New perchlorate rules go into effect 10/19/07

http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_perch21.3e7dd56.html#
10:23 AM PDT on Friday, September 21, 2007
By DAVID DANELSKI
The Press-Enterprise

New state regulations setting a legal limit for the chemical perchlorate in public drinking water will go into effect Oct. 19, forcing millions of dollars in cleanup efforts.

The rule became official after it passed the scrutiny of the state Office of Administrative Law and was signed Wednesday by California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, said a spokeswoman for Bowen's office.

The rule allows no more than 6 parts perchlorate per billion parts of tap water.

Perchlorate is a chemical used in rocket fuel, fireworks and other explosives. Although it has contaminated dozens of Inland wells, most area water providers already meet the new state standard.

But one San Bernardino-area water district faces about $30 million in cleanup costs.

Water delivered to East Valley Water District customers this year averaged slightly more than the new limit. Perchlorate concentrations have reached as high as 8.6 parts per billion, district officials said last month.

The district provides water to about 70,000 people in eastern San Bernardino, Highland and unincorporated areas nearby.

Ron Buchwald, the district's engineer, said last month that East Valley will seek state and federal grants to help pay for removing perchlorate from its water supplies.

Buchwald could not be reached Thursday for comment.

The state regulations require the district to warn customers about the potential health effects of consuming perchlorate.

The chemical can disrupt the thyroid gland's ability to absorb iodide and make hormones that guide brain and nerve development of fetuses and babies. The hormones also control metabolism.

Pregnant women and iodide-deficient women are more vulnerable to the chemical's ill effects, studies have found.

Defense industries, fireworks factories, fertilizers and other sources have been blamed for Inland perchlorate contamination. Fertilizer is the suspected source in the Highland area.


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

Seaside CA residents want fireworks ban

Seaside residents split on fireworks ban
Some worry about noise, others about loss of revenue for nonprofits
By ANDRE BRISCOE
Herald Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 09/14/2007 01:40:45 AM PDT
http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_6891470?nclick_check=1

Dog owners in Seaside who complain that they have to sedate their pets on the Fourth of July may just have to keep a few bottles of Puppy Prozac handy.

Residents who say their neighborhoods sound like wars zones come Independence Day pleaded with the City Council on Thursday to ban "safe and sane" fireworks.

But a majority of attendees at the special council session expressed support for continuing the traditional fireworks sales, saying a ban on legal fireworks would hurt nonprofits that depend on the revenue generated from the yearly sales.

"I'm not really sure that banning fireworks is going to solve the problem. I think there are a lot of things we need to talk about before we ban fireworks," said Mayor Ralph Rubio. "We need to talk to neighborhoods, we need to talk to businesses. There have got to be ways to keep (safe and sane fireworks) and keep the city safe and keep it clean. Mostly, what we are concerned about are the things that fly and the things that go boom."

Fireworks opponents hoped a ban on legal fireworks would discourage the use of illegal ones.

Nine-year resident Dwight Marshall said the noise was so bad that he had to leave town for at least four days over July 4.

"If we don't do something, it's going to be a more serious problems every year," he said. "You're going to lose people who are going to leave the town of Seaside. It's not just the Fourth of July, but at least a month before and a month after, you've got explosions
Advertisement
going off all over the place."

The city has allowed the sale of safe and sane fireworks for more than 40 years, and sales are conducted by church organizations and service clubs. Marina, Greenfield, Gonzales and Soledad also allow the sale of the safe and sane fireworks, which don't shoot up in the air or cause explosions.

Mel Mason, former president of the Monterey Peninsula branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said in a statement sent to the council that banning illegal fireworks would not curtail their use.

"The immediate beneficiaries (of safe and sane fireworks) are the many community-based organizations that serve youth," Mason said. "Ultimately, it is our youth who benefit from these yearly sales, through organizations that are generally volunteer-run, without agency type infrastructure, financially beleaguered and always struggling to work miracles without a magic wand."

