Snout deep in the sales tax trough

Resident blowhard Tom Cookman gave his regular KINS community comment yesterday, railing against Measure Z. He’s usually 100% wrong on issues, but on Measure Z he was about 10% right. To be clear we don’t agree that county employees shouldn’t have dental insurance. We don’t agree that county employees shouldn’t have vision insurance. But we do agree that there are a lot of people in the county making a boatload of money. Before the supervisors ask to raise the taxes poor people pay, they should take a hard look at cuts that could be made to salaries within the county. Rex, where are your fiscally conservative credentials when it comes to these employee’s?

$ county

Not a surprise that local conservatives have been pointing out this disparity in pay between government workers and the private sector. At least as far as the county goes. There is a conservative backed effort against Measure Z. However, these same conservatives, many of who live in Eureka, support Measure Q. WTF?

In Eureka, the numbers for 2013 haven’t been released. However, in 2012 Measure O (the original pigsMeasure Q) funded $248,738 in pay and benefits for David Tyson. In 2011, Measure O paid Dave 213,523 in pay and benefits. Wow…during the financial crisis in Eureka Tyson still managed to pull in close to a half a MILLION dollars. But that’s not the half of it. Dave retired in 2012 and earns $137,159 a year in pension payments. Talk about the government cash cow!!!

But enough about Tyson. How about a lesser know city employee like Cynthia Trobitz-Thomas, former Redevelopment and Housing Director. In 2012, Measure O made sure she was comfortable with a pay and benefit package of $297,550. In the midst of this “financial crisis” in 2011, the “conservative” Brady Bunch council decided to fire popular Chief Garr Nielsen. Because they screwed up, Nielsen wound up getting $281,751 in pay and benefits for the year (his pay was supposed to be about $135,000).

As the budget crunch continues, and the Eureka City Council can see no way out of this crisis but to disproportionally tax the poor, they still paid the extremely inept and unqualified City Attorney Cindy Day-Wilson $191,544 in pay and benefits in 2012!!!!

This list goes on, and on. We urge the local “conservatives” to take a look. Is there space for savings in Eureka City Government? Of Course!!!!!

But, there is a reason that local conservatives have shied away from this issue and have given either tacit or implicit support. Many local “conservatives” like reaping the benefits of taking low income people’s money!!! It’s not about public safety (whose salaries they cut this last contract negotiation go-around and who haven’t been fully staffed in the PD…..since 1983), it’s about the pet projects they don’t want to lose. It’s about big government salaries for the well connected. It’s about the Eureka “conservative” bottom line.

Their “conservative” bottom line is; Taxes are great…as long as they don’t effect my friends and benefit me!

Vote NO on Measure Q


8 thoughts on “Snout deep in the sales tax trough

  1. These salaries are too high for Humboldt. Seem to be keyed to a prosperous area like Healdsburg. .

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I will be voting No on Q and Z this year for the reasons highlighted in this post. The major long term debt and funding crisis within the Government are the employee pensions. Pensions within the Government sector are paid as a percentage of the annual salary, thus this is a vicious cycle of more outrageous pay equals more outrageous pension benefits. Not only that the City of Eureka is literally borrowing millions and millions of dollars to pay for its pensions. In the end, the debt service payments will swamp them and there will be nothing that can be done. A No vote on Q will force the city to make the hard decisions that they are clearly not making.


  3. The same applies to measure z. I listened to the under sheriff, who is paid $400,000. +a year, begging for more money via z on KMUD a week or so past. Makes me ill.


  4. A lot of this compensation and discrepancy comes from a ridiculous practice of employees “SELLING” their sick leave when they retire. Sick leave is for when you are working, you can avoid coming to work and not make co-workers ill, and not be put in a financial hardship. It is not to cash in and dramatically spike your pension. If you leave and you had unused sick leave then congratulations you had a healthy life. It is not to stick your big-ass snout into the tax-payers trough. Eliminate this ridiculous and immoral benefit then tell us you need more taxes. Voting No on Z also!


  5. They should be ashamed of themselves.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s