A Republican lawyer writes me with political advice:
"Peter, the salaries are the big motivator for the YES vote. Not that good government stuff like going nonpartisan, or getting better representation with five commissioners instead of three. Even Republicans with big 'NO!' signs on their yards plan to vote 'YES'to cut salaries. Don't you realize that?
Tell the 'Jackson County for All' people to emphasize the salaries if they want to win this thing."
I suspect my Republican friend is correct.
People are startled by the salaries of the commissioners and the county administrator.
There is a small but energized group of people who follow politics, especially local politics, closely. I am in that group.
Over half of Americans follow politics the way I follow sports. I am aware that the NBA playoffs are going on but I don't remember any player names except Damian Lillard. Back when I worked in an office I filled out a March Madness bracket to be cordial. I knew nothing about any team. I know enough about sports to have a two-minute conversations with people who do care about sports. That is how I understand that great block of Americans who get polled and say they are "undecided" on voting for Trump or Biden. For them, politics is a spectator sport, and they don't care much about it.
But sometimes in sports, something pushes into my active consciousness. If the Trail Blazers were in the NBA finals, I might watch a game. If the Oregon Ducks were playing Alabama for the national championship I would watch on TV and cheer for Oregon, hoping that we Oregonians would show a thing or two to that team from a state that bans abortion even in the case of rape, incest, and the health of the mother. (See? Even then, the sports event gets back to what I care about.)
Sports help me understand voters.
 |
| Click: 30-second ad |
The commissioner salaries -- plus their perks including health insurance, telephone allowance, car allowance, technology allowance, and PERS -- have an instant element of surprise when I mention them to people. It breaks through, sort of like my learning that the Oregon Ducks would be playing for a national championship in football.
County Administrator Danny Jordan's salary, plus perks including a home loan and three-year severance package, has the same effect: surprise.
There is a single simple message that I think poorly-engaged voters (i.e., people like me with sports) get. They think the salaries are self-serving. It fits into a template of presumption that a great many people have of government. That is that politicians arrange things to take very good care of themselves if they have the opportunity. One need not be conspiratorial in one's thinking to believe that. It is just an presumption based on general life observation that friends support friends, that politicians get support from prosperous donors, and that in return politicians return the favor. Politics is a swamp.
I think the recent action by the Board of Commissioners to vote themselves another pay raise, done in the face of ballot issues that would cut their pay, could be read as a sign of confidence that the giant campaign they have organized to defeat the ballot measure will preserve the status quo. Most voters won't know about the recent pay raise. Some of the ones who do know about it will consider it arrogance. A few voters will think the commissioners darned well ought to be paid $150,000.That is where my friend, a Republican in good touch with fellow Republicans, thinks the commissioners have mis-calculated. The majority of voters, Republicans included, do not particularly value the work of the commissioners, he tells me. The presumption, including among Republican donors to the "NO!" campaign, is that the administrator spoon-feeds the commissioners information and they go along with whatever he says. They have to. He controls the information they get. This sets up a mutual protection system -- the commissioners support Danny Jordan and he protects them by positing giant costs to add two commissioners at half the salary.
I suspect this set of presumptions is overdone and unfair to commissioners, but that template of belief is consistent with Republican populism. That is the ascendant GOP mood. The reality of whatever happens at the courthouse is less important than the belief that politicians are no darned good. That is why opposition to the increase from three to five has political traction. Voters consider extra representation to be worthless, just "Big Government." Heck with that.
But the salary issue cuts the other way; yeah, its "Big Government." Heck with that, too.
I know that there has been expensive polling on this issue. By dumb luck, I was polled at random by the top-tier Republican-orientedNelson polling organization out of Portland. The "NO!" campaign has poured new money into its effort. I suspect that the YES people are ahead or at least close.
I have a guess about how the election will turn out. Measures one and two, making the positions nonpartisan and increasing the number of commissioners to five, will have difficulty. Voters will have seen all the organized activity saying "NO!", and many people engaged enough to vote will go along with the consensus of all the signs.
