Newsletters

April 11, 2022

The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA. I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

***

Did You, or Didn’t You?

As we approach 30 days until voting commences in Sonoma County and Marin County, I want to do more to see that David Rabbitt wins reelection to the 2^nd District fof Sonoma County Supervisor. While I also want to see James Gore win, his race is not as contentious and competitive as Rabbitt’s. For those that live in Marin County, I also understand there are a few political races of great importance for you as well. I will speak to those in a later Soapbox. This Soapbox is intended to reach out to those that are in a position to influence employees, coworkers, neighbors, friends and family, and ask them if they are doing all they can to ensure Rabbitt does get reelected.

Hopefully, I do not need to speak to the reasons why Rabbitt is the best candidate for Supervisor. His track record is exemplary, and his work ethic is admirable. He is known as the “budget hawk” that watches out for our tax dollars and refuses to bend to pressures that try to get the Supervisors to vote on frivolous and costly stuff like buying the Sears property. Rabbitt held firm on that fiasco, and ultimately the deal was mercifully killed (Sonoma County scraps plan for government headquarters in downtown Santa Rosa (pressdemocrat.com)).

Rabbitt is being challenged by a former staffer from Jared Huffman, Blake Hooper.

In the recent debate, here is a direct quote from Blake Hooper–“It doesn’t make sense to develop out our county that much further,”.

I don’t know about you, but I believe basic economics would tell you that if a community does not continue to have some sustainable growth, businesses are not going to stick around, workers will not have a place to live, and young people who want to have a good paying job and a healthy community to raise their children, will look elsewhere to put down their roots and call it home.

Blake Hooper is from the political camp that wants to drain Lake Pillsbury, give money to everybody (yes-including homeless and non-citizens), and get more money from anybody who is still working and paying taxes so they can pay for the ever increasing costs of County services being paid by fewer and fewer people.

Blake wanted to have the County buy the Sears site, and obviously does not understand construction costs as he claimed the cost of building an 18 story office complex on an 8 acre downtown site that the County did not own, would be the same as building on an 80 acre site that the County does own. Want Blake to be your contractor?

Enough said, I hope. We cannot afford to have Rabbitt lose to this guy. So how can we help David Rabbitt? Let me give you a few ideas:

Put up a sign on your land, or your yard. To get signs contact Andrea Krout at 707-799-9932. She can arrange to get signs put up and taken down. Can political involvement be any easier?
Become an endorser for David Rabbitt. (Contact David Rabbitt’s Reelection Campaign)
Contribute to David Rabbitt’s campaign reelection (Contact David Rabbitt’s Reelection Campaign)
Talk to your family and friends and make sure they know which candidate is going to actually do the work as a Supervisor. Be an influencer. Influence them.
Let your employees and co workers know, to ensure their futures, they need to vote for the candidate that has done the work before to support their jobs, and will continue to do the work to support their jobs.
Let your subcontractors and suppliers know the best way to keep working together, is to have opportunities to bid on projects and only one candidate is the best option for that!
Write a quick letter to the editor (believe me the other guy is doing it-there is a letter writing campaign starting now to support Hooper and we need to be doing the same thing!):
Press Democrat-Letters, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Bay Area Newspaper, CA news

B. Argus Courier-Online Services | timesargus.com

Bohemian-Submit a Letter | Bohemian | Sonoma & Napa Counties

Sonoma County Gazette-Submit an article or column (sonomacountygazette.com)

Sample Letter Templates: click on this here, use the template of your choice, please modify it with some of your own words, and follow the directions in A:D to send it to one, or all of the local newspapers

Social Media-many of you have Instagram, Facebook, or LinkedIn accounts. Post something positive and constructive that Rabbitt has done for the community. Make it fun and positive!
Pick up a sign at the ECA Public Officials Night on Thursday, April 14, and put it up in your yard! I have arranged to have signs there for you to pick up!

When the votes are done being counted for this critical race, will you be able to look in the mirror and tell yourself

“I supported Rabbitt as best I could”?

Did you, or didn’t you?

For all of our sake, let’s hope you did!

That’s All Folks!