Most who support a fireworks ban said it is the best way to keep the influx of illegal fireworks out of the city.

"I understand safe and sane fireworks, but I'm talking about pyrotechnics," said five-year resident Murray Macdonald. "The stuff is going off so loud that the foundation of my house shakes. I have to sedate my dog. I would like to see the work of the nonprofits continue, but if the legal fireworks can't be distinguished from the illegal fireworks, there should be a zero-tolerance policy."

La Bridga Adams suggested that a task force be created to search out illegal fireworks so the sale of legal fireworks could continue.

"My concern is that these children who work in this community suffer for something that the bad guys are doing," she said.

City staff members will come back to the council with alternative suggestions to banning legal fireworks at a future meeting.

Andre Briscoe can be reached at 646-4436 or abriscoe@montereyherald.com.

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

Pockets of Success...mixed with...

We applaud the fact that the old Macy's (which has been empty for over a year) is now supposedly going to be occupied by a new Costco in the Fall of 2008. Obviously some of the effort was made by Macerich, the owner of the Lakewood Center Mall. We are also happy to see the new Tesco "Fresh and Easy" market and the Rite Aid (finally) pony up some money to match the upgraded exteriors that all the other retailers completed in 2006 at South St. and Woodruff Ave.[see related story here ]

Of course for every success in Lakewood there is a failure. Take a look at Bellflower Blvd. and South St. Two gas stations. They are ok but the small strip mall with the closed out comic book store (vacant since 2006) and the dive "bar" (still occupied unfortunately) are starting to look tattered. Especially the vacant comic book store. "Joe's Sushi" just down the street (5607 South Street, Lakewood, CA 90713) dressed up part of the strip mall on South St. (the east end of the intersection) but we suspect Joes may not last too long due to the poor location (not in Lakewood Center "Restaurant Row") and with it most of the improvements may fade.

The biggest eyesore is the "Itana Designs" "warehouse" that is never open and has no customers. It used to be an old Vons which closed at least 8 years ago (when the Pavillions opened at South and Woodruff). Very old 1950's style building which is likely a fire hazard. Apparently the city cant get anyone in there or force Itana to spruce up the site. I guess some incentives will need to be offered or a fire lit under the leasing agent, whom LAAG contacted, without a reply. Likely not a site high on their list. Most likely a "second tier" or "distressed property" from the looks of all the leasing signs. The whole North West corner of Bellflower Blvd. and South St. is going down hill fast due to the lack of good tenants in that center and a strong anchor tenant. The city needs to act now.

Below is our email to the property broker at www.Grubb-Ellis.com about the status. There was no reply of course. Feel free to contact them. The url in the email has all the specifics on the location.

Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:35:12 -0700
To: max.franco@Grubb-Ellis.com
From: Lakewood Accountability Action Group | LAAG
Subject: south and belflower in lkwd

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/LoopLink/Profile/Profile.aspx?LL=true&LID=14847969&STID=grubb

so what is going on with this place. Are you leasing the entire shopping center? This whole shopping center needs to be rehabbed. What is the city doing to help move the property?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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

Fundraising Trumps All

These cities will never give into the smoke and fire peddlers and the groups that pander to them. AS LAAG has already demonstrated using LA Co. Fire Dept statistics, legal fireworks increases the use of illegal fireworks. So the issue is simple. Outlaw all personal fireworks and help the booster groups get money some other way as we have outlined over and over again.

Monday, September 17, 2007
Garden Grove to revisit fireworks after tragedy
City Council plans to talk about putting ban on November 2008 ballot.
By DEEPA BHARATH
The Orange County Register

GARDEN GROVE – Joshua Matua had just started to doze off the night of July 4 when a lighted skyrocket landed on his house's shake roof.

It all happened very quickly after that. Black smoke billowed and orange flames shot skyward.

Matua and his friend, who owns the house on Mac Street, were the only ones in the house that night. Matua's girlfriend and 5-month-old son were not there, he said.

The four-bedroom house was a total loss and is uninhabitable. Matua and his family lost all of their possessions and moved to a studio apartment in Westminster.

