A ruling was made Fri., May 17 in Superior Court concerning a 2010 voter initiative.  Judge Thomas Wills ruled that the initiative was unconstitutional. In doing so, he also found that Measure R, passed by voters, was unconstitutional.

He did find that the city had met its “meet and confer” obligations in the matter, however.

On July 21, 2010 a citizens’ group presented the City Council with an initiative that would put the cap on retirement contributions for employees. The council sitting in 2010 voted to enact the initiative rather than put it on the ballot. Then-council member Bill Kampe, now mayor of Pacific Grove, was the lone dissent.

City attorney David Laredo and City Manager Tom Frutchey each warned the Council at the time that the matter would be litigated, as did a representative from CalPERS (which is the pension plan in question). Laredo informed the council that if they insisted on enacting the measure, they should also ask the voters if they wanted to amend the city charter to reflect the change because the city charter did not allow it. He expressed doubt at the time that it would be enough, but Measure R was put on the ballot and passed. The Police Officers Association immediately sued as did the Police Management Association,contending that the city charter prevents employee compensation from being decided by voter initiative.

This ruling will likely have implications for the current citizens’ initiative which seeks to void the 2002 pension agreement, dub it illegally enacted, and require benefits to be repaid. The City Council on Wed., May 15, decided to ask for a judicial review of the matter instead of enacting it as the previous council had done, or putting it on the ballot right away.

“It has been a seminal week for Pacific Grove,” said City Manager Frutchey, pleased at the outcome. He said he was gratified that the judge had ruled the City had met its meet-and-confer obligations in the matter. The mayor could not be reached for comment, being on vacation. Former police chief Carl Miller also expressed appreciation of the ruling on the unconstitutionality of the two matters.

It will take several weeks for Judge Wills’s ruling to be final, but when it is, an injunction will likely be issued that will void them both. In the meantime, City staff will seek declaratory relief on the current citizens’ initiative in time to put it on the ballot if that’s what a judge rules.

On May 2, 2013, the Pacific Grove City Council, presented with a completed and filed citizens’ initiative to declare null and void the 2002 ordinance which set in place a “3%@50” retirement plan for public safety employees, and required to take take action within 30 days, voted to commission a report on the impact of the citizens’ initiative. The report is in, and has few surprises for either side of the question.

Michael G. Colantuono of Colantuono and Levin prepared a six-page report which will be presented at the May 15, 2013 City Council meeting, at which time the Council must make a decision whether to: 1) adopt the ordinance, 2) place it on the regularly scheduled general election ballot in 2014; or 3) call a special election to consider the matter earlier than the 2014 general election.

None of these options would be inexpensive. In 2010, faced with a citizens’ initiative brought by the same faction which has brought the current one, decided to enact it rather than to put it on the ballot, going against advice from the City Manager and City Attorney. The result was an expensive suit brought by the Police Officers Association, which has not yet been settled. A ballot measure in 2014 would mean legal costs and, depending on the outcome, more potential suits. The third option, to call a special election, likely would at least save the city the cost of putting the measure on the ballot because the initiative does not request a special election and therefore puts the city under no obligation to pay for one.

A fourth option exists, according to the report: Take no action and seek relief in Superior Court.

According to the Colantuono report, “Retroactive remedies are not available and seeking to pursue them will be costly in terms of legal fees, litigation exposure, and potential liability.” The City has already spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on the question, mostly in legal fees.

In his discussion in the report, Colantuono states that the initiative is likely illegal because “the voters have no power to adjudicate the lawfulness of an ordinance and contract amendment adopted 11 years ago,” and he cites case law establishing that the intent is not to enact future legislation – which is a power granted to the people – but to “adjudicate alleged procedural violations and to impose a remedy,” a power which is limited by the Constitution to the courts.

Also, as had been previously pointed out by City Attorney David Laredo, a local initiative may not challenge the legality of a City ordinance after the statute of limitations runs. Colantuono restates this in his report and points out that the statute of limitations ran out in 2005 and that the 2002 ordinance and the CalPERS contract “cannot be amended or repealed with retroactive effect.”

The citizens’ initiative seeks to declare the 2002 ordinance, 02-218, null and void based on either erroneous or purposely withheld information regarding the financial impact of the agreement. But Colantuono further points out that there is still a question whether financial impact requirements, a pillar of the case brought by the citizens’ initiative, are mandatory or not. And the question, he repeats, is superfluous because of the statute of limitations.

Another point made by Colantuono is that the citizens’ initiative would violate the Brown Act, which requires “meet and confer” with employees before making material changes in their compensation and benefits. Under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, a charter city such as Pacific Grove is obliged to negotiate before calling an election on charter amendments. He reiterates that, although Pacific Grove is a charter city, Article 16 of the charter states that the right of initiative and referendum is given to the citizens t”to be exercised in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Constituion and General Laws of this State.”

He points out that voter-approved pension reform efforts in San Jose and San Diego are currently before the courts and they do not go as far as this one does. The San Jose and San Diego initiatives try only to affect current employee agreements whereas the one before the Pacific Grove City Council attempts to rescind agreements with employees who have already retired and are collecting benefits. It would also attempt to strip current retirees of their benefits under 02-218. Colantuono says doing so would violate the Fifth Amendment to the federal Constitution as well as comparable state laws.

Colantuono states that City employees appear to have vested rights. It has been argued by proponents of the citizens’ initiative that they do not.