John

February 14, 2022

ECA Newsletter

2-14-2022

John’s Soapbox

The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA. I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

***

Stay Put!

Last Tuesday the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors discussed moving forward with purchasing 7 plus acres where the vacated Sears Building currently stands by the Santa Rosa Mall. I am happy to report at least two of the Supervisors were able to delay the $21 million purchase of this property unless and until more information is processed on the overall costs of well over $1.2 billion has happened. Supervisor Rabbitt and Hopkins expressed their reluctance to “pull the trigger” on buying the Sears site until staff has provided a plan that they can study and discuss on how to finance the biggest dollar commitment the BOS has considered in several decades. This is a huge decision. And a complex set of circumstances needs to be thoroughly vetted and considered prior to moving forward, in my humble opinion.

To see a short view of the presentation staff presented, click on this link:

5-Presentation Sonoma Co

Now for the editorial part of this newsletter. Remember, this is my opinion only, not an official opinion of the ECA’s.

I hate the idea of moving County admin to Sears.

The County owns 82 acres of land easily accessible off of Steele Lane, Mendocino Avenue, and Bicentennial Way off of Highway 101. Currently, the County Courthouse, Jail, and the Sheriff are all on site and even if the County buys Sears, they will all stay at the current site off of Mendocino Avenue. Yes, the old admin buildings are old and in need of replacement. But they all sit on land the County owns and has control of, right now.

Here are some of the talking points that I have read and heard about supporting moving to the Sears site:

Close proximity to the bus terminal and SMART train.
Close proximity to the Federal and State buildings on the corner of E Street and Sonoma Avenues.
A County move of 1800 workers would revitalize downtown Santa Rosa merchants, bars and restaurants.
Moving County offices could “free up” land on the current County admin site for building much needed affordable housing that would be closer to Kaiser health care facilities.

All of the other arguments in favor of moving downtown have to do with getting rid of deferred maintenance costs which go away with either site, and with modernization of facilities that would be more energy efficient which also would be true with either site.

Here are some of the arguments against moving County administrations to the Sears site:

Construction would be more expensive-tougher site to build on-7.8 acres vs 82 acres to access and lay down and stage. Some estimates say the per square foot construction costs would be 20% higher at Sears site. Or more.
Advocates for the move are “hoping” that County workers will stay in the downtown area after work and go to restaurants, merchants, and bars. I do not think that will happen because it is pricey to go out in downtown SR (anybody been to CA Bianca lately?) and County workers are not highly compensated unless they are administration heads. County workers will simply go home after work. Downtown SR will not be “revitalized” with 1800 workers working at the old Sears site during the day.
Parking will be a nightmare. Advocates for the move are banking on County workers taking public transportation to and from work. “Not Gonna Happen” in my opinion. Most workers with families, have one or two stops to make at their lunch time, and/or after work to pick up kids, take kids to practice, go shopping for groceries, or other errands. Public transportation will not allow that freedom of movement, so I see most of the County workers driving to work. With less than 1200 parking spaces onsite and adjacent to the Sears site, ALL parking will be used up by workers, and NO parking will be available for residents and businesspeople to go get permits, meet the County staff, attend County Committee meetings, or otherwise go to the new County offices. People driving around looking for a parking spot will negate any benefit from carbon friendly construction of the new buildings!
Spreading out the County workers is the antithesis of efficiencies in my opinion. Right next door to our office at the NCBE is 37,000 sf of office space being leased by the County right now. All of the remote office rental space should be consolidated into a new County planned facility near the existing Courthouse and Jail which are not moving anytime soon. I think the benefit of having State and Federal offices near the Sears site is far less efficient overall than having all of the County on one 82-acre site.
If properly planned on the existing 82-acre site, the construction could be easily staged in such a manner as to make the operation of existing services cheaper than staying in the old buildings while new construction goes on at Sears. My thought would be put a bunch of modern trailers on site now, demo the existing buildings, construct the new 18 story facility, and maybe a “twin tower” somewhat smaller next to it, and then the move is onsite rather than across town. Much cheaper in the long run.
If the County thinks they can house 1800 employees on a 7.8-acre site at Sears, then certainly they could house all 4,000 employees on 40 acres at their current site. And with lots more parking spaces!! That leaves 42 acres they could develop for the much-needed affordable housing and a park like setting to enhance both the work environment and the ambiance for the affordable housing units.

