Fletcher Fails Prop-A Supporters and San Diego Taxpayers with Absent Vote on SB 829

Steve Rider Steve Rider 20 Comments

Share

Partisan-Republican-turned-something-else Nathan Fletcher failed San Diego taxpayers yesterday by missing the Assembly floor vote on a labor union bill specifically designed to punish the City of San Diego financially. If Fletcher is truly in favor of Proposition A, and protecting taxpayer interests, he could have done no greater service to the Prop A effort and the San Diego taxpayers by voting NO on this bill.

Senate Bill 829 (Rubio) is legislation sponsored by the State Building and Trades Unions designed to restrict some state funds for construction projects in San Diego County’s eight charter cities. The bill is aimed at charter cities that enact limits on union-friendly Project Labor Agreements. The bill has serious constitutional defects and is an unprecedented attempt to interfere with the fiscal independence of the City of San Diego and the County’s other charter cities.

In June San Diegans will vote on Proposition A, the Fair and Open Competition Ordinance, that will protect taxpayers by prohibiting city politicians from imposing Project Labor Agreements on city construction contracts and will require construction contracts to be posted online for easy public review. The potential taxpayer savings from Proposition A are enormous. Experts estimate that the City can save up to 15% on construction costs if they are bid under fair and open competition.

Senate Bill 829 is intended to derail Proposition A and “persuade” City of San Diego voters to agree with organized labor or to “scare” them into voting no by the threat of losing state funds. While it is highly unlikely the courts will uphold SB829, actions outweigh rhetoric. Nathan Fletcher’s endorsement from Police Unions, his exceptionally delayed support of CPR, his lack of support against the 2010 unions’ push for a sales tax, and this latest inaction are troubling signs that candidate Fletcher is not committed to protecting taxpayers’ interest, but rather he’s aligning himself with the same unions who brought our city to financial ruin.

San Diego GOP

Share

Comments 20

  1. Steve- Nathan’s position on this is clear. He opposed similar legislation last year and supports Prop A. He was just absent.

    Are you going to send out similar statements on other San Diego members who were also absent?

  2. Amy, Nathan is running for Mayor, not the other members. But please let us know who else was not there to represent San Diego county. It is good information to have for the future. Thank you.

  3. If I understand Ms. Thoma correctly, the Fletcher team defense is “the other kids were doing it too.” Basically, throwing colleagues who support Fletcher under the bus to deflect criticism.

    As I posted in FlipFlopFletcher’s post, Stay Classy Ms. Thoma!

  4. “Are you going to send out similar statements on other San Diego members who were also absent?”

    I can’t speak for Steve Rider but I hope he doesn’t.

    The simple fact is that Mr. Fletcher is opposing the GOP now; he is running against two Republicans. The SDGOP should point out where its adversaries are negligent in their duties to the taxpayers. In this case, voicing support from San Diego, while the vote is being passed in Sacramento, does not protect the taxpayers of San Diego from the labor unions.

  5. Post
    Author

    Editing note: I changed the language in the middle section of this post regarding the legal aspects of SB 829.

    The frustration with Fletcher failing to vote against this bill remains the same.

  6. Not voting actually has the same effect in the legislature as voting no. The yes votes are all that really matter and it takes 41 of those to pass a bill. If 39 Assembly Members vote yes and 41 fail to even vote, the bill fails. Fletcher let no one down yesterday.

  7. Alger,
    Thanks for letting us know that they don’t have to be there to vote No, so we know now that Republicans never need to show up in Sac. I wonder how much we can save in airfare/living compensation for them to not go to Sac, especially since 99.9% of their leg never gets past committees. This could be an opportunity to save more than you and I make together in a year in one month for the state! Great info! All, lets encourage Republicans to stay in their hometowns as much as possible to save money since we just found out their votes are considered ‘No’ when they are not in Sac. Please spread the news!

  8. Ms. Right,

    Your sarcasm aside, the fact still remains that abstaining and voting no have the same effect on whether legislation passages.

    You really should take a look at final vote total and see how many times there were 80 recorded votes in the Assembly or 40 recorded votes in the State Senate. It is a rarer occurrence than you might have realized.

  9. Ms. Right just gave us a Clinic on the debate technique called “Reductio ad Absurdum”. Alger is unlucky enough to be in the role of student here.

    Reductio ad absurdum is, “a process of refutation on grounds that absurd and patently untenable consequences would ensue from accepting the item at issue.” It was popularized by Aristotle in “Prior Analytics” during his MVP season of 341 BC in the Greek Philosophers League.

  10. Jim,

    You can take any argument to it’s extreme and make it sound ridiculous (What if we spent 100% of the Federal budget on the military?), but that won’t change the facts in this case. Fifty Assembly Members voted yes, twenty three voted no and seven, including Fletcher and Garrick did not vote. Even had all seven who abstained actually voted no, the bill would have still passed.

  11. Alger raises an interesting point. Since our side’s votes don’t count, why not elect a chimpanzee in Fletcher’s district and pay him with bananas instead of a six figure income?

    The chimp can live at the zoo, avoiding all those fruitless (so to speak) radiation-soaked commutes to Sacramento. From Balboa Park, our representative could not vote with great regularity. Our hairy hero would vote correctly (by not voting) almost all the time.

    Now I’ll admit, some might be offended by being represented by a chimp (or NOT represented by a chimp — whatever). I’m not one of ’em, but I seldom find myself in the majority on anything.

    So let’s consider Plan B. IF we supposedly are paying such an generous income for someone to GO to Sacramento and, ya know, VOTE — shouldn’t that be what they are doing?

    If they choose not to vote so they can campaign full time for some other office, should not they take a leave of absence (if not outright resign), fire their staff and pursue their passion on their own nickel?

    Given Fletcher’s recent demonstration of his integrity by his gaming of the GOP, I doubt we have much hope of Nathan doing the right thing in this matter. We taxpayers will continue to pay him while he foregoes his legislative duties to run for mayor.

    Still, longer term, perhaps this idea needs to become law. Doubtless our intrepid state legislators will move this worthy reform to the top of their “to do” list.

  12. OK. I get Alger’s argument. So let’s be more on topic. Will Nathan go on the record opposing a PLA for the convention center expansion and, if it ever happens, a new Chargers stadium? Will he promise that he will veto council action designed to impose one?

  13. Richard,

    Like politicians, the chimpanzees will soon figure out that they can hold out their votes for whomever gives them the most bananas.

  14. Nathan Fletcher can side with every faction and game them all just as he did with the local Republicans. Like the old comment about Oakland,” There is no there there.”

  15. Being conveniently absent when a bill the Unions want reaches the Floor is a tried and true method some Republican legislators use to curry favor. Alger makes a fair point, but these are the Sacramento Rules we’re discussing, and they have their own logic.

  16. Alger, all sarcasm aside, thanks for making my point more visible.

    Richard – unfortunately D7 could be right, the chimps are probably smarter than some in Sac….so we definitely need to have them locked up, maybe in a more secure place than the zoo.

  17. Richard and Ms. Right,

    I never said Republican votes don’t count and I think both of you know that. What I said was not voting has the same practical effect as voting no. Now, if you are claiming that Republicans do nothing but always vote no, then maybe you have a point.

  18. Erik,

    I agree. Those are the important questions and should be asked of Fletcher. Since he is on record as supporting Prop A, I am quite certain he would also answer yes to your questions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *