My Turn - 12 - Smut Politics

Examine the photograph:  The photograph was hacked from my computer.

The website was created or edited with information and captions written to be published, possibly during the "Heat" of RECALL voting to discredit my TRUE identity which is CY SUN.

My wife and I have never created or had any website in our life.

You can tell this is totally PHONY when you look at the dates.

Offline.  Last online December 31, 1969.

Joined April 28, 2010.

How could you join in April, 2010 and last be online December 31, 1969?

My wife and I have never visited this site even after Kenyon Luce, the City Council Attorney, asked me to RESIGN or there would be a huge scandal.  Kenyon Luce, the City Council Attorney, at that time gave me this printed copy of the site.

My wife and I were in shock.  Who would do this to us?

Cy Sun
Mayor
City of Pacific

My Turn - 10 - James Pickett Cost to City of Pacific

From the PR - Payroll Register - City of Pacific, Washington

Payroll Period 12/16/2011 thru 11/15/2012

Should you not believe this as FACT, I will publish the Payroll Register so you can read it yourself!

James Pickett  -  

Employee No.  PICKJ

Name:  James Pickett

Department:  Police

Payroll Period 12/16/2011 thru 11/15/2012

Total Gross Wages:          $120,697.97

Benefits:                           $  27,279.76

Total Cost:                       $147,977.73

The Federal Gross Wages were $111,439.93, but the total cost to the City of Pacific was $147,977.73.

The total cost to the City of Pacific includes Benefits as well as wages.

Check it out.

You will find the following numbers on the Payroll Register.

Federal Gross:       $111,439.93

Retirement Gross:  $ 94,387.67

Deductions:            $115,216.81

State Gross:           $   8,278.33

FLSA Gross:           $ 42,184.47

Benefits:                $ 27,279.76

FICA Gross:            $110,100.00

Gross Wages:        $120,697.97

TOTAL COST:    $147,977.73

The TOTAL COST TO THE CITY OF PACIFIC IS:  $147,977.73 which is a total of the GROSS WAGES plus the BENEFITS.  This is the amount the City of Pacific must pay, not the amount reported for the Employee’s W-2 Statement to be filed with their Taxes.

Taxpayers, request the figures from Payroll if you wish to verify my figures.  Ask for the PR - Payroll Register for the Police Department for James Pickett for the Payroll Period 12/16/2011 thru 11/15/2012.

The Total Cost figure:  $147,977.73 doesn’t include the cost of the Patrol Car that was provided to Sgt. Pickett:

1.  A Car provided for 24 hours per day/7 days per week paid for by the City of Pacific Taxpayers.

2.  Gas to run the car that was paid for by the City of Pacific for James Pickett’s Patrol car.

3.  Maintenance on the patrol car.

4.  Insurance on the patrol car.

5.  License on the patrol car.

It also does not include any cost for Uniforms, etc. which are part of the employee’s cost to the City of Pacific.

It does not include the cost of a laptop computer.

It does not include the cost of a cell phone.

As you can see these costs are not included in the $147,977.73.  If you want to be realistic the cost for James Pickett is greater than $147,977.73, much, much greater.

Mr. Jim Pickett write the TOTAL FACTS, not the HALF TRUTH.

I can be called a liar, but the cost to the city is more than what appears on your W-2 form that you file with your taxes.

I am interested in the total amount that the City of Pacific must pay for an employee, not the take home wages for the employee.  The total amount is the REAL COST to the City and the one that affects the finances of the City.

The figures I quoted are straight off the 

Payroll Register for the Period: 12/16/2011 - 11/15/2012.

Cy Sun

Your Mayor

City of Pacific

FOUR councilmembers are up for election in November.  Consider running for office and helping to decide your city's future.

The FOUR:

Position #2 - John Jones - 1/1/10 to 12/31/13

Position #4 - Leanne Guier - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #5 - James McMahan - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #6 - Tren Walker - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

When to File for Councilmember with King County Elections:

In-person: May 14 – May 18, 2012, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Filing opens Monday, May 14 at 8:30 a.m. and closes at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 18, 2012.

Mail: April 30 – May 18, 2012 

Filings made by mail must be received by the filing officer not earlier than 10 working days before the first day of filing or no later than the close of business on the last day of the filing period, irrespective of postmark. Failure to meet the deadline renders the filing invalid and it will be returned.

Online: May 14, 9:00 a.m. - May 18, 2012, 4:00 p.m.

