Atherton: A Government or a Business?

[Re-posted from Almanac blog]
Atherton, posted by please stop, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood
This Wednesday a very important vote on employee’s compensation/benefits will be made by the Council to chart the course of Atherton’s employees and managers for the future. This will be a last ditch effort by a group of Councilmembers who see Atherton as a business where the mission is to deliver the product at the lowest possible cost using the fewest and cheapest employees one can find. Given the wording of the pending resolution the rational is built on “savings”. Likely the business backgrounds of the various personalities involved see their duty as business managers. They see the need for this hurried vote as they realize change is coming. The new moderate mixture of council members will likely see Atherton as a small town government serving the residents and responding to their needs for safety, roads and infrastructure.

The last ten years of Atherton’s governance is not pretty. It has been marked by a toxic mixture of various Council members who are at war with each other, with multiple departures of key employees, and costly lawsuits. There is no vision to replace decrepit town buildings. The recent effort at placing a library in the Park was a total disaster in that the will and appeals of the majority of the residents was totally ignored from the beginning and then when using the ballot box was overwhelming slapped down.

While it appears that the resolution on compensation and benefits will probably be passed unless it is immediately pulled as an agenda item. The timing is just wrong in that a new council will not be allowed to consider the matter. The old Council has no business making long term decisions in the final minutes of their term that a new Council will have to live with over a long period of time. The voters have indicated they want a change in the nature of Atherton’s government. The remuneration issue has not been explained in terms of fiscal need or discussed in public meetings. The resulting effect will be not being able to attract the best employees available. What this vote will produce is more employee turnover, less effective employees and in the end more expense for the taxpayers of Atherton.

This vote will have consequences in upcoming contract negations with the sworn police officers. It would not be a surprise if many are planning to leave right now as they see what the future holds in Atherton. Many communities are seeking trained police officers from adjacent communities (lateral transfers) and enhancing benefits. For instance Antioch, California is considering making benefits more attractive as they find training and experience are costly items.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_22055565/antioch-looks-at-ways-entice-veteran-police-officers

The need for a renew of the Parcel Tax is obvious but the intent of this vote is to do away with it having “saved” costly employee expense. The private funding effort of a new Town Center which residents endorsed will likely stall in absence of a long-term vision for the Atherton Police Department and other town service employees. As a new library or remodeled one is mixed into Town Center concept it likely too will stall.

While the result of the Wednesday vote can possibly be undone in the months ahead, it will be a reflection of today’s dysfunctional Council for a long time. Atherton residents should demand a responsive government and are tired of the last ten years of poor governance. Atherton is not a business but an organization to serve the needs and reflect the will of the residents. The lame duck council should not vote on anything of a long term nature right now but take their victory lap, have their party and get out of the way.

November 2012 Council Agenda

 

To read any of the council reports associated with these agenda items, go to the Town website (http://www.ci.atherton.ca.us/city-council/index.html) and click the link to download the .pdf packet that corresponds with the agenda Item No. that you want to read.

Measure M

From: Paul Tonelli  Date: Wed Nov 7, 2012 3:19 pm Subject: Measure M

 

I think the voters have clearly voiced their opinions in regards to the Atherton measures on the ballot yesterday.  With regards to Measure M, it is my understanding that the vote shows the town approves the Little League proposal to improve/expand the baseball field at Holbrook-Palmer Park.  It is also my understanding that the proposal must still go through the proper approvals with the Park and Recreation Commission and the Town Council.   Is this correct??  IF this is correct, then is is possible for the Park Commission or the Town Council to modify the proposal as was suggested by Elizabeth Lewis during the Little League proposal to council earlier this year.  Before this issue was put on the ballot, it seemed the council would be willing to consider the proposal piece meal in order to determine which improvements/expansions suit the park. 

 

It is my humble opinion that parts of the Little League proposal are necessary and some are unnecessary.  Yes, the field needs to be improved.  Yes, bathrooms in that part of the park would be welcome not only to Little League supporters, but by tennis participants as well.  No, we do not need a permanent scoreboard.  No, we do not need permanent foul poles, and we most certainly do not need a permanent 200-seat capacity grandstand.  I truly think that we can satisfy the basic needs of Little League while keeping the baseball field a low-key, fitting addition to the park.  Details on fencing, dugouts, and the backstop would have to be worked out.  I would once again remind interested parties that 10 years ago Little League agreed to maintain the existing backstop and fencing, and they have fallen short of their promise.

 

I think we have an opportunity for a compromise here that would satisfy both Little League and residents who are proponents of a more bucolic, botanical environment.  I believe Little League should be amenable to scaling back their proposal to an extent, while others should recognize the need for improvements in the field and limited expansion of facilities.  Full scale development of the Little League proposal would add permanent structures (grandstand, scoreboard, dugouts, foul poles) that would be used for only one-quarter of the year.