“It's very hard,” said Matua, 37, manager of a sports bar in Anaheim. “I cry every day partly because of how my life has changed, but also because me and my friends had so many memories in that house.”

The local AARP chapter, which has been vocal in its opposition of fireworks, will host a fundraiser today for Matua and his family at the Community Meeting Center. Garden Grove is one of five Orange County cities that allow state-designated “safe and sane” fireworks during the Independence Day holiday. Proceeds from the White Elephant Sale will go toward helping Matua and his friend rebuild the house and help Matua's family buy everyday items such as clothes to baby necessities.

In the meantime, Garden Grove council members say the July 4 fire has prompted them to reconsider putting a fireworks ban on the November 2008 ballot.

For years, the issue has divided the community into those who want to do away with fireworks altogether and the booster clubs and nonprofits that want to raise money for their respective causes through the sale of fireworks – a big moneymaker for these groups.

Those who support fireworks say problems such as fires and injuries are usually caused by illegal fireworks, not the legal ones they sell at the stands.

A majority of the City Council has always supported keeping fireworks in Garden Grove, although council members this year imposed $1,000 fines on those shooting off illegal fireworks.

Councilman Mark Rosen said the July 4 incident doesn't change his view on fireworks.

“But it's a tremendous tragedy for this family and something that happened as a direct result of fireworks,” he said. “I think the time has come for our residents to have a say on the matter.”

A motion last year by former Councilman Harry Krebs to put the issue on the ballot fizzled.

Sharon Tanihara, a Garden Grove resident and AARP member, said she has been coming to council meetings to protest fireworks for the last four years because she was afraid of people losing their homes or their lives in fireworks-related fires. “Our benefit for the Matua family will hopefully help raise awareness in the community about fireworks and why they should be banned,” she said.

Meanwhile, Matua says it's going to take at least a year to fix up the burned house. Walking through the barely standing structure, Matua sighed as he looked at loose wires hanging from the ceiling, hardwood floors blackened by ash and soot and a murky pool, which had been the site of many a party and barbecue.

“I ran out with the clothes on my back,” he said, glancing at the borrowed shoes he still wears. “All my possessions are gone. But I'm thankful I still have the people I love.”

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

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™

State of the City hoopla

LAAG told the County of LA essentially the same thing regarding its own "state of the county" luncheon Nov 1. Why should non profit organizations (like LAAG) and taxpayers in the city be forced to pay to hear politicians speak about issues that should be fully discussed and detailed on their website? The City of Lakewood (although not a charter city like Long Beach) needs to take note and end this silly luncheon. Much better to raise money with firework sales (just kidding about the fireworks!!).

Mayor To End State Of City Luncheon
http://www.gazettes.com/stateofthecity08302007.html
By Harry Saltzgaver
Executive Editor

There will be a State of the City message next January and in every January until and unless the city Charter changes.

But that message probably won’t be delivered at a luncheon sponsored by the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce after next year. Mayor Bob Foster has told the Chamber that he doesn’t believe anyone should receive a financial benefit for a speech delivered to fulfill a requirement of the Charter.

Becki Ames, Foster’s chief of staff, said last week that the mayor wouldn’t participate in a State of the City luncheon after 2008. Randy Gordon, Chamber president and CEO, said Tuesday that he and Chamber board members had met with Foster last month, but hadn’t resolved all he issues.

“After we met with the mayor in late July, we knew it (2009) most likely wasn’t going to happen, but it wasn’t a done deal,” Gordon said. “We knew this was coming because of the mayor’s philosophy. But we were leaving it up to him.”

Foster gave notice last year that he wasn’t comfortable with the format of a luncheon raising money for the Chamber, and asked the group to donate money to three nonprofit groups from part of the proceeds. The Chamber gave $5,000 to each of the groups for a total of $15,000, and Gordon said he expects to give away significantly more after the January 2008 event.

“We’re still negotiating what we are going to give to nonprofits, but it is going to be substantially more,” he said. “We want to do that, especially if it is the last one.”

Foster was on vacation and unavailable for comment.

Since the early 1990s, the Chamber has sponsored a lunch with the State of the City speech as its centerpiece. During former Mayor Beverly O’Neill’s tenure, the luncheon became a must-attend event, drawing up to 1,500 people.

When the City Charter was amended in 1988 to create the position of a fulltime mayor, a section was added requiring a state of the city message similar to the State of the Union required of the president:

“On or before the 15th day of January of each year, the Mayor shall communicate by message to the City Council a statement of the conditions and affairs of the City, and make recommendations on such matters as the Mayor may deem expedient and proper.”

But, according to City Attorney Robert Shannon, there is no requirement that the message to the council be made in a speech, or even made public.

Before O’Neill’s term in office, mayors presented the speech to the council, typically at the second City Council meeting of the year. The Chamber first started hosting a lunch to give the mayor a chance to give the message to the public when Tom Clark was in office, according to Randy Gordon, Chamber president and CEO.

In O’Neill’s last year in office, the State of the City netted about $100,000 after expenses, Gordon said. That included a major sponsorship and corporate tables going for as much as $1,895. Individual tickets were $45, which about covered the cost of the meal, Gordon said.

But the Chamber has become increasingly political in recent years, endorsing candidates and providing money through a separate Chamber Political Action Committee. The Chamber has sued the city regarding campaign finance laws and mounted petition drives against City Council action on issues including a “Labor Peace Agreement” for city hotels and a ban on big box stores.

Several council members, most notably Seventh District Councilwoman Tonia Reyes Uranga (whom the Chamber opposed in the last municipal election), have complained that the city government was supporting a group that apparently opposed city policies.

Foster, who received the Chamber endorsement in the last election, had not made that fact an issue.

Instead, his emphasis has been to find a way that no individual group benefited from the Charter-mandated message.

Ironically, the Long Beach Chamber will sponsor its first “State of the County” luncheon this November, featuring a speech from Fourth District Supervisor Don Knabe. But that event was not planned in response to the pending demise of the State of the City luncheon.

“It, frankly was something we should have done a long time ago,” Grodon said. “Long Beach is the largest city in Supervisor Knabe’s district by far.

“You aren’t going to replace a $100,000 or $125,000 hole in your budget overnight. But we’ll do some other, smaller events to take up the slack.”

The Chamber’s State of the County lunch is set for Nov. 1. For more information, go to www.lbchamber.com.

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

letter to City Council re RV/Trailer private property parking code revisions

Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:02:06 -0700

To: "Todd Rogers, City Council" , , "Joe Esquivel, City Council" , , "Larry Van Nostran, city council" , , "Steve Croft, city council" , , "Diane DuBois, City Council" , "Howard Chambers, City Mgr" , "Jack Gonsalves Dir. Comm. Dev." , "Lakewood Service Requests"

From: Lakewood Accountability Action Group | LAAG

Subject: RV/Trailer private property parking code revisions

Dear Councilman Rogers:

I wanted to summarize my thoughts in a letter rather than taking up more time in the 8/28/07 city hearings. First after volunteering I was rather disheartened by the fact that I was not asked to participate on the 10 member focus group which claimed to be balanced. It sure appears that the RV owners carried the day there as anticipated. Again I will reassert from my May 2007 letter that it does appear that the Council is capitulating on the reform of the code as to the private property parking issues, which LAAG feels will likely result in further relaxations of the existing code not recommended by the Planning Commission and which will have the effect of nullifying the November 2006 election results.

For brevity I am only going to address the “site plan” number 4 schematics as all the properties in my area have detached rear two car garages. I am also not going to repeat all the information in our May 2007 letter. Unfortunately most the items I mentioned in that letter were not addressed and will likely come to pass as issues facing a future council.

