CARSON CITY – A Nevada think tank investigation shows that Clark County taxpayers are contributing $4.6 million a year to fund union activities by local government workers.

The results of the investigation by Steven Miller and Kyle Gillis of the Nevada Policy Research Institute, published today in the Nevada Journal, identifies almost 70,000 hours of paid leave time made available each year by local governments to public employees to conduct union business.

Although top union officials are employees of the county or city governments, paragraphs in the bargaining agreements specify that those employees are to be released from their duties on behalf of taxpayers to instead work – while continuing to be paid by taxpayers – for private organizations, their labor unions.

The costs to taxpayers was calculated by reviewing 37 municipal labor contracts, contracts that are not easily accessible by the public.

“People are really going to be stunned when they realize that governments in Clark County, I mean the same governments that are facing fiscal challenges, are giving millions upon millions of dollars every year to union employees to work for the union,” said Victor Joecks, NPRI communications director. “I mean government certainly has a role in providing schools and public safety and roads, but it doesn’t have a role in subsidizing a private organization; doesn’t have a role in subsidizing these labor unions.

“Not only that, I think that it’s a perfect example of how kind of the union contracts with collective bargaining get out of control,” he said. “Year after year of collective bargaining, when you are only ratcheting up, I mean leads to this kind of excess and this kind of waste.”

The investigation found that the most lucrative contract is between the City of Las Vegas and the Las Vegas Police Protective Association, which receives over $1 million in tax dollars and 15,500 hours a year for union members to perform union work. Las Vegas also pays its Metro Supervisors Association and its Police Protective Association, Civilian Employees, Inc., more than $430,000 a year and $300,000 a year, respectively, for union employees to do union work.

The investigation also found that the Clark County firefighters union received well over $400,000 in taxpayer funds for union business, and North Las Vegas provided over $600,000 for union firefighters to carry out union work. The Service Employees International Union Supervisors and SEIU Non-Supervised Employees took over $195,000 a year and over $300,000 a year, respectively, from Clark County taxpayers, for union activities.

Read more…

HONOLULU — A bill that would ban the sale of smokeless electronic cigarettes to minors and impose the 70% tobacco tax on the devices was briskly debated at the state Legislature today.

All of the testimony favored a ban on sale of the products to minors but more than 1,000 individuals and companies protested imposition of the tobacco tax on “e-cigarettes.”

E-Cigarette kit retails for $74.99, pictured at right (courtesy volcanoecigs.com)

The devices deliver vaporized nicotine mist to users but contain no tobacco and generate none of the carcinogenic smoke generated by a burning cigarette, proponents said.

State Health Department Director Loretta Fuddy told members of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, “There is very little known about the long term health effects of the use of e-cigarettes or the vapors given off. Recent studies have shown that within one liquid nicotine cartridge there is enough nicotine to cause serious illness or even death.”

Cory Smith, president of local retailer Volcano Fine Electronic Cigarettes, said the product actually helps tobacco smokers quit their habits and produces none of the second-hand smoke issues associated with traditional tobacco cigarettes.

“The tohacco tax is aimed at  deterring tobacco use and  generating revenue to pay for health care costs associated with tobacco-related harms,” Smith said.

“Since the research thus far indicates that e-cigarettes show promise as a means to  deter tobacco use and thereby reduce the cost of  tobacco-related harms, it makes no sense to subject e-cigarettes to the tobacco tax,” Smith said.

Taxing e-cigarettes at the 70% tobacco rate would shut down his business and drive customers to the internet to obtain the devices from out-of-state sources, he said.

“The general cost of a fully-functioning electronic cigarette kit is upwards of  $70,” Smith testified. “Levying a 70′% tax on all of these items would virtually guarantee that purchasers will go out of state, or, worse yet, return to tobacco cigarettes.”

But Health Director Fuddy said more scientific study must be undertaken of e-cigarettes.

Read more…

TRENTON — For state Sen. Frederick Madden Jr., the path of public service also has been a road to personal wealth.

Madden collects more than $241,000 a year in public salaries plus retirement pay. He gets $49,000 as a legislator, a $106,983 as a police academy dean and an $85,272 annual pension as a State Police retiree.

Since he “retired” at age 48 nearly a decade ago, Madden has cashed $770,156 in New Jersey retirement checks. Among the 15 legislators who draw state pensions, no one pockets more than the senator from the state’s 4th Legislative District, which includes parts of Gloucester and Camden counties.  (See chart below.)

It may madden taxpayers, but double-dipping practices by public officials generally are legal under state law.

“There are those who have an issue with people retiring from one organization and going to work someplace else,” Madden told New Jersey Watchdog. “Obviously I don’t have a problem with people doing it. I’ve accepted that in my own personal life. I don’t have a problem with it at all.”

The problem is whether the state can afford such generosity. New Jersey’s pensions are underfunded by $36 billion, according to the State Treasury’s latest numbers. Other studies have estimated the shortfall as high as $144 billion.

‘Special Retirement’

How did Madden retire with a fat pension at 48? Other public employees in New Jersey typically must wait until 60 or older to retire with full benefits. Under federal Social Security, the full retirement age is 66.