 

However you stand on this issue I would encourage you to keep track of the progress of the proposal.  I would also encourage you to participate in the discussion when the issue comes before the Park Commission and the Town Council. 

 

I'd also like to thank everyone who took the time to vote in this election.  It was certainly one of the most spirted and active elections in the 15 years my wife and I have lived in Atherton.  Agree or disagree with the results, residents had the time and the available information to inform themselves of the issues/candidates and to make the decision they thought was best for the town.   I think the town and the process come out on top this time around.

 

Sincerely,

Paul Tonelli

Atherton Election Results

From: "Didi Fisher"
Date: November 7, 2012 8:22:41 AM PST
To: "Athertonians Athertonians"
Subject: [Athertonians] election


Good morning,

Congratulations to Elizabeth Lewis and Cary Wiest! They won last night and will be the new city council members.

No on measure F won with 68.94% of the vote.

Thank you all for the interest and help! Hopefully now the Town will have a master plan phase that will engage many residents .

Thank you.  Didi Fisher

                                                           __________________

From: "WRWidmer"
Date: November 7, 2012 9:10:07 AM PST
To: Athertonians@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Athertonians] Election Results

Atherton Residents:

The people have spoken on the Library, Ballpark and New Town Center. During the development of the ballot measures I insisted these be binding meaning your vote sets firm parameters for the Council to follow. This is why I wanted votes on all three of these key issues. This provides us all with a clear direction moving forward.

My vote of support on the Library measure was inline with my 2010 campaign platform. It is clear that my position misread the community. Please rest assured I will ensure my actions are inline with the voter mandates on this issue as well as on the other two.

I congratulate Elizabeth on her re-election and our new Council member, Cary, whom I am looking forward to working with.

Bill Widmer
                                                           __________________

Have Secret Sacramento Union Funds Entered Atherton Politics?

 From: Colleen Anderson
Date: Fri Nov 2, 2012 4:17 pm
Subject: Fwd: Have Secret Sacramento Union Funds Entered Atherton Politics? 

Begin forwarded message:

From: Save Our Park <saveathertonspark@gmail.com>

Subject: Have Secret Sacramento Union Funds Entered Atherton Politics?

