CA Governor promised to take 10% pay cut ‘in solidarity with workers’ – but ‘accidentally’ didn’t

Share:

SACRAMENTO, CA –In an attempt to show solidarity with the state workers who received a 10% pay cut due to budget deficits caused by the lockdown, California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) promised he and his staff would also take a cut.  However, almost three months later, that cut never took place.

In May of this year, Gov. Newsom had proposed a budget to answer the reduction in revenue across the state.  The revision, which showed a 22.3 percent loss in revenue since January, was most likely a direct result of the shutdown of the state amid the pandemic fears.  The revised budget has a projected deficit of $54.3 billion. 

Gov. Newsom admitted that the revised budget also included a proposed 10 percent pay cut to all state employees and less funding for public schools and community colleges.  To help the ailing budget, Gov. Newsom asked the state workers to take a 10% reduction in pay. 

A press release on the budget said,

“Negotiations will commence or continue with the state’s collective bargaining units to achieve reduced pay of approximately 10 percent. 

The May Revision includes a provision to impose reductions if the state cannot reach an agreement. In addition, nearly all state operations will be reduced over the next two years, and nonessential contracts, purchases and travel have already been suspended”

Knowing the strain of state employees losing 10 percent of their pay would cause on their families, Gov. Newsom at least tried to make it sting a little less.  Newsom promised that he and his staff would also take the ten percent cut,

“And so we’re asking, across the board, for 10% contribution in wages,” Newsom said. ”We’ll be negotiating and bargaining with each bargaining unit in the state of California.

I know this is the last thing that our partners want to hear, but unfortunately, we’re in a position where it’s required of all of us. And by the way, including me and including my entire staff.”

As an elected official, Gov. Newsom is not required to take a pay cut when there is a budget reduction.  Knowing this, he said in May,

“Nothing breaks my heart more than making budget cuts … Let me sum up here, quickly. Also recognize this: you can’t have a conversation about budget deficits, and you can’t have a conversation about sacrifice unless you lead by example.

And I want folks to know that none of us in state government will be immune from tightening our belts and committing to help the cause and help support those most in need.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters? Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you. Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories. Click to check it out.
Proposed bill in New Jersey would allow illegal immigrants to obtain professional and occupational licenses

A spokesperson for Gov. Newsom had said:

“The Governor publicly committed to taking the same pay cut as other state workers when he introduced his budget in May and has officially asked the Controller to adjust his pay, effective July 1.  The reductions for both July and August will be deduced for the next pay period.” 

The problem is the reduction in pay never happened. 

The Sacramento Bee produced a report on August 20th which found that Gov. Newsom has been getting his complete monthly salary of $17,479 for almost three months when he promised to take the pay cut. 

When Gov. Newsom’s office was called to get information on why the pay was not reduced, they said it was an “administrative error.”  Gov. Newsom has since notified the controller to reduce his pay, retroactively to July.

The only elected official in the state to take the reduction in pay was State controller Betty Yee.  Gov. Newsom had pressured State Treasurer Fiona Ma, Lt. Governor Eleni Kounalakis, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, and Attorney General Xavier Becerra to also take the pay cuts.

##

California legislator proposing bill to remove gay sex offenders from the state’s sex offender registry (op-ed)

This editorial is brought to you by a former police officer and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today

SAN FRANCISCO, CA- Push…push…nudge…nudge. This was entirely predictable actually.

When the Supreme Court blessed gay marriage, many people thought that it was only a matter of time where that would not be enough.

Recently we saw the Civil Rights Act of 1964 expanded to include the “t” in LGBTQ. Now, a state senator in California is trying to destigmatize gay sex between young adults and minors.

He argues that the present state law which governs the state’s sex offender registry unfairly discriminates against the LGBTQ community.

As reported in the Daily Wire, a report attributed to The San Francisco Chronicle says that Democrat State Sen. Scott Wiener (seriously) is trying to gather support in the waning weeks of the legislative session for SB145, which he introduced last year and which is held up in a key committee.