1. For the most part, you are throwing years of established code precedent out the window by allowing garages to be totally blocked for months if not years on end by huge trailers and motor homes (RV’s). Now the car(s) that could have gone in the garage will have to be parked in front of my house as most of my neighbors have too many vehicles. The city needs to address this issue. How is that fair that your neighbor uses up all his parking with an RV then takes up your street parking?

2. There is no rational basis for allowing RV’s to creep beyond the front of the house. My garage to the front of my house is 51 feet. I don’t know of any RV’s or trailers longer than 50 feet. Allowing the RV to come within 16’ of the sidewalk is silly and again has no rational basis. You are only creating another 5 feet of storage and ruining the look of the houses as you look down the street. You are also creating sight restrictions when backing out. If children are playing on an adjoining lawn you will not be able to see them until its too late. The 5 foot vision triangle should run from the front of the house as well. If the RV’s are even with the houses this blight is reduced. The rule should be that the RV cannot protrude beyond the house.

3. The blight effect would be further reduced by requiring at least a 6 foot fence to run across the entire driveway even with the front of the house. If you make the RV jut out beyond the house the fence becomes a bigger problem. The fence is needed to keep animals and small children out from the underside and backside of the motor home and to block the view of all clutter usually associated with motor homes and their owners who are usually working on them. Also most people that own motor homes think theirs looks great. Most don’t. I think a painted solid fence is better to look at especially with most run down RV’s in Lakewood. It would make the sore thumb blend in better. I also see no rational basis for making a distinction on requiring a corner lot to be fenced. Looking at the front of an RV is just as bad as the side. Also just because more people see it from the street on a corner lot makes my point. If its ugly on the corner its still ugly right in front on my house, on a corner or not. Also why a distinction between campers and RV’s. This is nonsense hair splitting to appease some silent minority.

4. Fire and access issues. How you can park a 12’ high 40 foot long motor home between two homes with barely a few feet either side of it and not think that it is going to hinder firefighters access to either property is ludicrous. In addition most of these RVs have huge fuel tanks and propane tanks which could explode in a fire. Also the more fact that you are wedging this huge plastic coated structure in between two homes is increasing the chance that one house fire will also ignite the adjoining house. I would take that lawsuit against the city especially in light of the fact that it is such an obvious problem. Apparently the firefighters union nixed the Edison right of way RV parking plans with a bogus fire code “revision” but have green lighted (or not addressed) this private property issue. Politics and fire. What a mixture.

5. CEQA The “aesthetics” part of CEQA is a big issue here. I think if this ordinance gets too liberal it is going to be subject to a CEQA challenge. So the existing negative EIR could be called into question as it was done for the changes the Planning Commission envisioned which I don’t see being adopted without significant relaxations affecting aesthetics. It appears here that the Planning Commission recommendations were essentially trashed on key provisions the pro RV lobby wanted and that what ever input the “anti-RV” contingent of 5 citizens, it could not have had much to do with improving aesthetics.

This committee is nothing but a capitulation to the RV owners and has thrown aesthetics out the window. The city is on its way to becoming Cudahy or some other city with low property values. This is how it starts. The November 2006 election results are hereby officially nullified. The voters were successful in moving the blight 20 feet.

The city also has no provisions for the total number of RV’s or vehicles that can be stored on or of the property, their degree of repair or tattered appearance or any method for homeowners to challenge the blight created by a neighbor. Given the enforcement efforts to fix blighted homes so far I see things getting much worse under the “new” “enlightened” code.

Sincerely,

Lakewood Accountability Action Group

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

do away with the state Legislature..not a bad idea

LAAG has said this before. With the initiative process who needs the state legislature? What have they done for you lately (by "you" I mean taxpayers not govt. employees)? I really dont think we would miss them. I dont totally agree with the writer below that the handful of California Republicans are just in this for themselves and did not help by not "fixing" the budget. Sen. McClintock proposed fixes. How could he get them through. Would the spendaholics ever vote for them? No. The state Republicans are in much worse a position that the Congressional Dems were before Nov 06 when the Republicans controlled congress. When you are in the minority all you can do is throw stones. You cant set the agenda.

