Councilmember Holly Tillman - Sidestepping Issues

Holly Tillman

By Clayton Watch

Hi Council Member Holly,

It appears I have touched on a sensitive topic. You appear to be sidestepping many of the issues I brought up along with a few others. Thanks for the open communication.

If I remember correctly, you have declined to approve the budget for two consecutive years now, even though you were previously a member of the Budget & Audit Committee.

It was apparent last year you didn’t want to make a decision on the budget because you disagreed with the Master Fee Schedule income prediction. It was predicted to be at a $35k increase, and as of May 30th this fiscal year it is at $49k and growing. "Umm hmm"

Also, the FY 24/25 budget estimates were posted on the city website from May 14th through June 6th. Both you and council member Peter Cloven had ample time to review everything that Jeff and Kim reviewed in the Budget and Audit Committee meetings. No excuses!

Transparency and accountability are just empty words if you do not have time - and will not take responsibility for doing the job of balancing the budget in a timely manner. Three of the five council members seem to have found the time.

Looking forward to your reply.

Gary Hood

We appreciate you for reading this article.

--------------------------------------------------------

Please support our cause with a small donation today!

Donate

Just When it Seemed the Situation in Clayton was Cooling Down. . .

By Clayton Watch

City Council members Holly Tillman and Peter Cloven demonstrated their continued meddling at the last council meeting. You can watch the full meeting, including the city budget discussion starting at 1:49:12, by clicking this link: https://claytonca.gov/government/city-council/city-council-meeting-06-04-24/

Despite the city's recent staff turnover, the Interim City Manager Adam Politzer effectively leveraged outside resources to promptly assemble and deliver the FY24-25 budget by the legally required June 30th deadline.

This baseline budget aimed to establish an ongoing process for more frequent evaluation and adjustments, rather than seeking significant changes and tax increases.

Over the past 6 weeks, the Budget and Audit Committee (Council Members Jeff Wan and Kim Trupiano) diligently reviewed and iterated on the budget, which staff had prepared professionally and transparently.

Notably, the projected $560K deficit from the previous City Manager (Bret Prebula) was inaccurate, highlighting the value of knowledgeable staff and rigorous financial analysis. By all accounts, Bret Prebula created a significant mess at City Hall, failing to provide the professional, competent oversight that a municipality requires.

However, during the budget discussion, Holly Tillman and Peter Cloven claimed they lacked time to review the budget details and sought to delay the vote. Their unwillingness to engage with the budget process, despite materials and invitations from staff, raises questions about their priorities and understanding of their responsibilities as council members.

Unbelievable! It’s one of the most important functions of a city council member, and they didn’t have time? If they didn’t have time to devote to the city’s number one priority, reviewing and passing the budget (while the whole staff turned out and was online to answer any of their questions) what was more important?

What was the real reason they avoided the budget process?

⁃ Were they upset because they were complaining we would have a huge deficit and now the truth comes out?

⁃ Were they embarrassed because their numbers were wrong and their push for a sales tax and parcel tax was unfounded? (Holly Tillman wanted a .5 to 1% sales tax, and Peter Cloven wanted a $400.00 per year parcel tax without even knowing our true income and expenses. Keep in mind, the city checkbook hadn’t been reconciled in 18 months and the numbers Holly and Peter were looking at were over two years old.)

⁃ Was it because they didn’t understand the process or that they knowingly pushed a huge false budget deficit presented to them by past city managers Reina Schwartz and Bret Prebula to justify their support for tax increases.

Let’s not forget, that for their first two years on the city council, they had a voting block (Wolfe, Tillman, and Cloven) to present a realistic budget to the community, but instead they chose to push a false budget deficit in support of their tax and spend agenda.

Last year, Holly Tillman abstained from voting on the budget, partly because she doubted the $35,000 revenue projection from the proposed new master fees. Her skepticism proved unwarranted, as the actual fees generated to date are $49,000, and the fiscal year has not even ended.

Meanwhile, Peter Cloven questioned why Jeff Wan had requested worksheets and supporting data on the budget from Bret Prebula, who presented the budget but refused to provide backup documentation. When Peter Cloven asked why Jeff Wan hadn't asked Reina Schwartz for the backup, Jeff clarified that he had, and Reina supplied the requested information in a timely fashion.

Ultimately, the budget was approved 3-2, with Tillman and Cloven voting against it. Their actions suggest a concerning disregard for state law and one of their core council duties.

As the Clayton community considers future elections, voters should keep this in mind when evaluating the candidates and their commitment to the city's best interests.

We appreciate you for reading this article.

--------------------------------------------------------

Please support our cause with a small donation today!

Donate

Healthy Skepticism of Government is Wise - Who is City Manager Bret Prebula?

By Clayton Watch

Healthy skepticism of government is wise, but outright mistrust is counter-productive. If Brett Prebula's projections are accurate, a sales tax or parcel tax may be necessary down the road. However, we don't think sunsetting the LMD and solely relying on an uncertain parcel tax is prudent.

After reflecting on the late-night Tuesday, March 5, 2024 session, we all felt the push to pass a rushed sales tax that night was imprudent. Also, Bret's reaction to Jeff's reasonable request for the supporting data, paired with the consultant's canned spiel, compelled us to file a public records request at City Hall. We want to understand where Bret got his figures, they seem a bit fuzzy, and he seemed uncertain.

In our view, between our reserves and surplus funds being transferred into the general account, we have some financial breathing room and don't face an imminent crisis. So why not take a second look?

Side note: Part of our hesitation with Bret from the beginning stems from his background, and the way he handled the oversight on the Olivia project.