The answer is simple: “Special Retirement.” It is a rule that only applies to law enforcement officials in the Police & Firemen’s Retirement System (PFRS) or State Police Retirement System (SPRS). The special retirement provision allows officers to retire at any age after 25 years of service, without reduced benefits.

“It’s basically a young person’s job,” said Madden. “The system is set up for them to retire early to keep the forces young. We have mandatory retirement at 55.”

Two months before he turned 21, Madden was hired as a $9,088-a-year state trooper who would climb up the organizational chart. He could have retired at 45 with full benefits, but Madden maximized his nest egg by staying for four more raises, three more birthdays and two big promotions to lieutenant colonel and deputy superintendent. Then he retired June 30, 2002.

“I had reached the top of my career in policing. It was in my best interest to move on, so I decided to retire,” Madden said.

Read more…

HONOLULU – The University of Hawaii is threatening legal action against the operator of a pornographic website called universityofhawaii.xxx.

X-rated domain names were made publicly available late last year and many universities around the country, including Hawaii Pacific University here, purchased names that could have associated their institutions with pornography.

The University of Hawaii chose not to do so and the universityofhawaii.xxx name was purchased by an unidentified buyer who in turn offered to re-sell it on eBay for at least $100,000.

The lurid site went operational this month and now UH officials are trying to shut it down.

“The University of Hawaii demands that you immediately cease and desist in the use of the University of Hawaii’s name,” UH attorney Darolyn Lendio wrote in a “to whom it may concern” letter emailed to the website.

“You are not associated or affiliated with the University of Hawaii…  and it is clear that you are using this name and its association misleadingly and/or for improper purposes, and in bad faith,” Lendio’s letter said.

UH spokeswoman Lynne Waters said in a written statement that the website “is an unauthorized and improper use of our name and reputation, and we plan to take appropriate legal action.”

She said the university wants to make sure that “this website is taken down and that no other future similar uses of our name shall occur.”

Read more…

By Wayne Lusvardi | CalWatchdog

SACRAMENTO – Ready for another phantom “drought”? The National Resources Defense Council is. The NRDC’s bogus Delta Smelt lawsuit brought the court-ordered “drought” from 2007 to 2010.

Now the NRDC is launching a disinformation campaign to divert the public’s attention from the bigger water issues of the Sacramento Delta. On Sept. 16, 2012, U.S. District Court Judge Oliver Wanger threw the case out of court as based on bogus science.

Gov. Jerry Brown declared the “drought” over in 2011. Yet water rates have risen anyway across the state as a result of the bogus “drought.”

In the Feb. 6 issue of the San Francisco Chronicle, NRDC attorney Doug Obegi said there are three “facts” and three “myths” about the Sacramento Delta.  Like any slick attorney, he is working on you as if you were on a jury to make sure you are persuaded of his case.

The Delta is where most of the water runoff from the snowpack of the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range ends up.  California depends on the Delta for most of its water for farms and cites, as well as fishing and water recreation.

To understand the big issues with the upcoming Delta Plan of the State legislature’s Delta Stewardship Council and the proposed $11.1 billion Water Bond on the November ballot, it is important not to be distracted by small facts and alleged irrelevant myths.

The NRDC’s device for distracting you from the water issues of the Sacramento Delta is a purported checklist of so-called “facts” and “myths” about California’s water system.  Let’s look at them without being diverted from the larger issues.

Read more…

ANNAPOLIS – Legislative analysts said Friday that $870 million more in revenues for transportation – the amount recommended by the Blue Ribbon Commission on Maryland Transportation Funding – is not enough for the state to meet all of its needs.

Gov. Martin O’Malley has proposed applying the sales tax to gasoline, which would generate over $600 million, but he has yet to submit legislation to implement the tax.

Comptroller Peter Franchot, whose agency collects the gas tax, is hosting a roundtable at noon on the gas tax hike that includes industry opponents of any increase.

In a hearing on the state’s transportation budget Frdiay, legislative analyst Jonathan Martin told members of the House Appropriations Committee that Maryland’s aging infrastructure is demanding more and more dollars.

“Because of all the funding pressure for transit lines and system preservation, the amount raised is insufficient to meet those needs,” Martin said. “With a shortfall, as policymakers, you have difficult choices to make.”

The shortfall is exacerbated by two major factors. The state is planning to build two major commuter transit projects – the Red Line to connect Baltimore suburbs and the Purple Line to connect Washington, D.C. suburbs – without a funding source. The federal government is paying half of the planning costs, but estimates for construction costs are as much as $724 million in a single year. Congress has not come to a consensus on how to fund transportation in the future, causing uncertainty about continued funding.

According to the analysis done by the Department of Legislative Services, between fiscal 2013 and 2017, it would cost about $6.5 billion to do all of the work that the state has proposed. Even if $870 million more in transportation funds are raised, the state will under $5 billion to work with in that five-year period.

Martin said that policymakers have many questions to answer in order to shore up transportation funds. One of the things that the Blue Ribbon Commission wanted to do is restore Highway User Revenues – funds given to city, county and municipal governments to maintain local roads. The funds were cut as state budgets got tighter.

Read more…