Wednesday, October 5, 2022
67.8 F
Oxnard
More

    Latest Posts

    Two Visions of America by Don Jans
    America on the Precipice Documentary

    Oxnard City Staff Misleads Council And The Public

    Letter to the Editor:

    Submitted by Raymond Blattel

    On 27 July, 2022, at the Oxnard City Council meeting, again, as was the case three years ago, the Oxnard city staff misled the city council and the public with erroneous cost data for the city’s employee benefit contribution increases.

    Human Resources (HR) stated that for the Exec, IOUE, OPOA, and SEIU labor bargaining units, the total estimated costs for the new three-year term (FY22/23, FY23/24, and FY24/25) would be $12,738,520 with a General Fund (GF) impact of $8,087,342.  This total was derived by adding all of the ‘delta’ cost increases for the three years.  If math isn’t your favorite thing, that just means the city staff pretended the total cost in the second year was only the difference between the first year cost and the second year cost…as if the first year’s increase never happened, and the third year cost was only the difference between the second year cost and the third year cost.

    This is a deceptive method of describing the total cumulative cost impact to the taxpayer, but it is a sadly common technique bureaucrats use to hide the total cost.    Oxnard city staff did the same thing three years ago, at which time the public demonstrated the correct calculation to the former Chief Financial Officer, three council members, and even the city manager.  Yet, again this year, with these new agreements, the city staff still ignores the correct methodology and misleads the council and the public with incorrect information.

    An example may help here.  Let’s assume gasoline now costs $3 per gallon (we wish), and the cost will increase $1 per gallon for each of the next two years.  In addition, assume one buys exactly 100 gallons of gasoline each year.  After currently paying $300 for gas for the first year, next year it will cost $400, and the year after it will cost $500.  Thus, the total cumulative cost paid for gasoline over the three-year period will be $1200.  But, using the city’s methodology, the total cost would be $300 for the first year, $100 for the second year ($1 per gallon cost increase – $1 per gallon being the cost delta between year 1 and year 2 – times 100 gallons), and $100 for the third year (again $1 per gallon cost increase times 100 gallons). Thus, the city’s total would be $500 over the same three-year period.  $1200 vs. $500, this is a HUGE difference.

    Thus, the true total cumulative cost impact for the four aforementioned labor bargaining units is $24,462,909, NOT $12,738,520 as stated by HR.

    Additionally, for the OMMA labor bargaining unit, the city’s HR told the city council and the public that the total estimated cost for the same three year term would be $2,899,064.  However, the actual total cumulative cost, using the correct math, is $5,991,764.  The total cumulative costs for these benefit increases is nearly DOUBLE what HR presented to the city council and the Oxnard taxpayers.

    Yes, it appears the Oxnard City Council will approve almost anything offered by the city staff with a unanimous vote most of the time.  And yes, it is appropriate that the city employees receive benefit contribution increases to help combat inflation which at this time is the highest in history.  However, what is NOT appropriate is the city staff misrepresenting the true and actual total cumulative cost for these benefit increases.  The Oxnard City Council needs to be presented with accurate cost data in order to make informative decisions and the Oxnard taxpayers not only need to know but deserve to know the truth and how much this will impact their personal finances.

    SOURCE

    Opinions and Commentary Published By Citizens Journal do not necessarily reflect the official positions of Citizens Journal.  You are invited to get involved!  Author and submit your editorial piece to [email protected]


    TELL YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT CITIZENS JOURNAL  Help keep us publishing –PLEASE DONATE

    - Advertisement -

    2 COMMENTS

    5 1 vote
    Article Rating
    Subscribe
    Notify of
    guest

    2 Comments
    Newest
    Oldest Most Voted
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Douglas D Partello
    Douglas D Partello
    1 month ago

    Myself, and others have brought this issue before the Oxnard City Council, and staff from the previous MOU agreement data. Mine focused on the three safety MOUs, and the healthcare costs, using “Delta Methodology”. Only to be ignored by those that have the power to investigate, and make changes to this misleading, and flawed reporting of the true costs to the taxpayers.
    So, what do you call a government that taxes, and does not well represent those taxpayers? With their very questionable accounting methods, and practices, it is little wonder why Oxnard needs 3x the city portion of sales tax (Measure O & E), schemes like the IUF siphoning off enterprise funds into the General Fund, ReNew Oxnard Mello-Roos scheme, and others to keep filling the blackhole of overspending in the General Fund. And yet, with all these schemes, our roads, medians, public parks and landscaping, sewer system, and building maintenance are sorely lacking. With $323 million in pension debt to CalPers, and quickly climbing, it may be the the day they default, that Oxnard residents and taxpayers wake from their slumber, and cry out, “What the heck happened?!”

    Douglas D Partello
    Douglas D Partello
    1 month ago

    Myself, and others have brought this issue before the Oxnard City Council, and staff from the previous MOU agreement data. Mine focused on the three safety MOUs, and the healthcare costs, using “Delta Methodology”. Only to be ignored by those that have the power to investigate, and make changes to this misleading, and flawed reporting of the true costs to the taxpayers.
    So, what do you call a government that taxes, and does not well represent those taxpayers? With their very questionable accounting methods, and practices, it is little wonder why Oxnard needs 3x the city portion of sales tax (Measure O & E), schemes like the IUF siphoning off enterprise funds into the General Fund, ReNew Oxnard Mello-Roos scheme, and others to keep filling the blackhole of overspending in the General Fund. And yet, with all these schemes, our roads, medians, public parks and landscaping, sewer system, and building maintenance are sorely lacking. With $323 million in pension debt to CalPers, and quickly climbing, it may be the the day they default, that Oxnard residents and taxpayers wake from their slumber, and cry out, “What the hell happened?!”

    Latest Posts

    advertisement

    Don't Miss

    Subscribe

    To receive the news in your inbox

    2
    0
    Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
    ()
    x