"How would you have voted on the issue if Councilman Curry hadn't withdrawn his proposal for the ballot measure and why?"
The issue being, of course, Councilman Keith Curry's attempt to put on the ballot the ability for the voters to control the City Employee Unions pension increases. For those who want a background, look here, here, and here.
Essentially, I've contended that the Police and Fire Unions (they like to be referred to as Associations) have a firm grip on the City Council with their Election-time Endorsements and Independent Expenditures and such.
Here's another example of how deep the Councilmembers are in the Union pockets.
When the Daily Pilot asked the question above, Councilman Curry answered (of course) saying:
"Obviously I believe this would be a prudent and fiscally responsible strategy to contain pension costs. The time to take action is before a crisis develops. San Francisco voters have been making these decisions for more than 100 years, and they have avoided unfunded pension liabilities. I think Newport Beach voters can also make proper choices. This is a smart strategy to avoid problems."
Councilman Webb (a retired Newport Beach City Employee) predictably answered:
"I appreciate Councilman Curry removing the item from the agenda."
The rest of the 5 City Councilmembers?
They did not respond.
Maybe all five are on vacation?
Maybe all five didn't check their voice mails or emails?
Maybe the Daily Pilot reporter had the wrong contact information?
Maybe the other five Councilmembers were soo wrapped up in the other major pressing issues in the City (City Hall, John Wayne Airport, Sober Living/Group/Rehab homes) they didn't have time to respond.
Maybe they are all shy.
Most likely though, they were afraid to upset their Union bosses. Soo afraid that any thing said would have irked them and would have disturbed their wonderful spot in their pockets.
Sometimes a "No Comment" speaks volumes.
No comments:
Post a Comment