Filings made online for regular candidates may begin at 9 a.m. the first day of the filing period and continue through 4 p.m. the last day of the filing period.

My Turn - 9 - The Clincher

Here's a Clincher!

The Attachments open a "Clear-cut" proof of what I've told you about - a corrupt City Council.

Sweet talking Leanne Guier, who sings her song "I love Pacific. I care for the City of Pacific," is showing her true colors; put the blame for the loss of insurance solely on the Mayor, not them - Destroy the Mayor!

If she "Care for the City", she should have steered the Council to work with the Mayor and push forward, instead of bogging down the Mayor, causing havoc and internal unrest,
which was the true reason for the insurance cancellation.  If that is not corruption, what is?

In spite of the Council blocking me all the way, I met all the requirements, but the insurance company cancelled our insurance because of the internal unrest.

Internal unrest from the first day I took office - RACISM!!

Now you can see, the Council you elected have been in office too long.  They are not representing the majority of the people, they are representing themselves.

They could have put a stop to what Leanne did, but they didn't.

Why?

Because, they too, don't want me as your mayor.  I'm upsetting the "Old Guard of Dictatorship."

They are "Dictators!"

They don't give a damn what the people want.  They're doing what they want - "Get rid of the mayor you voted in office to clean up the mess." and then Leanne Guier, as Council President, becomes the Mayor, as she told me she would when in my office, she DEMANDED my RESIGNATION.

NOW THE HAMMER!

If she becomes the mayor, the Council has complete control of the City.

Then, when the election time comes, John Jones runs for Mayor, and they have a stronger control of the City.

Leanne Guier is coming up for election.

People of Pacific, you have the power to clean up this City!

November is around the corner.

The Attachment (Declaration) was thrown out of Court.  The judge could see there is a power struggle.

Cy Sun
Your Mayor
City of Pacific

FOUR councilmembers are up for election in November.  Consider running for office and helping to decide your city's future.

The FOUR:

Position #2 - John Jones - 1/1/10 to 12/31/13

Position #4 - Leanne Guier - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #5 - James McMahan - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #6 - Tren Walker - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

When to File for Councilmember with King County Elections:

In-person: May 14 – May 18, 2012, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Filing opens Monday, May 14 at 8:30 a.m. and closes at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 18, 2012.

Mail: April 30 – May 18, 2012 

Filings made by mail must be received by the filing officer not earlier than 10 working days before the first day of filing or no later than the close of business on the last day of the filing period, irrespective of postmark. Failure to meet the deadline renders the filing invalid and it will be returned.

Online: May 14, 9:00 a.m. - May 18, 2012, 4:00 p.m.

Filings made online for regular candidates may begin at 9 a.m. the first day of the filing period and continue through 4 p.m. the last day of the filing period.

My Turn - 8 - February 11th Council Meeting

For the February 11th Council meeting, I tried to repeal an Ordinance that enacted the Public Safety Director position.  So you understand, an Ordinance is a law or statute enacted by our City Council.

The reasons why I wanted to repeal the Ordinance were:

1.  The Public Safety Director directs and manages both the Police Department and the Fire Department.

2.  For six (6) years our Fire Department was absorbed by the Valley Regional Fire Authority (VRFA).  Six years ago, our Fire Department tax dollars were also turned over to the VRFA.  But, that was not all, we're paying double taxation.

3.  Since we don't have a Fire Department under our jurisdiction, we don't need a Public Safety Director.

4.  This is where we're paying double taxation.  We don't have a Fire Department, but we're paying a Public Safety Director to direct and manage a "Ghost" Fire Department.  And, we're also paying taxes to VRFA.

5.  After reading 1, 2, 3, & 4 my prime reasons for Repealing the existing Ordinance were:

        A.  The existing Ordinance should have been repealed six (6) years ago.  We don't have a Fire Department.  Why are we paying another tax to pay a Fire Department Director?

        B.  Because the Ordinance was not repealed six years ago, we the taxpayers were duped into paying an on-the-job Public Safety Director at an extremely high salary, when instead we should have been paying a salary only for an on-the-job Police Chief which would be much more reasonable.

Now comes the Hammer!

Because the Ordinance was not repealed six (6) years ago, the estimated taxpayers' dollars paid for  having a Public Safety Director was approximately $140,000 per year (including fringe benefits) multiplied by 6 years equals approximately $840,000.00 paid by our tax money.

Instead, we should have been paying a salary for a Police chief.  A Police Chief's salary is approximately $80,000.00 per year (including fringe benefits) multiplied by 6 years equals approximately $480,000.00.

