Statement of Anthony Wong

June 2, 2010

Good evening. I am shocked by the statements made at the last city council meeting on May 19, and I would like to set the record straight.

I am proud of my 17 years of service to the people of Monterey Park. Before being elected to the city council, I was President of the Monterey Park Lions Club and served on the Economic Development Advisory Committee. I would never knowingly violate the trust that the people of Monterey Park have given to me.

I have also been in the real estate brokerage business as the owner of Concord Realty for over thirty years. In January 2009, I agreed to represent a tenant named King Media Group, who was searching to expand its business. After showing them sites at several other shopping centers, they decided that they liked the Atlantic Times Inflatable Water Slide Square best. If a lease were to be consolidated, there would be a brokerage fee of 4% to be shared by the listing agent, BP International, the agent of the Landlord, and Concord Realty, the agent of the tenant. The only vote that I have participated in on the Atlantic Times Square Project was 3 years ago, before I represented King Media Group.

On May 19, the 24 Hour Fitness matter was put on the city council agenda. Because the matter pertained to the Atlantic Times Square and the lease was pending, I abstained from voting.

However, the King Media lease has not been consummated and Concord Realty has not received a brokerage fee. I have also decided to resign from representing the tenant, so I will never receive a brokerage fee.

With regard to the Town Center project on Garvey and Garfield, I represented the buyer of a property on Garfield and Emerson in Monterey Park, where escrow closed 2 % years ago, in September 2007. One of the sellers of that property was also a partner of Magnus Sunhill, which was developing the Town Center project on Garvey-Garfield. I disclosed this relationship with the then-legal counsel in the city of Monterey Park, and have been abstaining from all discussions concerning the Town Center project, until recently when I did not need to abstain any longer because the statute of limitations had passed.

As a city councilmember, I have done my best to disclose all relationships and to abstain from any votes where there is a potential conflict of interest.

With regard to the other allegations, I feel they are not only wrong, but personal and highly political accusations, and I will not comment on them.

Monterey Park is facing difficult economic times. I hope that my colleagues on this council will focus on what’s important, and that is, improving our city’s financial situation so that we can keep city employees in their jobs and continue to provide our residents the kind of services they deserve.

CITY OF MONTEREY PARK EMPLOYEES TELL THE REAL STORY OF LABOR DISPUTES!

Statement Date May 19

Negotiations between Miscellaneous Employees and the City, to assist with the budget deficit, have met with continuous roadblocks. The Miscellaneous Employees of Monterey Park have offered several ways by which the City could save hundreds of thousands of dollars and each time the City Council refused them. In addition, the Council hired a well known experienced Interim City Manager to assist with solutions and they voted against his proposals. The inability of Council to make a decision and consider the alternatives put before them has cost the city a larger deficit.

The Council has said repeatedly that layoffs would be a last resort but they have continually placed the options of layoffs, job cuts and furloughs at the forefront. Over the last several months, Council Members have repeatedly said layoffs can be minimized if labor groups agree to furloughs and delay the cost of living pay increases. The continued attack on city personnel to reduce staff and the prolonged lack of decisions has deteriorated morale and continued the reduction of the city coffers.

To assist the City in obtaining a balanced budget, and to the extent possible prevent the layoff of represented employees, the city and the Miscellaneous Employees proposed a furlough representing a 10% reduction in pay for all represented employees. In addition to the furloughs, the Union Members voted to defer the agreed upon salary increase scheduled for July 2010, and January 2011, per the 2007-2011 MOU, for a year. At the time salary increases were negotiated the employees agreed to take their increase in 6 month intervals as a way of helping the city by allowing them to earn interest on the 6 months, rather than pay the entire increase at once.

Another option that would have saved thousands of dollars was early retirement packages for positions close to retirement age; this was also met with indecision.

Currently, employees pay 5.25% of their salary towards the employee-a contribution to CalPERS, with an additional 1.3% employee payment by the employees to begin July 2010.

Approximately 15 years ago the Miscellaneous Employees agreed to work with the City Manager to increase the cities Reserve balance so the city would have a healthy reserve balance. To do this the Miscellaneous Employees took several days of furlough on two separate occasions enabling the City to place additional funds into their reserves. In addition, the employees agreed to take small pay increases until that balance grew stronger. It now stands at $17 million; healthier than most surrounding cities of comparable size.

Miscellaneous Employees continue to negotiate in “good faith”, with the goal of preserving city services, personnel and the city budget.

TOM REICHHARDT, President of the Miscellaneous Employees (SEIU 721) of Monterey Park protests the layoffs,  “Each of these layoffs represents a city service–a park, a library, a public safety service that taxpayers pay for.”

He urged the city to adopt a budget plan crafted by the City Manager last week. That plan does not include layoffs and instead calls for, among other things, a 10% reduction/contribution in salary from police and fire association members.

“We’ve proposed a balanced budget without layoffs, and that’s what we’re still supporting.” REICHHARDT said. “We’ve come a long way, but we’re working to wind up with a budget that has no cuts to vital services, which also means no layoffs.” Over the last several months, Council Members have repeatedly said layoffs can be minimized if labor groups agree to furloughs and delay of cost of living pay increase. SEIU 721 Members agreed to these concessions in a March 2010 vote.

“We have made offers and the elected officials have refused! ”