Recent postings and updates

Click any link below to view

Nov 19

Ron Westerterp Death Notice Updated with Photo

Nov 21

Another CHP Family Member Passed Away

Nov 18

Obituary & photo added to Bob Ferry death notice





Today’s Date

Upcoming Events



Special Events

Click Icon to View



Retirements, meetings funerals and other scheduled events



Calendar

Click icon to view

Fill out this form

Then

click “send” button below

Click image to view CHP’s Facebook page

Sign up to receive update notices

 Marin Squad, 1933, SF Golden Gate Park

Submitted by Rich Simmons

Contact Us



Click Badge

To

SUBSCRIBE

 to CHP1010

Master Calendar

Support Your CHP Retiree Businesses

(Click on link)







Quick links



CHP Office Directory


Senior Discounts


Medicare


Zenith 12000


US Govt. Resources


Lists of California Newspapers & More


The CAHP

(Sign-in required)

Rest In Peace

Click name for details


Bob R. Goode–New

Ralph Anderson

Jeff Evans

Bob Montgomery

Bob Ferry

Ron Westerterp







Click icon above to Post Comments & Eulogies

Comments
Don't forget to check our "MASTER CALENDAR" from time-to-time
Please participate in our NEW poll--see below



Jimmy Jimenez

Eugene Espinola:Nov 22


John Russell: Nov 26


Cheryl Walker:  Dec 2


Matt Olson:  Dec 3


Margaret Klidy:  Dec 10


Mike Kelly:  Jan 17


Kurt Heuer/Randy Rudd

Jeff Tempest: Jan 31



Retirement Flyers

Click icon for daily

CHP-related News Stories

Survey Results


Recently CHP1010 has been made aware of some discontent among retirees with respect to left-leaning politicians the Board of Directors endorses. Part of the blame, some say, points to the retirees themselves because they've become apathetic and don't vote in large numbers and, moreover, don't voice their concerns to representatives.


Question: DO YOU SUPPORT THE CAHP'S ENDORSEMENT OF LEFT-LEANING POLITICIANS?

Yes

11.46% 11


No

88.54% 85


Don't really care. The Board of Directors pay no attention to CHP retirees

5.21% 5

Total Respondents: 96  



Comments(45)


11/21/2014 10:45 AM Some times. I always make my own choices.


11/21/2014 10:45 AM

I understand the rationale behind the political endorsements, but I don't like the people the CAHP endorses, nor do I like my dues money going towards those endorsements. In this day and age it isn't always possible, but I feel that the CAHP should be neutral in all political aspects. When you lay down with dogs, you get fleas, pure and simple. I don't really care for the term "left leaning" because the "far right" has some wackos too.


11/20/2014 10:38 AM

sometimes the person endorsed by the association is good for the rank and file, but not necessarily good for us as a tax payer.


11/20/2014 9:58 AM

Surveys are sent to all candidates that ask for the CAHP endorsements. The answers that are received from the questionnaire determines the enforcement as well as their past voting record.


11/20/2014 9:56 AM

Do any conservative politicians remain in California? Seems few can get elected these days.


11/20/2014 9:36 AM

I don't know enough about it to vote. I don't even know who my rep. is. But then I've only been retired 31 years next month. I would think voting would be done for the benefit of the retired and not for politics.


11/20/2014 9:35 AM

You seem to be trying to stay politically correct. We need to keep what was given to us when we retired. Your salary goes up each year,or when promoted.


11/20/2014 9:30 AM

I live in Florida and cannot vote in CA elections.


11/20/2014 9:23 AM

Seems like once you retire it's like you've died anyway


11/20/2014 9:23 AM

Can't say, I do... !


11/20/2014 8:55 AM

There are other reasons for the CAHP to exist besides just wages and benefits, and many of our members are not supporters of liberal issues. Years ago the CAHP's Board considered law and order and public safety history of politicians before deciding to give endorsements and financial assistance to candidates. Today our State is faced with failed social experiments damaging our quality of life proposed and passed by liberal legislators our Board continues to support. Those directors should be consulting or polling the members about what legislative issues are most important when deciding who to endorse. The friends of the CHP are often also friend's of the CAHP, especially when they are considering public safety measures. The Board's support of politicians like Kamela Harris, who refused to fight for the death penalty in a cop killer case when she was DA in SF, is sorely misplaced.