Now subtract $480,000.00 from $840,000.00, the Council paid a Public Safety Director approximately $360,000.00 for managing a "Ghost Fire Department" - free money.

And the Council is determined to continue giving away approximately $360,000.00  free money for another six (6) years, if we, the taxpayers, don't stop them.

I say "determined" because the two "King Pins" blocking me from Repealing the Ordinance are Council Member John Jones and Council Member Leanne Guier.  Of course, the other Council members followed like lambs - when the first vote is "Nay" all the following votes are "Nay"....when "Yea" all the lambs vote "Yea".

What happened to the Ordinance I presented to repeal the existing Ordinance?

It was Blocked! and put back for the next Work Shop.

Why was it put back for the Work Shop and not voted upon?

The most logical reason is that the Council did not want to admit they misused the taxpayers' money by paying a director, who we're giving away free money managing a "Ghost" Fire Department.

The Council's reasoning was that I did not follow procedure - go to the Work Shop first, then to the regular council meeting.  I did take that Ordinance to the Work Shop, but I got "shanghaied into a shenanigan".

Council member John Jones argued that the Civil Service Commission has jurisdiction to repeal the Ordinance not the Council.  From that argument, he and Gary Hulsey were going to study whether the Civil Service Commission has the power to make and repeal an Ordinance.

Now I ask you, the people, what kind of idiotic nonsense - find out if the Civil Service Commission has the power to make or repeal Ordinances (Laws) for the people of the City of Pacific?

If you understand the idiotic statements of John Jones and Gary Hulsey, clue me in.

In the history of the United States and the world, a Legislative Body makes the laws, such as Congress. But, in the city of Pacific, laws are made and repealed by our Civil Service Commission.  (HA!)

Let's repeal that Ordinance and not give away free $360,000 tax dollars to a Public Safety Director.

How can we do it?

You tell me, my hands are tied by the Council, but I'm still in there.



Cy Sun
Your Mayor
City of Pacific

FOUR councilmembers are up for election in November.  Consider running for office and helping to decide your city's future.

The FOUR:

Position #2 - John Jones - 1/1/10 to 12/31/13

Position #4 - Leanne Guier - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #5 - James McMahan - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #6 - Tren Walker - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

When to File for Councilmember with King County Elections:

In-person: May 14 – May 18, 2012, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Filing opens Monday, May 14 at 8:30 a.m. and closes at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 18, 2012.

Mail: April 30 – May 18, 2012 

Filings made by mail must be received by the filing officer not earlier than 10 working days before the first day of filing or no later than the close of business on the last day of the filing period, irrespective of postmark. Failure to meet the deadline renders the filing invalid and it will be returned.

Online: May 14, 9:00 a.m. - May 18, 2012, 4:00 p.m.

Filings made online for regular candidates may begin at 9 a.m. the first day of the filing period and continue through 4 p.m. the last day of the filing period.

My Turn 7 - Two Cops

For two City of Pacific Council Meetings, the Council passed, by majority vote, two identical Resolutions:  Mayor Sun, you will hire two more cops.

At both meetings, the Council members hammered away at me:  "Our Police Department overtime cost is higher than hiring two more Officers!"  "They're overworked!"  "We're not getting Police protection!"

At the two meetings, without saying a word, I took all the pounding, but stood firm.

I will not hire two more Cops, because:

1.  If I hire two more Cops, it will cost the taxpayers about $140,000 (wrap-around cost) to be included in an already enormous, monstrous $1,888,900.00 Police Budget for a 3.68 square mile city with a population of 6,280 of which approximately 2,000 bring home the pay checks.

2.  Exhibits A, B, and C:  OVERTIME Finance figures comparison clinches my decision, "Not to hire two more Cops!"

             PPE (Pay Period) by Percentage:
                      Exhibit A (Police Dept)..........................................................5.44
                      Exhibit B (Finance/Clerk).......................................................8.17
                      Exhibit C (Public Works Employees).....................................2.51

Note:

By the above figures, the Finance/Clerk (my Office staff - two employees) worked more overtime than 7 Cops for the same pay period.  They don't get paid overtime, they're exempt.  And, they're not belly-aching for two more employees at the cost of $140,000 per year.

Our Public Works, responsible for your health and welfare (water, sewer, storm water, streets, sidewalks, etc.) is just as important as Police protection, and they are 7 employees, same as the Police Department.

