To the Editor:
On Sept. 24th I[1] called a property owner and asked if the Toombs-Gillette signs were put up with the owner’s permission and whether we could put our signs up. The owner said that permission was given because they were told we want to end Kensington’s independent control of our police department. I told the owner they were lied to. I sent them some of our literature and the July 11, 2011 article in the “Patch” about Chief of Police/General Manager Harman’s improper credit card use, another covered up affair, and his 17% raise, plus a $24,000 “gift of public funds,” shoved through by Toombs violating the KPPCSD clear Policies/Procedures.
Since when is a demand for fiscal responsibility somehow the same as opposing the independence of our Police Department. On the contrary it reflects a desire to be able to continue to afford our independence. Though some appear not to believe it, we support, appreciate and want to keep our line officers. We know them and regardless of a couple of rough edges we want to keep them, and speaking for myself, to keep all of them. With proper leadership they can be a great part of a great community. All the pieces are here, we just need changes at the top.
The pattern of misrepresentation is consistent with what we have been seeing in this election and for years by both the Chief and Board Majority. We are now told that crime is way up in Kensington. This comes ONLY after Cathie Kosel discovered the last crime statistics covering 08, 09 and 10 were grossly wrong. The 3 years of false statics were used as a justification for measure G. Where are the up to date statistics? Toombs says the budget is balanced. In reality, GM/COP Harman is projecting a $109,849 shortfall for the current fiscal year.[2] Where does the demand for more money stop and where does all the money go? I have a clear memory from a formal meeting for the campaign to pass measure G. We were told we needed a 10th officer to provide safety. 2 years later we still have only 9 officers. The property tax payers by law are liable for the retirement commitments the Toombs Board 3 to 2 majority are making for us. Even more troubling is what happens if CalPERS defaults as they very well might. Then we tax payers will own all of the retirement liability for years to come.[3] The potential liability is frightening. When property taxes go sharply up property values go down. Why are Toombs-Gillette and their active supporters spending so much money and using such tactics on a small community election like ours.
– Leonard Schwartzburd
Kensington
[1] Leonard Schwartzburd (drlschwartzburd@gmail.com)
[2] Page 57 of the February 2012 BOD package http://www.kensingtoncalifornia.org/files/active/1/2012-03-08%20KPPCSD%20AGENDA.pdf
[3] Presently, according to a Dec. 2011 Stanford Study PERS HAS 100’s OF BILLIONS IN UNFUNDED OBLIGATIONS. http://siepr.stanford.edu/system/files/shared/Nation_Statewide_Report.pdf
--------------------------------
El Cerrito Patch welcomes Letters to the Editor of up to 450 words from readers. Send them to elcerrito@patch.com. You can see past Letters to the Editor here.
