“GAYNE BRENNEMAN
”Because of our weakened financial situation, “Yes”,
we have to explore all options. My priorities are:

1. Resident safety is more important than our financial problems, but they are related. Our Dispatch system has to be upgraded immediately, and the County will be asked to suggest solutions for our Dispatch and policing to compare our current quality and costs. Torrance is an adjoining city and they should be asked as well.

2. We have to determine the extent of our pension debt through available data, and then make a realistic estimate of what Calpers future return rates will be. This will involve reviewing their history and management decisions in the past, and considering the economic environment we are moving into.

3. Public safety savings will be combined with further cost cuts, to see if they can reduce the pension debt.

4. Negotiate with the police union, and Calpers.

5. Exploring new sources of revenue.””

“SANFORD DAVIDSON (incumbent)
(Councilmember Davidson declined to supply answers to any of the questions posed)”

“DAWN MURDOCK
”Safety is a top priority. I agree that a focus on ensuring funds for safety and other services such as maintenance of infrastructure, parklands, and buildings is essential. This will require trade-offs and hard decisions to support fiscal sustainability.

The FAC (Financial Advisory Committee) delivered the PVE forecast projecting deficits begin-ning next year. So yes, I agree, the financial issues above are critical.

The overwhelming majority of residents want to keep our local police. Yes, everything is on the table, and decisions must align with residents’ priorities. This begins with full transparency of all costs, including pension costs.

Next comes an effort to reduce costs through activities such as operational reviews, automation, contracting, etc.

Pensions are a challenge to our budget. The cost rises each year. This year pension costs consumed 12% of the budget. I address pensions in the next question.

We also need to consider options that bring in new revenue. This includes an increase in service offerings at our concessions. I recommend a new ad hoc committee with a clear charter, timeline, and defined check-in points be commissioned to explore additional non-tax revenue opportunities. Residents have ideas and want to be involved.

After all efforts are exhausted, additional taxes need to be considered, providing residents options between services and taxes.””

“JIM ROOS
”Managing the People’s money would be among my top priorities as a member of our City Council. Our City has suffered several financial setbacks in recent years including a significant rise in its unfunded pension liability and the failure of Measure D, which drove cuts to City services until residents passed Measure E in 2018.

Managing against a long-term plan that ensures the financial viability of Palos Verdes Estates is “table stakes” for any serious candidate for City Council. But our residents also expect a high level of service from our Police Department, we expect the City’s infrastructure to be maintained to avoid costly repairs in the future, and we expect that basic maintenance of the City’s parklands and landscaped areas not be neglected while our leaders tackle the issues of planning and budgeting.

I am running for City Council to address all of these issues.””

“BILL SEWELL
”These are my priority list and I would add fighting loss of local control over planning and permitting as an additional top issue. Our long-term financial viability depends on solving the pension problem; not just the Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) but also future pension costs that if not addressed can become new debt. I propose the following:

1. Pay down our pension debt.

2. Shorten our CalPERS amortization schedule to ten years which would save taxpayers $8.5 million in interest.

3. Use more accurate actuarial assumptions to better anticipate costs.

4. Split pension costs with employees to keep new debt from amassing.

5. Disclose ALL costs in the budget simply and clearly.
Most residents have shown that they prefer to keep the PVE Police and I agree. We should not look at outsourcing because we must pay for competing bids whether they are viable or not, a practice unheard of in most public procurements. The practice is the definition of conflict of interest.

Finally, we must join other cities across the state in fighting the 37 densification bills coming through the legislature that will take away our ability to preserve our home values. We must keep control in the hands of those who know the local housing market best. We can’t do it alone. I would join with other cities across the State to make our voices heard and share (reduce) the cost of any legal action. We MUST retain local control.””