They, like the Police Department, are on the job, 40 hrs a week, on-call any time during the night and on weekends, and their overtime is much, much lower than the Police Department.

How critically important are they?  Imagine if the street sewer backs-up into your kitchen and bathroom for a week!  Or, the water main line ruptured and your water was shut off for ten days!  Or, the storm water system plugged up and your home was flooded for two weeks.

Taxpayers, after seeing what I've presented, you should be yelling, "Council!  You passed two Resolutions to force our Mayor to hire two more Cops, what the hell's going on!  The economy is down, we need to tighten our belt, not 'Go for Broke" with our tax dollars!"

Taxpayers, "You've got a lot of thinking to do before the coming November election!"

At the next Council meeting, I'm putting on the Agenda a motion to Repeal the Public Safety Director job description (Ordinance), because the Public Safety Director directs BOTH the Police and Fire Departments.  We don't have a City of Pacific Fire Department.  It is now under the Valley Regional Fire Authority jurisdiction.

So, why should we have to pay approximately $140,000 a year for a Public Safety Director, when we don't have a Fire Department, only a Police Department?

And that, the average salary for a Police Chief is approximately $78,000 a year.

When I present this to the Council, the "Roof of Corruption" will come crumbling down.  This is the reason:

1.  The Valley Regional Fire Authority was established six (6) years ago.

2.  That means that for the past six years, the City of Pacific did not have a Fire Department.

3.  That means that six (6) years ago the council should have changed the Public Safety Director job description.

4.  That means that the City has paid approximately $840,000 ($140,000 per year X 6 years) salary to John Calkins.  $840,000 is almost a million dollars.  All wasted, because the Council was "Blind" about correcting the situation.

That is CORRUPTION with a Capital "C", because the Council is not being responsible with your money.

5.  Now, I come along, correcting the situation by requesting the Council to repeal the Ordinance.

On a bet:  Two will get you Ten dollars, the Council will block me.

People of Pacific, this City is in a "Hell-a-va Mess!"

Problem of Consent from the Council:  A few months ago, I selected Howard Erickson for a seat on the Civil Service Commission.  The Council not ONLY turned me down by not "consenting" my selection, but also humiliated Howard in front of the audience, even though Howard was the most qualified candidate that had applied for the position.

Why?  Because, they hate Howard!

When a Council uses hate as their criteria for voting Howard down, the City of Pacific has a problem - anarchy.  Anarchy means they are not representing you, the taxpayers.  They are representing themselves.

Howard Erickson has applied for that position for the second time.

I'm selecting Howard Erickson again, for these reasons:  Howard is a "Square Shooter", a man with integrity, an educated "Self Thinker".  Howard has not only had experiences that qualify him for the position on the Civil Service Commission, but also understands the working of our City of Pacific government.

Most of all, Howard Erickson cares for our City of Pacific.

Enough!

I'll let you know what happens in my next MY TURN.

As for the two cops, have you come to a conclusion?




Cy Sun
(Your Mayor)
City of Pacific

FOUR councilmembers are up for election in November.  Consider running for office and helping to decide your city's future.

The FOUR:

Position #2 - John Jones - 1/1/10 to 12/31/13

Position #4 - Leanne Guier - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #5 - James McMahan - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #6 - Tren Walker - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

When to File for Councilmember with King County Elections:

In-person: May 14 – May 18, 2012, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Filing opens Monday, May 14 at 8:30 a.m. and closes at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 18, 2012.

Mail: April 30 – May 18, 2012 

Filings made by mail must be received by the filing officer not earlier than 10 working days before the first day of filing or no later than the close of business on the last day of the filing period, irrespective of postmark. Failure to meet the deadline renders the filing invalid and it will be returned.

Online: May 14, 9:00 a.m. - May 18, 2012, 4:00 p.m.

Filings made online for regular candidates may begin at 9 a.m. the first day of the filing period and continue through 4 p.m. the last day of the filing period.

MY TURN - 6 - A classic, colossal Corruption

In the January 14th Council meeting, Clint Steiger dumped his household garbage and called me a LIAR in front of a ninety-nine percent hostile audience, not mentioning the Council.

He claimed that the Orting-Pacific police financial and personnel comparison data I used for My Turn-5 were all lies.  He received his data from the City of Orting.  I got my data from the City of Orting's Internet website.

Of course, we had two different sets of data, because Orting had not updated their Internet data.  The data I used for My Turn-5.

Carefully neglecting the differences between his Orting City data and my Orting City Internet data, he ranted and raved, called me a LIAR.