Further muddying the waters, and as questioned by Councilmember Robert Huitt at the May 3 City Council meeting, the citizens’ initiative does nothing to deal with contracts, such as a subsequent pension bond, which have been enacted based on 02-218 in the interim. Colantuono points out that CalPERS has made “vigorous legal response” to the bankruptcies of the cities of Stockton and San Bernardino and that “it would be naïve to expect PERS to allow the City to evade its responsibility to fund the cost of those pensions.”

In his conclusions, he concludes that “a Court would not require retirees to repay a portion of their pension benefit received to date because Pacific Grove has come to regret the adoption of Ordinance 02-218” and he does not expect PERS to back down. He expects that PERS will ignore the initiative and may even treat it as potential breach of contract and seek litigation.

The City had, until March, been working with the citizens’ initiative group and an outside attorney, Karol Deniston, to avoid local action and instead form a coalition with other citizens to force the State of California to make pension reforms and revise the CalPERS system. On March 6, 2013, the Council designated a subcommittee to discuss a “term sheet” with the working group of citizens as an alternative to the citizens’ pension initiative. The citizens working group chose to file the initiative anyway, and did so on March 26, 2013. Monterey County Elections Office certified the petition, signed by some 1,300 people, on April 18, 2013.

The Pacific Grove City Council will take up the question at its May 17, 2013 meeting, which begins at 6:00 p.m. in City Council chambers at 300 Forest Ave. in Pacific Grove.

www.cedarstreettimes.com/newpdf/mtal_champ_results.pdf

The RaiseForWomen Challenge is an initiative to help women-focused non-profits gain resources and recognition. The challenge is to raise the most money by June 6 via the crowd funding platform, crowdrise.com.

According to Carmel Jud, Executive Director of Rising International (www.risinginternational.org) , “We see The RaiseForWomen Challenge as an important opportunity to take our organization to the next level, and help a lot more impoverished women. We are a unique non-profit as we help our local women while simultaneously helping disadvantaged women across the world. We hope that our community will donate what they can to help women both here and abroad. All they have to do to donate is to go to www.crowdrise.com/risingtogether. For added recognition, we are listing individuals and company names on the website unless someone prefers to remain anonymous.”

The RaiseForWomen Challenge is also providing unique short-term bonus vhallenge incentives that allow donors to achieve publicity for both the organization and the donors. Donors are urged to “like” the Rising International Facebook page to see the current challenge.

Celebrating its 10th Anniversary, Rising International and its supporters are dedicated to helping to reduce poverty, trafficking and other horrific conditions for women locally and globally through economic empowerment. By using the popular “home party” model, Rising International provides disadvantaged artisans from more tan 20 of the poorest countries access to the American market. By selling their beautiful hand-crafted products and fashion accessories at Rising Home Parties the artisans earn enough money to improve their living conditions and leave what were previously hopeless situations. Think Avon with a social cause.

Rising International Home Party hosts in the U.S. invite friends to their homes to shop and trained low income women and teens run the Rising International Home Parties as a business. It is a simple and effective approach that has changed thousands of lives here and abroad over the past decade.

These local women entrepreneurs acquire career building skills, including leadership, business, sales and presentation skills that help them obtain better jobs, in addition to earning life changing supplemental income. Former East Salinas resident, Susana Camberos for example, used her earnings from her first three Rising International Home Parties to move her family to a safer neighborhood. Susana lost her brother to a drive-by-shooting. Santa Cruz native Paula Smith earns an average of $30 per hour running her own Rising International Home Party business. A domestic violence and cancer survivor, Smith never imagined herself as self-assured public speaker. Today you will often find her on stage at Rising International events sharing her triumphs and inspiring other women to believe in themselves.

The Skoll Foundation, a partner in the RaiseForWomen Challenge, has agreed to pledge $50,000 in prizes for the top three organizations that raise the most money by the June 6th deadline. The Foundation is also giving an additional $25,000 for short-term goals throughout the challenge. Rising International won $3,000 by accomplishing the first short-term goal of securing 15 new donors from April 24 to May 6.

“If we win first place, we win an extra $25,000 and the PR power of Huffington Post!”  Carmel adds. “This is an amazing opportunity for us. We hope to train 100 more local low income women, like Susana and Paula, to run their own Rising International Home Party businesses. The more our Susanas and Paulas prosper, the more they change the lives of women around the world!”

For more information about Rising International: www.risinginternational.org

To donate to help Rising International win the RaiseForWomenChallenge: www.crowdrise.com/risingtogether

To follow Rising International progress in the RaiseForWomenChallenge: www.crowdrise.com/raiseforwomen

Now the team takes their mascot, a homemade Jobu, on to the playoffs. Photo by Justin Russo.

On April 27, 2013, Monterey Officers initiated an investigation into animal cruelty at 1290 First Street in Monterey. During the course of the investigation over 48 dogs and cats were taken into protective custody and housed at the SPCA. 

Detectives completed their investigation and requested a warrant for the resident. The resident has been identified as Ilagene “Jeanie” Quaglia, a 59 year old female who lived by herself at that address.

Quaglia was arrested without incident today at her workplace, 686 Lighthouse, Monterey. She was booked at the Monterey City Jail on the warrant for animal cruelty and will be transported to the Monterey County Jail to be held in lieu of $10,000 bail. Quaglia is facing new charge of animal cruelty

Lorin Letendre, Carmel River Watershed Conservancy  “Can Our Carmel River Be Saved?”  Lorin will speak on the past, present,  and future of the Carmel River and its  35-mile watershed. Work is ongoing to restore  its former natural beauty.

Wed, May 8 at 7:00 p.m. at the Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History, Central & Forest in Pacific Grove. Free event. For more information, email Denyse@sustainablepg.org or call 831-643-0707