![]() |
||
![]() |
||
| To: opinion@sacbee.com, mpaul@mcclatchy.com, rrodriguez@sacbee.com, bendicott@sacbee.com, msaltzman@sacbee.com, pdinsmore@sacbee.com, dwalters@sacbee.com From: Jim McRitchie <jm@perswatch.net> Subject: CalPERS cc: dbernstein@sacbee.com Dan Bernstein's recent article says the State Controller won her lawsuit against CalPERS on a technicality. While I don't favor Connell's continued ability to shake down CalPERS contractors for campaign contributions, neither should the board be above the law. Using the same illegal process overturned on political contributions, the CalPERS board also enacted unenforceable policies "requiring" gifts from contractors to be reported. I petitioned the board to enact regulations banning gifts from contractors and penalizing violators. The idea was rejected. The Government Code prohibits gifts when it can be "reasonably" substantiated they are "intended to influence" official actions. An ABC employee got fired for accepting a drink. Yet, the incumbent in the current election for the state/university employee seat has routinely accepted basketball tickets, dinners and more. When asked why he reports up to 168 hours per week to CalPERS responsibilities, he indicates that he dreams of CalPERS while sleeping. The current board elections provide another example of Mr. Crist's ethical lapses, as well as the collusion of CalPERS staff. Regulations indicate the 150 word candidate statements "may not be changed" except by the election coordinator who is to check the statements for obscene, inaccurate or libelous material. Yet, an exception was made for board president Crist who, according to a July 20th memo, was granted an "extension," not afforded the other candidates, which allowed him to submit a new candidate statement specifically aimed at addressing my own. He now pledges not to engage in negative campaigning and brags about authoring policies on ethics. However, he doesn't pledge to reject gifts from contractors, to stop serving on the board of a private investment firm or to vote against actuary reports that assume state employees will earn pay raises at a rate 1% below what private sector employees are earning. Contact: |
||