11/20/2014 8:39 AM

I would like the Board to justify their political left leaning stance for candidates they are asking us to support. It is my understanding, as was told to me, the Board sends out a survey to the candidates asking them to answer questions regarding their political position on many factors important to the CHP (CAHP), work conditions, pay, benefits, Peace Officer rights, etc. Some candidates do not return the survey. I have not personally seen the questions on this survey, however, I would like the Board to consider more transparency justifying their endorsement. If the Board would discuss these issues with their membership more thoroughly I think the membership would be less apathetic. Lastly, retirees may disagree with me but the Association represents all of it's membership, however it will not be on equal footing between active employees and retirees, nor should it be. The Association is more vocal for the current employees still on the job as compared to retirees who have completed their careers and have less determination on acquiring more benefits. Personally, I have always felt "torn" between a liberal-leaning candidates' overall beliefs and their commitment to the CHP, it's goals, and support to Officers on the road. I may not agree with their political philosophy but the idea of fair, competitive pay and benefits will always be a compelling point to consider when going to the voting booth.


11/20/2014 8:29 AM

First of all the primary concern of the Board is to look at what is best for rank and file. Secondly the historical fact is these Left-Leaning Politicians are the ones that have consistently approved better benefits. Those retirees that became Rep. politicians did not even support us. And I am a life long Rep.


11/20/2014 8:18 AM

We all need to become better informed. Listen to what is being said by ALL the candidates, not just a few "well know or popular" ones and don't be swayed by our "Friends" al ready in office..


11/20/2014 8:17 AM

It does bother me that for many years, the Assn. has endorsed people who are in favor of slowly taking our country down. If you study the reason for this, you find that it was simply to obtain raises and benefits for the active members. I can't think of any benefit that I have received via the Assn. in the 20 years I have been retired.


11/20/2014 8:16 AM

The Board needs to wake up! By endorsing these morons, they are helping to destroy a once great state. Start polling the members BEFORE you endorse.


11/20/2014 8:12 AM

I was asked a lot of things when I came on the job, one thing I was never asked is how I voted, or if I was liberal or conservative. To talk in generalities about someone in the profession and how they "should be" is ridiculous. Also, don't forget, we're retired. We are in the hands of CALPERS. We don't receive anything from the department anymore. The only vote we are entitled to is a retired director rep. Not happy? You should join one of the many retirement groups who look out for your interests, but of course that will cost you more than what you pay now. Too much bitterness.


11/20/2014 7:58 AM

The Board votes primarily without input from membership. Been This way since the inception/union! It's an insult to me every time I see the board has endorsed any politician - they do not represent me.


11/20/2014 7:50 AM

I'm registered and vote as an independent. I do not vote blind ... that is, I read the qualifications of each candidate, and the idea(s) behind every measure. I believe the CAHP perpetuates politics as usual' by endorsement of those who promise to support the CAHP's perceived needs ... with little or no regard for the needs of the retired membership.

11/20/2014 6:28 AM


What ever happened to "Core Values?"

11/20/2014 6:11 AM This is nothing new, however; the Assn's enforcement of lefties is a double-edged sword, meant to ensure the best benefits for rank and file members while having to sleep with the enemy. Liberal politicians, from the Gov. on down, are ruining this great state. It is time the Assn. shifted gears back to more conservative candidates.


11/20/2014 5:46 AM

The problem I see is in California the only people running are left leaning people, that way the state is in such the mess it is in.


11/20/2014 5:23 AM

How can a union representing members of one of the most respected law enforcement agencies in the country endorse politicians who openly urge multitudes to come to this country ILLEGALLY? The governor of a state already in financial difficulty urging millions to come ILLEGALLY and further drain the state coffers is strictly a political move to garner more votes for his political party, not to mention being fiscally irresponsible. I realize the CAHP has a responsibility to gain or maintain benefits for members, but at what cost? Sometimes doing the right thing must be the first order of business. Doing the right thing when nobody is looking is called integrity; doing the wrong thing with everybody watching is called "not too smart". Most Americans know California from who they see on TV, namely Pelosi, Feinstein, Boxer, Waters, and Brown. Not a whole lot more needs to be said. Politicians of that ilk are slowly but surely destroying California. No, I do not vote in California elections. I moved out of state in 2002 when I retired because I saw the political path California was taking and chose another route. Before spending members' money endorsing candidates maybe it should be decided by the members IF and WHO will be backed. Perhaps NO endorsements should be the new order of the day.


11/20/2014 4:32 AM

I live out of state and cannot remember the last time a ballot was received.


11/20/2014 4:20 AM

I was an alternate CAHP Rep. and was at a meeting where our legislative representative explained that their only issue was CHP benefits. The CAHP needs to modify their policy to be more like doctor's: "Do no harm".


11/20/2014 3:16 AM

While not directly, it gives the perception that the CAHP is a left-leaning organization, and by all the folks I have met on the job, that is not the case at all. The BOD should reflect the views of their constituents--not their own.