The legislation would provide “judges discretion over sex-offender registration in all cases involving voluntary intercourse between teenagers age 14 to 17, who cannot legally consent, and adults who are less than 10 years older.” In other words, this legislation would allow a 24-year-old to have “consensual” sex with a 14-year-old of the same sex and not be placed on a sex offender registry. Disgusting.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle:

“If  a man has vaginal intercourse with an underage teenage girl, the judge can decide whether he should be placed on the sex offender registry based on the facts of the case. But if anal or oral sex, or vaginal penetration with anything other than a penis is involved, the adult must register as a sex offender—a relic of a penal code that criminalized those acts until 1975, even between consenting adults.”

Wiener said, “California’s sex offender registry continues to draw that distinction—an antiquated, outdated, leftover distinction—that somehow oral sex is worse than vaginal sex.”

He continued that such a precedent is “horrific homophobia” that is “irrational and it ruins people’s lives.”

Wouldn’t it make more sense for California legislators to be going in the opposite direction? Making such conduct between members of the opposite sex fall under the same guidelines? Not necessarily under the auspices of fairness but because adults should not be having consensual sex with children under the age of 17. Period.

“It makes no sense. It disproportionately impacts LGBTQ people because LGBTQ people are far less likely to be engaging in penile, vaginal intercourse,” Wiener told The San Francisco Examiner.

Wiener is nothing if not a little bit obsessed with sexually oriented legislation. In 2017, he co-sponsored a bill which made knowingly exposing a partner to HIV no longer a felony.

 Wiener’s support for this bill has, according to him, exposed him to death threats.

“I’ve been the subject of death threats and personal attacks, threatening to decapitate me and send my head to my mother,” Wiener told an online news conference.

“This kind of slander, not just against me but against my community, is outrageous and we have to speak out against it.”

Always playing the victim.

Wiener singled out so-called “QAnon conspiracy theorists,” whom he says believe he is making a subversive plan to legalize pedophilia. Trust us, that will be next. There are already those trying to claim that pedophilia is a “psychological disorder” and therefore an illness, not a crime. It’s coming.

Wiener also told the Chronicle that he has been the target of online harassment, and hit with “toxic, poisonous hate and homophobia and anti-Semitism,” he claims from right-wing conspiracy theorists and others.

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Chad Felix Greene, a journalist who also happens to be gay wrote in The Federalist, “As has become far too common, opposing perceived right-wing attacks is more important than critically addressing dangerous legislation.”

Continuing, Green said:

“Providing reasonable legal accommodation to this very specific and narrow experience should not be an open invitation for adults to exploit young teenagers by engaging in sex with them.

Unfortunately, Wiener and other California lawmakers, who have had no formal pushback on this legislation so far, are more interested in pursuing grand social ideals rather than writing simple, rational law.

Left-wing media is all too happy to use labels of ‘hate’ and ‘conspiracy theories’ to dismiss legitimate concerns.”

Wiener’s proposal is backed by Equality California, a LGBTQ rights organization, as well as groups representing district attorneys and oddly enough, police chiefs.

Law enforcement agencies say that California’s sex offender registry has simply become too large to fulfill its’ mission, which is to track potential predators. Officials have previously advocated to have people convicted of less-serious crimes removed from the list.

One such official is Bradley McCartt, a deputy district attorney in Los Angeles County who prosecutes sexual assault cases involving children. He claims the unequal treatment of same-sex couples is a civil rights issue.

He says that “there’s a lot of misinformation about what the sex offender registry does, what its purpose is. That is why there is such strong, unbelievable support among law enforcement about this bill.”

While the bill was passed in the state Senate last year, it was held up in a key committee in the Assembly by the chair, Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego) who was seeking amendments to narrow its scope. Wiener says he is pushing to get the bill out of committee, which must be done by the end of next week.

Wiener says that he is trying to bring attention to the so-called “marginalization” of LGBTQ youth. So, apparently 24-year-olds are now considered “youth.”

“We need to be lifting these young people up,” Wiener claims, “and not criminalizing them and attacking them.”

Cool. Not.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
 
Facebook Follow First
Share:
Related Posts