I know my opinion is at odds with the Santa Rosa Metro and several of the current Supervisors. Either site will see the construction be under a Project Labor Agreement so there is not an advantage to labor either way. I just think it is “folly” to go to a very tight site that “hopes” workers will ride the bus to and from work, instead of how they get to their work now. If Sears is to be considered seriously, I would highly recommend/demand an intensive survey be done of all the County workers at their current and remote sites to see if they will ride public transit to and from work, and if they will hang out after work and eat and shop downtown. I bet the survey does not happen, but if it did, and the workers were honest, you would cross off Number 1 and 3 from my list above advocating for the move. And if a good plan for the existing County site can be developed to include affordable housing units, you could cross off Number 4 from my list advocating for the Sears site. That would leave the only good reason for moving to Sears being close proximity to the Federal and State buildings. No way would that reason wipe out the cost increase for building on the Sears site.

This to me in a no brainer. Stay put County!

That’s All Folks!

John

January 31, 2022

ECA Newsletter

1-31-2022

John’s Soapbox

Vote For Your Interests, Not the Special Interests of Another

The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA. I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

***

I am going to talk a bit about health care to make a point. I know-what does health care have to do with the ECA? A little bit, we all know that. But what my point is today, is that if we keep blindly voting one side of the ballot without knowing how that is going to affect our businesses and lives, we are going to get just what we deserve. And it is not good.

I was a part of another organization talking about whether to take a position on AB1400 last week (that is the ballot measure that would provide single payer health care in California), and I was amazed at how little we are aware of what is being voted on today. I am making this the topic of my soapbox today, in order to get people to think about blindly voting along party lines.

Whether you are a Blue or a Red voter, voting strictly along party lines exacerbates the problems we have from special interest groups basically running our government. And do not be fooled-this AB1400 and ACA 11 (ACA 11 is a constitutional amendment that dovetails with AB1400 to basically eliminate private insurance in CA and set the stage for additional taxes to pay for single payer insurance) are being promoted by special interest groups that do not care a whit about your business in California. If you care to see what special interest groups are backing this expensive, and very socialistic ballot measure, just read who is endorsing this bill. And if you want to see how demanding the democratic party is in California, feel free to read this where they basically say “vote no on AB!400 and lost all support” from the democratic party. Please read this chilling “threat”:

California Progressives Warn Dems Against No Vote on Single-Payer (commondreams.org)

AB1400 will be voted on today-January 31, 2022, and if the predominately democratic elected legislators pass it, it will go to the voters in November to be voted upon. I urge all of you to review how your State electeds vote on this bill today and write or call them and let them know how happy or unhappy you are with their vote today.

****

Here are what supporters of AB1400 say are FIVE FACTS about AB1400:

What would CalCare do?
CalCare would establish a state insurance plan that would cover all California residents regardless of employment, income, health status, marital status or documentation status.
What medical services would CalCare cover?
CalCare would include coverage for medically necessary services currently covered under the Affordable Care Act, PLUSoral health, audiology, vision services and long-term care.
How would CalCare be different from private health insurance?
CalCare would eliminate premiums, deductibles, co-pays and coinsurance. It would also eliminate hassles like pre-authorizations for treatment, provider networks and enrollment periods.
How would CalCare be financed?
CalCare would be financed by a public Trust Fund, which would be funded by monies from federal and state government agencies along with additional revenue sources, like a wealth tax, to be determined by the California State Legislature.
How can CalCare capture federal funding?
To capture healthcare dollars from the federal government, the Governor of California must request waivers from federal agencies such as Health & Human Services.

***

And if you want to read parts of, or the entire bill, have at it. It is right here in this link-Bill Text – AB-1400 Guaranteed Health Care for All.

***

I would like to add a few “facts” of my own about AB1400 if possible:

A. A recent survey shows nearly 93% of California residents are insured already. So, I have to wonder, who is going to benefit from this universal health care bill that is not already covered? LOL-I’ll let you guess!!