But the salary-cut measure will pass. The same people who consider five commissioners too many will think that $150,000 for the commissioners, is too much. And so is $367,000 for County Administrator Danny Jordan.
Is that over-simple? Is it unfair to the commissioners to say most voters think commissioners are puppets of the county administrator? The idea is out there in the political ether. I don't have any idea who replaced Damian Lillard, nor do I know who is the quarterback for the Ducks. People fill out their ballots with some generalized beliefs about government in mind. They feel grouchy about government, especially Republican populist voters.
I think my Republican friend has it about right.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]
12 comments:
Prior to getting elected as commissioners, Rick Dyer was installing windows in homes (he's not an attorney), Colleen Roberts was baking cupcakes in her bakery, and Dave Dotterrer was a paid stooge lobbyist for the Chamber of Commerce. None had professional experience commensurate with being a commissioner, and running a $600 million annual budget enterprise. None are closely worth being paid $150K annually. Danny Jordan runs the show, and the commissioners (who are owned by the Chamber of Commerce) are just a rubber-stamp for Danny Jordan. ALL of the commissioners defer to Danny Jordan.
Danny Jordan has a 3-year termination clause, which provides Jordan with 3-years of salary (a golden parachute) if he is terminated by the county. That clause has to be renewed by the commissioners every year. If not, then it gets reduced the following year to 2-years of salary, then 1-year of salary, then zero golden parachute, without the annual renewal. The commissioners have renewed the 3-year termination clause every year, meaning they could change it if they wanted to, but they choose to give Jordan a 3-year sweetheart deal nobody else gets. Jordan also recently retired at 50 years old, so he now collects PERS along with his salary.
Another thing of note is that the commissioners get a decent PERS pension, even for only 4 years of service. John Rachor and Don Skundrick both served as commissioners for 4 years each, and both get about $500 monthly as their PERS pension for being a commissioner. Just think of what Dyer and Roberts will get.
My opinion is that the county is not being run that great (we have a high crime rate), and the commissioners and Danny Jordan are more concerned about their compensation than they are about the citizens. I voted to reduce their salaries.
Keep in mind that as the Commissioners raise their already exorbitant salaries, the school district has a $15 million shortfall over the next two years, requiring drastic cuts. Meanwhile, the average teacher salary in Oregon is $56,693. I realize the budgets are unrelated, but not really. What it reveals is our screwed-up priorities.
I think most people would have no problem with a CEO of a local corporation with 1,000 employees making $150,000. But the Commissioners are not CEOs. They simply provide a ceremonial function and move information around. They listen to citizen concerns but know they have little power to change anything. Ask those who came from LTM and Burger King who were going to run the County like a business. It can't be done. The Commissioners absorb information, attend meetings, vote on things like routine contracts, and congratulate the employee of the month. Although all four in the picture may have the ego (Peter said arrogance) to believe they are worth their salaries, constant and consistent raises increase the cost of government everywhere in Oregon, as other Counties look to Jackson County to compare, and are required to keep up.
Although the County has been financially sound over the past 20 years, most voters question whether the Administrator is worth north of $350K per year. The fact is that the total size of budget has near tripled in the past few years. Better oversight is needed, and it's not going to come from the current structure. There are plans to spend down that $200M rainy day fund you used to hear a lot about to just a fraction of that.
Some will say Commissioners should stay partisan because that's the only way you can know what their values and beliefs are. That's naive. You only have to look to the DA race to discern who is truly bipartisan and who is being backed heavily by Repubicans.
Although i emphatically, mostly, agree w my man Curt. Rick Dyer is absolutely an attorney and associated w a law firm in California but is likely non practicing and hasn’t been for some time; aka another one of ‘Martindale’s most wanted’ and not uncommon. Click here to see his license in good standing.
