Comments on: Uilkema to retire from Contra Costa supervisors

By: John W

John W — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 19:39:23 +0000

Re: #12

People get up in arms about uber-generous pensions and retiree health benefits. But when somebody tries to do something about the system of political bribery that passes for collective bargaining in the public sector (Schwarzenegger, Wisconsin, Ohio), those same people, few of whom will ever see retirement benefits remotely like those in the public sector, turn on the would-be reformers.

By: Jones

Jones — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:03:00 +0000

Rick K – you are dead on. Having worked at CCC, I can tell you that it is corrupt and full of snide, mediocre, and ethically challenged people. Now some really could not get a job elsewhere, but in my opinion there are a lot of socio/psychopaths who get themselves protected by claiming an ADA issue, and sit there texting their spouse all day long, not accomplishing anything. And here we are, thinking the BOS will do anything about it – well no, they won’t because it’s those very same psychos who support the BOS into office.

By: Rick K.

Rick K. — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:46:48 +0000

This “Tomi” hasn’t declared where she stands on various issues. She is probably a pawn of special interest groups, such as the public employee unions. Raul (#8 above) has a very good point. The sheriff has a fat, plump budget. He and his deputies are masters at the overtime budget. Most of the deputies will retire in their 50′s with $100,000 a year pensions for the rest of their lives. It’s time for the 3% at 50 pension scheme to go. It was approved by then-Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier at the behest of his fat-reared union cronies in Oct. 2002. Marky Mark bought the support of the unions for his political career at the price of bankrupting the county government. If “Tomi” does not call for reforming the 3% at 50 pension scheme, then she does not deserve to sit on the Board of Supervisors.

By: John W

John W — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:48:49 +0000

The only way I could see Peterson leaving the comparatively well-paid, locally high profile DA job for a “small fish/big lake” position in the state legislature would be if he had ambitions beyond that. State AG, for example. Seems highly unlikely.

By: Lisa Vorderbrueggen

Lisa Vorderbrueggen — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:22:09 +0000

Assembly terms are two years and a member may serve a maximum of three terms, or a total of six years.

By: Patty O'Day

Patty O'Day — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:05:33 +0000

I thought Assembly terms were 2 years. At the most they are 4 years, I think. Not 6 years. Can somebody confirm?

By: raul

raul — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:45:59 +0000

Memo to Mark Peterson; A good way to increase budget for DA’s office is to stage raid on Sheriffs office budget, you’ve got fat galore in that budget. Sherriffs office has a paid flack for example, a deputy whose whole job involves fielding telephone calls from reporters. DA’s office under previous leadership was timid, got rolled by Warren Ruph year after year.

By: Raul

Raul — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:55:01 +0000

I think it highly unlikely Mark Peterson will be running for state assembly anytime soon. For starters, he would have to take a substantial pay cut. Assembly members make less than Elected District Attorneys. Peterson recently rebuffed efforts by Board of Supervisors to lower his $200,000 a year salary. As I understand it they were asking Peterson and other elected county officials to voluntarily lower their annual salaries in an effort to deal with budget problems, but Peterson balked. So I don’t think Peterson will be in any hurry to leave his $200,000 a year to take a job that pays $136,000. On top of that I think you can make a case that the DA’s job is a far better job than assembly member, DA’s have real power, assembly members, well, you are one of 80 members.
Additionally, the job of Assembly is a “temp” job, it last just six years, the job of DA’s is one he can hang on to for 20 years, just as long as he gets re-elected every four years. DA’s, historically, have no problem getting re-elected, incumbents usually aren’t challenged except by an occasional token candidate. I think Peterson will DA for a long time, he’s pretty smart, a savvy guy.

By: Pondering the Future

Pondering the Future — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 05:44:13 +0000

First lets clear up one thing, why would the D.A. who makes over 200k and has his own office with no term limits, safety retirement and authority run for assembly to take a cut to 94k,no retirement,term limits and no power?
As to the BOS, Gayle has served well but it is time. This is one of the weakest boards in years and in need of real leadership. Tomi is not it. We don’t need another finger in the wind, party jumping, union pandering elected leader in this County. We are going into a period of even greater financial sacrifice when truly tough choices will have to be made. In a district with such an educated population surely we can find a real leader with some courage and common sense.

By: Elwood

Elwood — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 01:22:48 +0000

@ #2

Joan Buchanan is a power player?

God help us, it’s worse than I thought!