Why would a majority of Thornton City Council push a pro-union, anti-taxpayer measure?

So what does tens of thousands of dollars buy you with Thornton City Council?  Judging by the actions of some on council Tuesday night, it gets you payback in the form of granting unions inroads to city employees.

City council members that have received significant campaign contributions from organized labor managed to pass a resolution providing “meet and confer” recognition of unions granting them the ability to represent employees in what amounts to something just short of collective bargaining.  These council members pushed this through despite the potential cost to their constituents (you the taxpayer) and the fact that employees had not even asked for it.

• Click here to read the “meet and confer” resolution (PDF)

The public comments part of the meeting (click here to watch the video) was enlightening.  As you watch, one can’t help notice exactly what members of the “public” spoke in favor of the resolution. 

First you had Thornton firefighter Lee Whitner who is coincidentally the local firefighter union president also.  Any guess what she thought council should do? 

Second you had Ken Riley, a representative of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 76 (AFSCME).  The AFSCME of course stands to rake in thousands of dollars in union dues from hardworking City of Thornton employees should they get standing to represent the employees.  As part of the AFL-CIO, they would help AFSCME contribute to the $150 million the parent organization takes in a year from hardworking Americans.

Third, Michael Violette, the executive director of the Colorado State Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police (a union of course) spoke in favor of the resolution.  The issue was important enough for Mr. Violette to come down from his home in Longmont and state the case to make Thornton taxpayers foot the bill for the unionization of employees. 

That was it.  Notice something missing?  What about those City of Thornton employees?  If collective bargaining is so important to the wellbeing of our employees, don’t you think at least ONE city employee would show up and speak in favor of the resolution?

Moving on to the council discussion on the topic, Councilmember Val Vigil introduced the resolution.  This of course was not surprising given the thousands of dollars unions contributed to his campaign last year. 

As Ward IV representative Randy Drennen noted, many of the provisions in the resolution were already being adhered to under the outstanding leadership of City Manager Jack Ethredge.  Further, Drennen wisely noted that “the driver of this was not coming from those most impacted.” 

Making no sense at all was Eric Tade, also of Ward IV.  He admitted that the city charter already contained the crux of the resolution and said that is why he would vote in favor of the resolution.  Huh?

Thornton Mayor Erik Hansen pointed out that “the resolution is redundant” and as he noted, it isn’t beneficial since many of the provisions in the resolution were already being done.  As Hansen said, if unions want to get in, they should go to the voters and ask for a change to the city charter. 

Councilmember Steve Lebsock, much like Tade, didn’t really make much sense with his argument.  He admitted that employees were not unhappy at all saying, “In fact I hear almost the opposite on a consistent basis that we do have good employees here, that they are happy with their employment, they are happy with what is going on.” 

The vote talley on the union-backed "meet and confer" resolution.

If the employees are happy, who is this resolution really for?  It obviously isn’t needed for the employee as even those that supported the resolution said employees were happy.  It does nothing for the Thornton taxpayer as they are the ones that will foot the bill.  It does nothing for the City of Thornton as a whole. 

That only leaves one conclusion:  Payback.  Unions have contributed thousands of dollars to the six council members that voted in favor of the resolution.  There can be no other explanation than the fact that these members felt they owed the unions something for their money. 

Money in politics is a sad fact of life these days.  Whether the big bucks comes from unions or from businesses, there can be little doubt that it is an influence – and a bad one at that.

The editors of the Northglenn-Thornton Sentinel hit it spot on with their evaluation.  In Thursday’s edition they wrote:

What has us puzzled is why the move was pushed by a member of council, not a staff member or a member of the community. 

<snip>

We remind elected officials of whom they do represent: the voters.

If employees had come forward before council as a whole and requested that council consider changing the way that city management interacts with the rank and file, then the move might be justified.  As it was there was the appearance that one or two council members are moving an agenda forward that may or may not be in the best interest of the citizens in Thornton. 

~ Northglenn-Thornton Sentinel Editorial, July 15, 2010

Related – How much money did unions give to city council members during the last election cycle?  View their finance reports:

• Lynne Fox – 2009 campaign contributions
• Mack Goodman – 2009 campaign contributions
• Val Vigil – 2009 campaign contributions

4 Responses to “Thornton City Council returns the favor for union campaign contributions”