Redding CA City Council bans fireworks without a permit

Redding City Council changes fire code

By Record Searchlight staff
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
http://www.redding.com/news/2007/sep/05/redding-city-council-changes-fire-code/

The Redding City Council on Tuesday voted 3-2 to require fire sprinklers in town houses, ban fireworks without a permit and make other changes as part of adopting an updated state fire code.

Council member Patrick Jones voted no because he objected to changes in the fire code appeals process that would grant an appointed board of experts a final say over technical issues. Builders could still appeal to the council on policy fire code issues, under the changes.

Council member Ken Murray wanted to delay voting to give the public more time to discuss the proposed changes.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

public employee union membership up 106.4 percent.

There are a few facts the writer fails to point out. As for unions in the private sector the issue is unions trying to get their share of company profits in good times. The problem is when bad times happen the union costs stay high. Also when people start making over 70k a year and have 3x the health benefits as non union people its time to wake up and stop living in the early 1900's. Child labor and sweat shops now only exist legally in third world countries. Unions have outlived their true mission/usefulness and from the union members we have spoken to feel that their non-public unions are selling out to business owners anyway.

As for public employee unions, the solution is simple. They should be illegal and are the result of years of gutless politicians with no vision as to the effects of future tax liabilities they have placed on their grandchildren. There is a reason public employee union are growing. Its not need. Its greed. The bolded sections of the article are good reading. The rest is mostly pandering to private sector unions. Whats funny is even the pro private sector union member and leader realizes that public employee unions are out of control in terms of costs and influence.

Henry column: Unions, negotiations the American way
By LOIS HENRY, staff columnist | Saturday, Sep 1 2007
http://www.bakersfield.com/102/story/226422.html

Cover your ears. I'm about to commit Kern County heresy.

Labor unions are not the devil's spawn.

Unions have helped improve working conditions and wages for countless Americans in all walks of life.

Without unions, average workers would not enjoy the benefits of middle class life -- safe working conditions, health insurance, retirement, livable wages -- that most of us now take for granted.

Union members turn right around and spend those livable wages on (gasp!) living. Their money is pumped back into the community through mortgages, shoes, groceries, car payments, cell phones, dance lessons, home decorating -- did I mention shoes? -- and so on and so on. Why those socialist fiends!

No one bats a capitalistic eyelash when industry strives to get the best price for its products.

In fact, right here in Kern County there are several industry cooperatives that band together for just that purpose. Calcot and the Independent Oil Producer's Agency are two that come to mind. Cotton growers and oil producers pay dues to those associations that then help market the products for the best prices.

This is how Calcot touts its services on its Web site:

"If Calcot did not exist, cotton growers would have a far more difficult time getting a fair price for their crop, since they would be at the mercy of independent buyers."

Workers' products are their time and their skills. Unions help get a better price for both.

What could be more American than that?

And while many bemoan the political power some labor unions wield, it surely isn't more than that of say Castle & Cooke, Chevron, ConAgra, or, I don't know, Halliburton.

For those who want to limit labor unions' access to politicians (and we all know campaign contributions = access) I say, fine. Do it. But be fair and curtail industry just the same.

Yes, I know some union members don't want their dues supporting political causes or candidates espoused by the union leadership. Well, I don't want the money I spend on frozen broccoli or gasoline to go to some political causes or candidates either, but realistically, I don't have much control over that.

In the interest of full disclosure, I was the vice president of the Bakersfield Newspaper Guild, Local 202, here at The Californian for several years. Ten years ago, I moved into management and have, on several occasions, been at odds with that same union.

I've seen both sides and I don't believe unions are the enemy.

I was interested to see that despite national trends, unions are not on their deathbeds here in candy-apple red Kern County.

While membership has been declining steady across the country, down from 20.1 percent in 1983 to 12 percent in 2006, to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it's up locally.

Between 1996 and 2006, overall union membership in the Bakersfield metropolitan statistical area increased 82 percent, according to the Current Population Survey, a joint report put out by the U.S. Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics. During that same time frame, the total number of employees increased by 28.3 percent.

Though there was a healthy increase in union membership in the private sector, 56.8 percent, the majority of the increase was driven by public employee union membership, a whopping 106.4 percent.

That's a reflection of a similar whopping increase in public employment overall, 70.4 percent versus 18.2 percent in the private sector. That's another story.

Those numbers mean some public employee unions have gained strength and the scales have tipped heavily, perhaps too heavily, in their favor, especially in terms of benefits.

Kern County officials acknowledged to The Californian several years ago that it is cheaper to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in overtime to firefighters rather than hire much-needed extra hands largely because of the lucrative benefits firefighters enjoy. (This, by the way, is just one of the many reasons it's important for public employee salaries to be open to the public, as was recently affirmed by the California Supreme Court.) Not to mention all the municipalities now facing enormous unfunded liabilities because of generous retirement benefits promised to a variety of public employee unions in recent years.

Who's to blame for that? The unions? Or public officials who forgot to bring their backbone to the bargaining table and act on behalf of all their constituents, not just the few with potentially powerful campaign endorsements? But that's what negotiation is all about.

Happy Labor Day.

Lois Henry's column appears every Wednesday and Sunday. Comment on this column at http://people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/noholdsbarred or e-mail her at lhenry@bakersfield.com or call her at 395-7373.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™

California Vehicle code and ADA regulations re blocking driveways and sidewalks

This is for those of you than can't seem to figure out where to park your vehicles. Two places not to park them (even for a moment) is in or across a driveway (even the one in front of your house as that is city property) or across a sidewalk, which you also do not own even if in front of your house. And don't forget about the Americans With Disabilities Act enforcement as you (and the city of Lakewood) may find yourselves at the wrong end of a lawsuit where you will have to pay the handicapped persons legal bills! The Federal Dept. of Justice tends to take parking that blocks handicapped access more seriously than Lakewood does. See letters below CA vehicle code section.

CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE
CHAPTER 9. STOPPING, STANDING, AND PARKING sec.22500-22526

section 22500. No person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle
whether attended or unattended, except when necessary to avoid
conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a
peace officer or official traffic control device, in any of the
following places:

[inapplicable text]

(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus
engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load
or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant
to an ordinance.
In unincorporated territory, where the entrance of a private road
or driveway is not delineated by an opening in a curb or by other
curb construction, so much of the surface of the ground as is paved,
surfaced, or otherwise plainly marked by vehicle use as a private
road or driveway entrance, shall constitute a driveway.
(f) On any portion of a sidewalk, or with the body of the vehicle
extending over any portion of a sidewalk, except electric carts when
authorized by local ordinance, as specified in Section 21114.5.
Lights, mirrors, or devices that are required to be mounted upon a
vehicle under this code may extend from the body of the vehicle over
the sidewalk to a distance of not more than 10 inches.

[inapplicable text]

(l) In front of or upon that portion of a curb that has been cut
down, lowered, or constructed to provide wheelchair accessibility to
the sidewalk.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/foia/tal427.txt

DEC 3 1993

The Honorable Dennis DeConcini
United States Senator
40 North Center, Suite 110
Mesa, Arizona 85201

Dear Senator DeConcini:

This is in response to your recent letter on behalf of
your constituent, XX , who inquires whether there are
any Federal laws that make it illegal for his neighbors to
bloc sidewalks with their trash or cars. While the activities
of XX neighbors may violate State or local laws, there
are no Federal laws that directly outlaw such behavior by private
individuals. However, allowing public sidewalks to remain
blocked may constitute a violation of title 11 of the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

The ADA authorizes the Department of Justice to provide
technical assistance to individuals and entities with rights
or obligations under the Act. This letter provides informal
guidance to assist your constituent in understanding the ADA's
requirements. It does not, however, constitute a legal
interpretation and is not binding on the Department.

Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination against
qualified individuals with disabilities in all programs,
activities, and services provided by or on behalf of State and
local governments. With respect to your constituent's problem,
if a public entity has responsibility for, or authority over,
sidewalks or other public walkways, section 35.133 of the
enclosed title II regulation [reprinted below] requires that public entities must
maintain them in operable working condition. Such maintenance
may include the removal of cars, trash, or other objects blocking
the passage of persons using wheelchairs or other devices to
assist mobility.

The title II rule also requires that a public entity make
reasonable modifications to its programs, practices, or
procedures when " ... necessary to avoid discrimination an the
basis of disability., See section 35.130(b)(7) of the title II
rule. Under this provision, title II may also require the public
entity to modify its policies, practices, or procedures to ensure
that, aside from temporary and unavoidable situations, public
sidewalks are not blocked by cars, trash, or other impediments to
travel by wheelchair. [reprinted below]

Although, as noted above, there are no Federal laws that
directly prohibit individuals from blocking public sidewalks, you
may wish to suggest to your constituent that he contact the
appropriate local authorities to determine whether any State or
local laws directly prohibit such behavior. If such laws exist,
your constituent may wish to draw the situation to the attention
of the local enforcement agency.

I hope this information will be useful to you in responding
to your constituent.

Sincerely,
James P. Turner
Acting Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
November 15, 2001

The Honorable Joseph R. Pitts
Member, U.S. House of Representatives
Lancaster County Courthouse
50 North Duke Street
Lancaster, PA 17602

Dear Congressman Pitts:

This is in response to your letter on behalf of your constituent, xxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx, regarding whether sidewalks, and in particular curb ramps, in a residential development built in 1993 must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), if plans for the development were approved by local authorities in 1988. Please excuse our delay in responding.

[inapplicable text]

Existing sidewalks that are not otherwise being altered are subject to Section 35.149 of the title II regulation, which prohibits a public entity from denying the benefits of its programs, activities, and services to qualified individuals with disabilities because the entity's buildings or facilities are inaccessible to or unusable by individuals with disabilities. A public entity that has responsibility for, or authority over, sidewalks or other public walkways, must ensure that such sidewalks and walkways meet the program access requirement and, when viewed in their entirety, are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. This may require the public entity to install curb ramps on an existing sidewalk. In addition, a public entity is required to maintain sidewalks in operable working condition. See section 35.133 of the enclosed title II regulation. The only exception to this requirement permits isolated or temporary interruptions in operation when required for maintenance or repairs of the sidewalks. See section 35.133(b).

I hope this information will be useful to you in explaining the requirements of the ADA. You may wish to inform your constituent that further information is available through our Americans with Disabilities Act Information Line at 800-514-0301 (voice) or 800-514-0383 (TTY). Please do not hesitate to contact the Department if we may be of assistance in other matters.

Sincerely, Ralph F. Boyd, Jr. Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

28 CFR sec. 35.133 Maintenance of accessible features.

(a) A public entity shall maintain in operable working condition
those features of facilities and equipment that are required to be
readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities by the
Act or this part.
(b) This section does not prohibit isolated or temporary
interruptions in service or access due to maintenance or repairs.
(56 FR 35716, July 26, 1991, as amended by Order No. 1694-93, 58
FR 17521, Apr. 5, 1993)


28 CFR sec. § 35.130 General prohibitions against discrimination.

(b)(7) A public entity shall make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures when the modifications are necessary to avoid discrimination on the basis of disability, unless the public entity can demonstrate that making the modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the service, program, or activity.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™