(Notice that he didn't say anything about our City of Pacific EXTREMELY HIGH police salaries and Police Department Budget which were FACTUAL!)

Furthermore, HE AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, is responsible for the HIGH POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET.

When a person twists facts to make another person a LIAR, that person could be blinded by aggravated, intensive HATE.

Enough!  Now I'm moving forward.

Come Now, the CORE of My Turn 6:  A classic, colossal corruption:

Before I go on, this is MY definition of CORRUPTION and COLLUSION:  Dishonest, evade, cheat, falsify, shift the responsibility or blame, collaborate, fraudulent and deceitful.

You have your definition, so you can make your own decision from what you are about to read.

Now the Punch:

The council took it upon themselves and decided to award Jane Montgomery $25,000 of our tax money.  The insurance company, Canfield, had no choice but to follow-through and paid Jane Montgomery $150,000.

The result:  Jane Montgomery had a windfall gain of $175,000.  (Money from Heaven).

Instead of the council awarding Jane Montgomery $25,000, and Canfield being forced to follow-through, this would have been the ordinary procedure:  Jane Montgomery files a suit.  The insurance company's lawyer and a city attorney, not Luce,  represent the City.  The case goes before the court.  Jane Montgomery does not have a leg to stand on.

City of Pacific WINS the case.

Jane Montgomery would not have gotten a cent!  She would have had to pay court costs and her attorney's fees.

INSTEAD, thanks to the City of Pacific Council, Jane got free money from our TAXES!  Jane just sat at home and $25,000 of our money came into her door and into her hands, thanks to the CITY OF PACIFIC COUNCIL for giving her our tax money.  Canfield complained, but they had no choice but to pay Jane; another reason to cancel our insurance, and put the blame on me.

Then another surprise!  $150,000 comes through her door.  She's "jumping-with-joy!"

I firmly believe the City of Pacific would have won the case, because:

All of Jane Montgomery's allegations against me were included in the Recall Committee's declarations.  King County superior Court Judge Laura Inveen threw all of the Recall Committeee's allegations out, along with Jane Montgomery's allegations, except two of the 41 allegations.  The two remaining allegations DO NOT APPLY to Jane Montgomery's allegations. The two remaining allegations are in the Supreme Court for decision.

What Judge Laura Inveen did was set a precedence.

If you know a little about law, you'd know that the Constitution defines a "Legal Concept".  That "Legal Concept" interpreted by Federal Courts,  becomes precedence.  That precedence becomes a law, by which statutes evolve and is followed-through, right down to the State, County and Cities.

Therefore, the precedence was set by Judge Laura Inveen.  Then, if Jane Montgomery goes to court to sue me, she'd  be up against a stacked deck of "Precedence".

The question is:  Would she go to court to sue me?.....  I'll bet on the odds; she won't.

Why did I say "The question is: Would she go to court to sue me?....."  I said it because the attached document named me as the Respondent (Defendant).  Therefore, if she went to court for a liability suit, I would have been the defendant, not the Council.

The Council should not have made the decision to pay Jane Montgomery $25,000 to settle her claim.  The claim should have been against ME, the Respondent (Defendant), not against the City of Pacific.  I'm the person who had the sole authority to challenge Jane Montgomery in court, not the council.

Somebody was engineering the collusion.  I'm guessing, someone with a legal background and vengeance.

Note:  The Claim for Damage Form was received in Pacific Municipal Court, July 26, 2012.  Jane got the "WINDFALL" in November 2012, about one-hundred and twenty days after she filed.

I was never served with any papers to go to Court.  There was never a Court date set.  The whole incident was engineered to make the people of Pacific think that I should be RECALLED or should RESIGN.

The people's tax dollars were used to set me up.

SUMMARY:
1.  The council acted without going through normal procedure, which would have been, to challenge Jane Montgomery's allegations in court.  Instead the Council recklessly gave away taxpayer's money.

2.  If the council challenged Jane Montgomery in court, she would not have a leg to stand on.  AND, the City would not have wasted the taxpayer's money, $25,000.  Furthermore, the insurance company would not have been forced to pay Jane Montgomery $150,000, then canceling our insurance.

3.  But the council acted, and the repercussion:  Cy Sun was blamed for costing the City of Pacific MILLIONS of dollars.

Luce, the Council's attorney, not mine, has been known to make the wild statement:  "Cy Sun is costing the City millions of dollars".

Could he have been the legal manipulator in back of all this?  I don't know.