B. Nobody knows what it would cost existing or new businesses, but the assumption is it would cost A FREAKING LOT! An example of the cost from 3 very democratic states that tried the universal approach, Vermont, Colorado, and Massachusetts, is shown here:

C. I know Biden wants to send Kamala down to Honduras, Guatemala, and other countries to find out what the “root causes/reasons” are for all these folks coming up and crossing the border into America might be (179,000 in December alone by the way!), but I would hazard a guess that free health care for your family for the rest of their lives, without having to pay into it one copper penny, MIGHT JUST BE A REASON TO LEAVE AND COME TO AMERICA! You think? And if you do not believe that allowing 179,000 folks to cross the border, get medical insurance at no cost once they are in the USA, and be allowed to vote regardless of if they are undocumented or here illegally are not part of the same program, think again.

D. Passage of AB1400, combined with the passage of ACA 11 (a constitutional amendment) would essentially make it illegal to have private insurance in the State of California. And ACA 11 will open the door for the legislator to impose new fees and taxes on businesses and workers to pay for all those that do not have to pay into the system.

California Democrats’ single-payer healthcare plan passes first hurdle (yahoo.com)

I guess my point in writing this newsletter soapbox piece is that no matter which side you vote for, do not vote unilaterally for all GOP or all Dem ballot measures and candidates. We are (or should be), better than that. When Trump comes out and says he is going to pardon those that stormed Washington on January 6, 2021, it is equally wrong to blindly support that position. If you believe they should all, be pardoned, by all means, vote for Trump in 2024. But if you do not believe they should be pardoned, and they should be prosecuted for trespassing and damaging federal property, then be aware of where you put that ballot check mark. Similarly, in California, where voting one side of the ballot is nearly a “given”, know what you are voting for and if that is what you want to vote for, never complain about the high cost of doing business in California. There is clearly one party in charge in CA, and if they are making your life better for you, then by all means, keep voting them in.

If you think “not so much”, look at each line item on the ballot and vote according to your interests, not those of the nurse’s association or any other special interest groups!!

That’s All Folks!

John

January 24, 2022

1-24-2022

John’s Soapbox

The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA. I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

Getting More Projects Out to Bid Sooner!

The City of Santa Rosa is not delivering capital improvement projects at a rate needed to sustain their infrastructure. Putting it in “laymen terms”, the sewer/water/streets assets that the City has, need to be replaced on a regular basis and that replacement has not been happening for several years. The ultimate result of not maintaining/replacing your assets that wear out? Failure. Failure of water lines, failure of sewer lines, and failure of road.

I have been writing about this problem for a while. Some of you have been speaking to me about this problem for a while. We held a CIP workshop in October of 2021 with the City of Santa Rosa staff in an effort to understand if the problem is real, and what can be done about it. Since October, I have had discussions with several department heads in Santa Rosa, they have hired Mike Prinz to kick the capital improvement project backlog in the butt, and they last week reported to the board of public utilities. Here are some of the findings reported to the BPU last week:

Local projects awarded in 2021 = $3.1 million

Local projects scheduled for award in 2022 = $24.9 million

Subregional projects awarded in 2021 = $1.3 million

Subregional projects scheduled for award in 2022 = $50.9 million

To see the staff presentation click here for the link–

As you can see, Jason Nutt was correct when we spoke a few weeks ago about a lot of work coming out in 2022. However, I must clarify that a large portion of the subregional project cost is in a project for new ultraviolet equipment for the wastewater plant ($49 million for that one project!). Although it looks like a lot of work is coming out to bid in 2022, not all will benefit our members unless they bid on the UV project. That is more what my old firm (Kirkwood Bly, now Western Water) would be bidding on, not the ECA members.

One of the most interesting slides in the presentation, depicted the “need” dollars @ $99 million/year vs the “allocations” of $36 million per year. That, folks is a shortfall of $63 million per year!! To make matters worse, the current “bandwidth” (actual CIP projects going to bid) is only around $24 million per year. Even worse!!