11/20/2014 12:38 AM

I do not vote for liberals due to the fact that they only want the associations logo, backing and money showing all their endorsements. And yes, during my career I took a lot of things from liberals just because they were willing to give them to me. Usually, if the association sends out a ballot requesting votes for certain politicians, I use it to make sure I vote the other way. You know they will not back conservatives.


11/20/2014 12:27 AM

"Left Leaning" is a pretty broad term. Our support should go to politicians who will work for the principles a majority of the membership believes in, not just those who will give us a raise. A raise is not going to do much good if our country keeps going down a path of socialism and big government.


11/19/2014 11:01 PM

We would be better off without the left


11/19/2014 10:31 PM

AS active duty Officers, we enjoyed the pay raises and benefits obtained for us by the CAHP. As Retirees, we should support the current active duty Officers in maintaining and surpassing the gains achieved in the past. If this means supporting the CAHP's endorsements of "left- leaning politicians" for the betterment of our members, I for one can live with it. Jim Duron Ret#10566


11/19/2014 9:57 PM

It's all about benefits! It has been that way for years and years! Democrats give us benefits, Republicans give us laws!!


11/19/2014 9:16 PM

Pay attention to what left-leaning politics have done to this state (California) and our Nation.


11/19/2014 9:03 PM

Retirees are seemingly left out in the cold. Maybe that's why some are apathetic re-voting, etc. Our annual COLA is peanuts. After a very few short years our hard earned pension has dipped below what is manageable. Most of us do not qualify for social security, and the state legislature, which our board endorses, doesn't care either. An annual 2% COLA is inadequate. The items that are not included in the COLA, i.e. the cost of gasoline and groceries, should be - as far as collective bargaining is concerned. The active officers are more concerned with how many toys they have than they are looking to the future. I was never one of those, and began investing in a 401k and 457DCP as soon as it became available to do so. I've always said that the basic cop on the street is a hard conservative. But when it comes to money they are suddenly liberal. Which is it folks?


11/19/2014 9:01 PM

Their decisions on who to support are apparently made with our salary and benefits in mind


11/19/2014 8:48 PM

First - I don't like the question is worded. I came over with the State Police merger. Back in the early 1980s, this same question came up from active members in CSP Assoc concerning adding CSP peace officer deaths to death penalty. President Len Delaney (ask Jon Hamm about Len) said there are enough law and order types & Republicans. Association will support the legislation, but Democrats will increase pay and benefits - paycheck issues. His initial answer was "Is the death penalty going to put food on your survivors table, keep a roof over their heads. Ray Meyer, CHP Sgt Ret, #14041,


11/19/2014 8:42 PM

Left leaners don't seem to support law enforcement much. Why should they be supported??


11/19/2014 8:33 PM

The CAHP must strike a balance between "what's in it for me" and the Patrol's role in providing public safety. The liberal left will always be willing to give unions what they want for votes, but that does not mean the Association must sell it's soul to stand up for it's members. Pushing Gov Davis for the 90% retirement certainly benefited numerous members, but logically with any understanding of economics, you would have to know in the long term that this was not a responsible fiduciary decision. As a result, that action has put the retirement of far more members, as well as local agencies in jeopardy, as well as drawing public disdain upon our retirees. These comments are not made to demean the CAHP, but to encourage them to measure the long term impacts of their PAC activities.


11/19/2014 8:24 PM

Bet over it, Republicans hate unions, Democrats love them, did you ever get a pay raise from Reagan, NO


11/19/2014 8:04 PM

The people who make the decisions to support the left leaning politicians pay no attention to rank and file or retirees. Nor do they respond to questions when asked. They are in their own little world.


11/19/2014 7:59 PM

Their objective is to collectively bargain for the best interests of the members. If your only beef is who they endorse and not with your retirement or medical I don't see what the problem is. I bet ½ of the membership are registered democrats anyway.


11/19/2014 7:47 PM

Want support of moderates from either party. I do not support left-leaning politicians any more than I support right-leaning politicians. I spent 8 years working for a CA state senator and can assure you that extremism on other side produces nothing but gridlock and we the people suffer. Our country is in sad shape, not because of the people, but because of the extremist in BOTH parties.


11/19/2014 7:46 PM

If you want pay and benefits it's necessary. From a right wing conservative who was an area rep for over 20 years and a retiree rep until I left California. Jim Metcalfe 5950r Brookings, Oregon.


11/19/2014 7:44 PM

I no longer live in California and don't vote there but the support of left leaning politicians is a problem for CHP Retirees as they make the laws affecting us.


11/19/2014 6:43 PM

I understand why they do it but it still pisses me off.


11/19/2014 6:39 PM

This is a very slanted survey. That "left Leaning" title shows a bias. Cops always bite the hand that feeds them. The right has always been skimpy towards us. Dalsafety is a band of whining malcontents.