We've attached an interesting video of him speaking to a Progressive Democratic group in Benicia that's worth watching. There are many similarities between Tuesday night's presentation and the shared video, see below. Also, Googling his name also surfaces an intriguing article in the Benicia Independent that provides insight. See the second link below.

https://us02web.zoom.us
Password: =N5u4#Rm

https://beniciaindependent.com/tags/lionel-largaespada/

Best regards,

Clayton Watch Team

We appreciate you for reading this article.

--------------------------------------------------------

Please support our cause with a small donation today!

Donate

California Public Records Act - Request for Five-Year Forecast Material

By Clayton Watch

Dear Mayor, City Council, City Manager, and City Attorney,

I hope this letter finds you well. I wanted to reach out regarding the Five-Year Financial Forecast for FY 2024-2028 that was recently presented.

My understanding is that when Councilmember Jeff Wan kindly requested to review the supporting materials for this forecast, there was some hesitation from City Manager Bret Prebula to provide the full details. I do not wish to cause any trouble, but I believe having access to these materials is in the best interest of our city's transparent financial planning.

Therefore, I am making a friendly request under the California Public Records Act for:

1. All worksheets, projections, analysis, and related correspondence used to create the Five-Year Forecast presentation. This would include any emails, memos, letters, etc. among city staff, council members, and consultants pertaining to the forecast.

2. Invoices and receipts for any consulting or other costs associated with preparing the forecast.

I know there may be some time and costs involved with gathering these records, so please let me know if fees would exceed $100. I would be grateful if these could be waived, as releasing this information contributes to public knowledge about our city's budget planning.

I understand the law requires a response within 10 days. If for any reason you are unable to fulfill all or part of the request, please cite the specific legal exemption and let me know the options for appeal.

I appreciate you taking the time to consider this friendly request. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Gary Hood

We appreciate you for reading this article.

--------------------------------------------------------

Please support our cause with a small donation today!

Donate

Clayton's New Parcel Tax 2.0. - Here is What Peter Cloven and the Pioneer are Not Telling You

By Clayton Watch

According to the city manager's February 1, 2022 staff report the projected General Fund deficit for 2022/2023 is not $672,000 reported in the Pioneer or $629,703 shown on the staff report, it is $109,703.

The $520,000 difference is what the city manager is calling her unmet needs that include hiring a police Lieutenant (+$250,000), hiring an in-house city engineer instead of a contract engineer (+$50,000. Probably a low estimate. I am not sure why we need an in-house engineer now because we have always had a contract engineer), additional cost related to streetlights and stormwater (+$50,000 to $100,00. The report does not identify what these cost are), improved IT support (+$50,000), increased audit cost (+$25,000), additional street maintenance (+$25,000. The report does not identify what these cost are. Most of the money for road maintenance is "return to source revenue"--gas tax, vehicle license fees)

The report does not address the revenue side. What are the assumptions used to project future property tax revenue. With property values on homes sold going for over 1 million was this part of the estimate? Why didn't the report look at leasing out Endeavor Hall or help the property owner find a tenant for the vacant retail building on Oak Street (It has been vacant for over 14 years) and other revenue sources? In addition, the report did not look at contracting out landscape maintenance instead of in-house.

Bottom line: City leadership is proposing a new parcel tax that will generate up to $1.7 million a year to cover an actual (if it is even accurate) projected $109,000 deficit next year.

I find it deplorable that Cloven did not tell us the truth about the budget situation. I am not sure why he found it necessary not to disclose this in the era of transparency we are living in. Apparently, we are being asked to support a new parcel tax to meet the city manager's unmet needs.

We appreciate you for reading this article.

--------------------------------------------------------

Please support our cause with a small donation today!

Donate

Peter Cloven's Clayton - Small Town Mayor, Big Town Ego - Leadership Style / Elitist

By Clayton Watch (Also seen in the Diablo Gazette Newspaper)

Inflation is at an all time high and gas prices are at an all time high, and what does Clayton's Mayor, Peter Cloven do to help Clayton residents? Push for a new $400 parcel tax on all Clayton residents.

Clayton has a projected $107,000 budget shortfall next fiscal year and what does

Cloven's Clayton

Cloven do about it? Inflate the budget deficit to a false $629,000 and then vote to spend $30,000 of money they do not have on a survey to tell him voters would not support a tax increase.

Weeds everywhere, plants along the roadways dying or dead--what does Cloven do about it? Blame it on a group disgruntled residents.

The city installs new sod at the downtown park, the Grove, lets it die and then plans to charge Clayton taxpayers to replace the sod and what does Cloven doing about it? Nothing.

Street light poles missing and damaged and road signs missing or damaged for months and what is Cloven doing about it? Nothing.

Aggressively fought against an affordably housing project in his backyard was successful in killing it. Then votes, not once but twice, to approve an 81 unit, 3 story apartment building in historic downtown and in Stranahan's backyard.

Integrity/Moral Principles:

Proven to supports affordable housing as long as it is in your backyard and not in his backyard.

Says he supports inclusion, diversity and kindness, yet he votes to pass oven a person of color as vice chair of the planning commission and then votes for a white woman as vice chair with only 4 months on the commission.

Says he supports inclusion, diversity, kindness, and is against Asian hate yet votes to pass over Clayton's Asian American vice mayor, disregard the historical council rotational police, and votes for a Caucasian council member as mayor and himself as vice mayor.

Says he supports inclusion, diversity, kindness, and is against Asian hate, yet votes to elevate himself as mayor and once again pass up Jeff Wan.

Lies to Clayton residents about budget deficit in an effort to garner support for a new parcel tax.

Sincerely,

Clayton Resident

We appreciate you for reading this article.

--------------------------------------------------------

Please support our cause with a small donation today!

Donate