Summary Conclusions from the staff report concludes:

Delivery has been falling behind relative to past years’ CIP Plans
Our CIP Plan appropriations (and proposed rate increases) are not sufficient to sustain our infrastructure long-term
Grant funding pursuits, disaster recovery, and other “extra” projects are needed, but cut into our baseline delivery capacity

The staff report concludes that the CIP program needs some major work to deliver projects. This is no surprise to those of us that follow the City of SR, but now the staff report has been presented to the Board of Public Utilities and there is no hiding from their conclusions.

This is a complicated issue (made so by City of SR staff shortages and difficulties in getting right of way easements and bid documents delivered for public bidding in a timely manner. The new CIP Deputy Director has been recently hired, and he is Mike Prinz. Mike is a take charge “get ‘er done” kind of guy, so I would expect to see more aggressive hiring, implementation of design build concepts, and some redefining of staff incentives coming soon. The entire program needs to have a reset attitude of HOW FAST CAN YOU SAY YES from top to bottom of both utilities and transportation/public works departments.

The ECA has reached out and will continue to do so to offer ideas, and solutions so we can get more projects out to bid sooner!

That’s All Folks!

John

November 15, 2021

November 8, 2021

Standard Disclaimer-The “Soapbox” is not intended to portray any official ECA position or opinion. Nor is it to be inferred that any ECA member shares the opinion stated in the Soapbox. The Soapbox is purely intended to be an Op-Ed piece done by John Bly each week to stimulate interest and thought on a wide range of topics.

We all feel the higher gas prices and diesel prices at the pump, and we can certainly see that higher transportation costs are making our goods, groceries, and travel cost us more. Our businesses, which are largely based on carbon engines, are some of the first to experience the higher cost for fuel. And by God, we want to blame someone for those higher prices.

Those of you who know me, can understand why I want to loudly and assertively scream “Hell Yes” to my own question as to should we blame Biden. Alas, I have to (sometimes) use logic and facts to form my opinions.

“But Biden cancelled the Keystone Pipeline-surely that has caused oil prices to rise!”. Sumbitch-that Keystone Pipeline argument is a tough one to toss away.

Ok-let’s go back to “Oil and gas” civics class. Although I would like to blame Biden for higher gas prices, the fact remains there are few actions a president can take to impact gasoline prices in the short term. Those few actions historically have been 1). Release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; 2). Increase gasoline taxes; or 3). Engage in a war in the Middle East.

Sleepy Joe has done none of these. While I will argue that what he has done will certainly lead to higher prices in the long term, his actions have neither helped nor hurt the oil and gas industry yet.

After cancelling the Keystone pipeline, Biden suspended new oil and gas leasing and drilling permits for federal land and water.

That action along with the Keystone Pipeline cancellations, were clearly the main reasons behind the rise in gasoline prices.

Not so fast.

Note when oil and gasoline prices began to rise. That rise started in May 2020. Between the first week of May 2020 and the last week of December 2020, oil prices had tripled.

Hmmm—darn it. Biden did not cancel the Keystone Pipeline until 2021. Shoot, Biden did not cancel oil and gas leases until the Spring of 2021.

So, at this point, you are thinking-“ok genius John-if it wasn’t Biden, then who do I blame?”

The reason oil and gasoline prices rose is that the economy started to open back up from the Covid-19 shutdowns. Those shutdowns had negatively impacted a couple of million barrels of U.S. oil supplies, and those supplies were slow to bounce back once the economy opened back up. That’s why we have soaring oil and gasoline prices.

I can enjoy filling up at the pump and chanting “Let’s Go Brandon” with several other rowdies. It is kind of fun. And Lord knows Biden is easy to blame and easier to laugh at.

But as the Brothers Osborne explain as if Biden was singing it-“It Ain’t My Fault”. Click here for their music video-https://youtu.be/E5RDEXpc8OY

It is the fault of China-who did more to create the pandemic and spread the COVID virus than any other person on the planet.

So, you want somebody to blame for higher gas prices now-blame China. If you want to blame someone for higher gas prices in the long term, blame Biden.

Just my opinion folks.

That’s All Folks!

John Bly

‹ Previous
1
…
9
10
11
12
13
…
34
Next ›

B. Argus Courier-Online Services | timesargus.com

About

Find Us

Important Links

Follow us