You make your own decision.

4.  The reason for blaming me was either to FORCE ME TO RESIGN, or to give the Recall Committee a stronger posture for the voters to boot me out of office...., if the people believe what the Council and the Recall Committee are trying to do.

5.  One question that boggles me:  As I said, I believe, somebody with a legal mind, orchestrated the whole shenanigan.  That person is known to be a very close and good friend of Jane Montgomery.

I also believe, that cunning person has been manipulating all the moves for the Council - against me.

Of course, I'm guessing.

6.  I was in Oregon when all that happened.  My wife had a nervous breakdown, I'm spending all our money for private attorney fees because I'm the mayor.

We had to get away for a few days.

Even if I was in Pacific and at that meeting, the council would have given me a deaf-ear.  I have NO SAY in Council meetings, except to chair and if necessary, to break a tie vote.

7.  When I was in Oregon, the $25,000 check was signed by Mayor Pro Tem - JOHN JONES.  He couldn't wait until I returned and took my position as mayor and signed the check for Jane Montgomery.

BUT,  I would NOT have signed that $25,000 check.  I would have challenged Jane Montgomery in court.

Jane Montgomery made whistleblower allegations which were never proven as FACTS.  There are many lies in her whistleblower accusations which would not stand up in a court of law.  It is easy to make allegations when you don't have to prove them as facts and don't file a formal Federal complaint.  It is easy to post allegations in the newspaper, but if you have to prove the allegations as FACTS either in court or in a formal complaint, it is another story.  Then the allegations are either TRUE or FALSE.

Trying to prove false allegations in court shall only make Cy Sun's defense case stronger.

TAXPAYERS, your money was squandered away!  What are you going to do about it?

Voting time is approaching, are you going to clean up the corruption?

The corruption I'm talking about is giving away $25,000 (your tax money) just to put a bad image on me.

Cy Sun

Your Mayor

City of Pacific

http://www.mayorcysun.blogspot.com

FOUR councilmembers are up for election in November.  Consider running for office and helping to decide your city's future.

The FOUR:

Position #2 - John Jones - 1/1/10 to 12/31/13

Position #4 - Leanne Guier - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #5 - James McMahan - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

Position #6 - Tren Walker - 1/1/10 - 12/31/13

When to File for Councilmember with King County Elections:

In-person: May 14 – May 18, 2012, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Filing opens Monday, May 14 at 8:30 a.m. and closes at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 18, 2012.

Mail: April 30 – May 18, 2012 

Filings made by mail must be received by the filing officer not earlier than 10 working days before the first day of filing or no later than the close of business on the last day of the filing period, irrespective of postmark. Failure to meet the deadline renders the filing invalid and it will be returned.

Online: May 14, 9:00 a.m. - May 18, 2012, 4:00 p.m.

Filings made online for regular candidates may begin at 9 a.m. the first day of the filing period and continue through 4 p.m. the last day of the filing period.

MY TURN - 5B

Here are the sheets from the FINAL 2013 City of Pacific Budget with the numbers for the City of Pacific Police Department.

If you doubt my figures, put in a Public Records Request and get a copy directly from City Hall.

To give a much better insight, let's take a closer look at the 2013 BUDGET for the Pacific Police Department (Criminal Justice) approved by the CITY OF PACIFIC COUNCIL.

Account 5211101................Salaries and Wages......................$  252,500.00

Account 5212010................Salaries and Wages......................$  817,050.00

        Total 2013 Budgeted Police Dept. Salaries & Wages......$1,069,550.00

Account 5211020................Fringe Benefits.............................$   83,600.00

Account 5212020................Fringe Benefits..............................$ 323,800.00

       Total 2013 Budgeted Police Dept. Fringe Benefits............$ 407,400.00

Total Police Dept. 2013 Budgeted Salaries & Wages.....................$1,069,550.00

Total Police Dept. 2013 Budgeted Fringe Benefits.........................$   407,400.00

Total Police Dept 2013 Other Budgeted Accounts..........................$  596,050.00

Carry Over Budget from 2012.........................................................$  207,336.00

               TOTAL POLICE DEPARTMENT 2013 BUDGET.....$2,280,336.00

Total Amount transferred from the General Fund 001.................$1,888,900.00

The General Fund 001 includes all Property Taxes, etc.

The General FUND should be apportioned to street, water, sewer and storm water improvements plus a park system for the taxpayers instead of ALL going to pay Excessively High SALARIES.

Is this how you want to spend ALL your tax dollars?