One way to do away with the current state legislature is make sure you dont vote for an incumbent in 08. That works. Looks like that may happen at the national level.


We should just do away with the state Legislature
By Jim Boren
08/26/07 04:52:04
The only thing the 52-day budget stalemate proved is how irrelevant the California Legislature has become. Change a few laws and we wouldn't need them at all.

State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata wants to reform the state budget process. I say reform the whole bunch out of business. Nothing the legislators have done over the past two months -- maybe the past several decades -- has made life better for Californians.

They have not fixed health care or made our public schools better. Our freeways are parking lots and they've done nothing. We're running out of water for a growing population and they're calling for another study. They use our most vulnerable citizens as pawns to leverage goodies for their rich pals. The prison system is about to explode and they wait for the courts to fix it. They drag out the budget and still can't balance it.

If this is what representative government in 21st century California has become, I'll pass.

A better idea is to make the state Capitol a museum and hire tour guides to tell visitors that this was once the place where cutting-edge ideas were turned into the nation's best freeway system, a place where a world-class public university system was encouraged, a place where leaders had the foresight to build a water system that could quench the state's thirst and grow the nation's best crops.

Lobbyists call the shots now

But somewhere in the mid-1970s, the Legislature and a series of governors began losing their nerve. The Capitol became a place where politicians weaseled and visionary ideas were replaced by demagoguery. They handed off policy-making to lobbyists, who pushed laws helping their clients.

If you were in the chosen group, you benefited. The rest of us saw our quality of life get worse.

And when we weren't looking, the legislators did a very smart thing to protect their backsides. They locked in their seats by manipulating legislative district lines. That allowed extremists from both sides of the political spectrum to be bullet-proof in their districts, even when they did stupid things like holding up the state budget for almost two months.

So the legislative process has finally become worthless. Let's go a few years into the future and listen in on a tour guide at the Capitol museum discussing how the California Legislature became extinct:

"Over here are the fossilized remains of legislators. Look closely and you'll see what's left of a species that attached themselves to legislators. They were called "special interests" and they survived by doing all they could to block the will of the people. They were sometimes called spine-suckers, and they went hungry in later years because legislators no longer provided nourishment."

Before that happens, let's admit that the California Legislature was a very bad experiment, and needs to be abolished. What we have now is not working.

With safe districts, the politicians don't have to appeal to the masses but can survive by throwing red meat to special interests, and voters on the fringe. Nothing gets done, yet we go through a legislative session pretending that all the activity means something important is happening. It's all a ruse.

They haven't done anything

Those of us outside of Sacramento see something quite different from what the legislators and political insiders see. They pat themselves on the back, but when you total up the good things the Legislature has accomplished, you get a big fat zero.

The conservative, anti-government types are going to say, "Yeah, that's what we've been telling you. Government stinks."

They couldn't be more wrong. Government is fine, but the people running it have gamed the system in a way that has caused gridlock in Sacramento. It's time to jettison the system.

The conservatives are as much of a problem as the liberals. Because they are in the legislative minority, they do little other than gumming up the works. They get giddy when they cause messes, and give speeches about protecting the public. Baloney.

The budget standoff in the Senate is a perfect example. They blocked the budget, but in the end, didn't make it better. They even hurt people -- poor people, of course, not CEOs or their big-money donors -- with their tactics.

The Democrats -- most of them way left of center -- control the Legislature and they give money away to the public employee unions and have put public pension programs in jeopardy by being unwilling to scale back out-of-control costs.

They should be showing leadership, but they are showing the way to bankruptcy.

If both parties aren't doing their jobs in the Legislature, is there any reason for it to exist? Some people say going to a part-time Legislature would make sense. I say that's just humoring problem children.

It's time for drastic action. We don't need a stinking Legislature.
Jim Boren is The Fresno Bee’s editorial page editor. His column appears Sundays. E-mail him at jboren@fresnobee.com or write him at 1626 E St., Fresno 93786.

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