necessary at all. 

Well, I have my opinion. What's yours?