Date: November 2, 2012 4:10:12 PM PDT

To: lovemypaws@yahoo.com

Reply-To: saveathertonspark@gmail.com

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

Is the SEIU, a public employee union, secretly funding the KUPPERMAN and the YES on F Campaigns to win itself fully-protected library jobs in an over-sized library in our park?  WHAT WE KNOW:   The YES on F and KUPPERMAN Campaigns have produced a blizzard of campaign materials, blanketing Atherton with dozens of mailings per household.  The barrage of political consultant-style mailings have raised considerable alarm among those fighting to protect the park and keep the library appropriate for Atherton. CONCERNS:    With campaigns "valued" at well over $35,000 each, where could the funding for all these materials be coming from!  Could YES on F or KUPPERMAN be using reserved JPA Library Tax Funds? WHAT WE KNOW:   From the recent disclosures, YES on F reported nearly $23,000 in expenses and total contributions of $6,875 (less than 30% of what they've spent), yet they have paid only $33, less than .15% of their costs!  The KUPPERMAN Campaign (with all the same materials and maybe more) reported less than $3,000 in total expenses and contributions of $6,500, and one payment of $857! CONCERNS:   Who would extend these groups so much credit?  How can KUPPERMAN's costs be $20,000 less than those of YES?  Why weren't those costs reported by Kupperman and who is going to pay all these huge campaign costs? WHAT WE KNOW:  The KUPPERMAN Campaign: 1)  paid for ads in the Almanac, 2) hired a Sacramento-based accountant, and 3) borrowed money from her husband to pay for beverages, office supplies and postage.  Yes on F Campaign: 1) got Almanac ads, 2) hired Duffy & Capitolo, a Sacramento-based political consultant and 3) hired Lowercase Productions, a graphic designer but paid nothing for any of these services!  That is virtually all that is reported! CONCERNS:   The reports leave big gaps in required information: clearly more is going on with the professional campaign materials evident from both groups. Could funding somehow be coming from the San Mateo Co. Library staff who worked so closely with Kupperman on the Atherton Library Building Steering Committee? WHAT WE KNOW:  It turns out that San Mateo Co. Library professionals are members of a public employee union, called the Service Employees International Union, or SEIU, based in Sacramento.  We learned that Duffy & Capitolo does work for the SEIU, including the SEIU's campaign on AB 438.  The purpose of AB 438 is described as follows: to make it as painful as possible for localities to withdraw from a county library system in favor of more cost-effective private management. The bill lets a city contract for library-management services only if no city or library employees would be "displaced." Librarians couldn't even be transferred from one library branch to another, much less laid off. Another provision would mandate that the private operator provide compensation that does not "undercut city or library district pay rates." This controversial bill was passed after a year of intense lobbying effort by the SEIU, starting in 2010.  The San Mateo Co. branch of the SEIU had their own campaign called "Our Libraries Are Not for Sale" to fight privatization.  Atherton is one of only a few towns in San Mateo County with excess library funds.  2010 is when the Atherton Council initially rejected the Library JPA staff's (and therefore SEIU's) recommendation to triple the size of our library and move it to the Park. CONCERNS:   San Mateo Co. Library staff's recommendation that Atherton build a larger library than what the town itself needs constitutes a conflict of interest and deserved vetting that it hasn't gotten. Residents raised concerns and complaints about being excluded from the decision-making, so why didn't our informed council member McKeithen and committee Chair, Denise Kupperman, try to help them? Why were residents attacked instead?  Did the San Mateo Library Staff get the SEIU to secretly put its financial weight behind KUPPERMAN and YES on F to finish the job that the Library JPA staff started, without disclosing their conflicted roles in the whole process?  Is this why Kupperman fails to mention the library issue and hides her central role on the committee in her materials and only talks about keeping Atherton "Safe and Beautiful?"  WHAT WE KNOW:  Denise Kupperman and Kathy McKeithen have fought the right of residents to make the decisions about their own library. McKeithen vacates her majority seat this term.  If elected, Kupperman will inherit that majority on a council divided between those who would force a library into the park and those who care to represent residents. If residents want to determine what library services they fund, be it school libraries or digital technology before they go ahead and build another big structure and fill it with books and librarians, we need representatives who are not allied with the SEIU.  Combined with AB 438, YES on F and Kupperman will checkmate the ability of Atherton residents to bring rationality to the ever increasing amount of funding used for the library even as budget shortages force us to outsource all other town services-including our Police. CONCERNS:  We pulled these facts together so late but if you haven't voted yet, please VOTE NO ON F and NO to KUPPERMAN. Our library, our park and our town depend on it!

Outsourcing Police - Transparency in Governance

November 1, 2012

 

Dear Athertonians,

October 31 we received a letter dated October 18 from "The Mayor" (no name) of Atherton.

We believe the mailing to be a misuse of taxpayer dollars for political purposes.  If the Mayor does not like the people (Elizabeth Lewis and Cary Wiest) the APOA endorsed for council, he should have to use his own campaign funds to promulgate his beliefs just as the Atherton Police Officers Association did. The Mayor needs to be a statesman. Referring to our police as people who issue unspecified "misleading statements" is not statesmanship.

What can be his agenda?  Is it to go into negotiations next year in hostility so that he can walk from the talk and justify outsourcing? Is it to get his candidates elected?

Among other questions my wife and I would like to see answered publicly:

1. The letter was unsigned. Is the Mayor representing the entire Council? Did the whole council approve his message?
2. How about informal or sub-committee discussions on local policing? I just do not believe there have been no communications with APOA.
3. Incomplete budget information was given regarding our police force - how about comparing staffing and response rates to last year, not to half a decade ago?

And we could go on....

 

We moved here from 30+ years in Palo Alto several years ago. In Palo Alto I served on the school board for eight years. I believed then - and I believe today - that honesty and transparency are absolute requisites of community leaders, and I am troubled that the Atherton council may not be living up to these essential attributes of effective representatives. I have a strong position on the Atherton Police Department - KEEP IT!  However, it is true that defined benefit retirement plan funding is an issue for all employers, especially public ones, and it is an issue that must be faced and addressed in a reasoned, public, and cooperative fashion. It seems to me, without being privy to all the communications, formal and informal, that the APOA has been willing to do this but has been stonewalled by the current council majority, one reason why we have contributed to the APOA-PAC.

A two-tier police retirement plan would be a good first step although the devil always is in the details. Of course we should have a School Resource Officer - duh! Of course we should support renewal of the parcel tax; it's not like our friends and neighbors cannot afford it. As to agendizing items for public council discussion, I had no idea it apparently takes a majority; that's nonsense. Any one elected council member should have that right. Here in Atherton we all have our own little private enclaves, and we like it that way. Unfortunately, that leads to a disregard for - and disinterest in - local governance. Our council does not represent the talent that resides in this town because most of us do not care enough to be involved. We need more who do. 

 - Don Way, 124 Patricia Drive , Atherton