Oregon needs a law to stop the kinds of golden parachute deals that Jordan gets.
Jackson County is not run well.
There is simply too much waste at the top.
I look forward to the three getting their salaries cut and then finding jobs in the private sector that (over)pay as much. I doubt they will find any.
So much for running government like a business!
Joe Cambodia, here's the deal on Rick Dyer.
In order to be called an attorney (and practice) in Oregon, one has to hold an Oregon bar card. You get that by passing the Oregon bar exam. In order to qualify to take the Oregon bar exam, you HAVE to have graduated from an ACCREDITED law school. If you don't graduate from an accredited law school, then you can't take the Oregon bar exam, and you can never be an Oregon attorney. NEVER! EVERY attorney practicing in Oregon graduated from an accredited law school. That's the law.
Rick Dyer attended a hokey, UNACCREDITED internet law school (out of Los Angeles). Dyer took the California bar exam, and passed the California bar. Dyer is a member of the California bar. You don't even need a law degree in order to take the California bar exam. So, Dyer can practice law when he's physically in California. Dyer has lived in Oregon his entire life. In order to practice law, Dyer has to physically be in California. Dyer can never practice law in Oregon, and he can never call himself an attorney while he's physically in Oregon. You have to be an OREGON attorney in order to call yourself an attorney while you are in Oregon. Dyer can NEVER call himself an attorney, unless he moves to California. Otherwise, it's called impersonating an attorney. That's a felony. Rick Dyer is not an attorney. His law license is no more valuable than one from China.
I would venture to guess that Dyer has never practiced as an attorney in his life. He'd have to be in California to do that. Further, his law degree is from such a hokey law school, that no reputable law firm would ever hire him.
You know nothing about lawyering in California. Oregon attorneys are a joke compared to California attorneys and almost nothing goes to trial here. It's not a crime to say you're an attorney when you're not... not even an infraction. Plenty of good lawyers went to chit schools and became good attorneys in California, many went to good schools and are crappy attorneys. The Cal Bar test is no joke and even the Vice President of the United States who I'm sure you'd have fantastic things to say about is/was an extremely talented and prolific attorney, in fact Cal state Atty Genl, and she failed the Bar her first time around so you stick to what they taught you at the esteemed cal state school where you got your degree that you won't disclose... where was that anyway? Cal state Sonoma, Riverside, Hayward?? You're not really one to talk pal.
Joe,
I was born in Los Angeles County, California, and I lived there for 41 years (1953-1994). I have a bachelor of science degree in business administration with a concentration in accounting from California State University Los Angeles. A lot of my professors also taught at USC. I've worked at two of the largest CPA firms in America. I've also worked with a lot of attorneys in the past.
I'm familiar with the California Bar, and that it's one of the most difficult Bar exams to pass. The law school that Dyer attended started as a "law review course", then it morphed into a hokey law school (Kaplan). I'm very familiar with it. They focus on passing a test, and not providing you with broad knowledge. So, people that go there are good at taking tests, but they don't have a wide breathe of legal knowledge.
As far as the Oregon Bar requirements go, I did my research, and I spoke on the phone with people at the Bar. You can't prove I'm wrong, so you have to try to defame me instead. I guarantee that everything I said is 100% correct.
I'll stand by my original statement that Rick Dyer is not an attorney. Dyer lives in Oregon, and he doesn't have an Oregon Bar card. If he tries to call himself an attorney while in Oregon, then I'll file a Bar complaint, and the Bar will slap him hard.
A very interesting back and forth between City and Joe Cambodia. I'd be interested to see what somebody like Phil Arnold would have to say about this issue.
O/T but kudos to City for his conversations today. Keep it up, and you might find yourself elected .
Curt, not City ! Damn spelchek.
Curt, you no longer need to pass the bar to be an Oregon attorney. I suggest a bit more research, but now Oregon is easier to become an attorney than in California.
I sure hope not.
Post a Comment