Are there any more tax or budget "tricks" left?

The true scope of the recession is now becoming clear. The recession in the so called "private sector" is finally starting to hit home in the public sector. Here come the tax increases. And new taxes in areas or on items you have not seen before. You see while people in the private sector and at home learn to do with less, the little piggies in the public sector can't as they have never learned how to do that. Every year must bring new ("well deserved") raises, more pension goodies and more perks like cars and blackberries. Well its going to be really hard to "sell" these new state and local tax increases to people in the private sector now netting less money (due to inflation, energy and food prices, and home devaluations). The private sector is saying "Hey why should we be financing you fat government cats when we dont get the same". Good question. I guess it finally will be the sour economy that gets the taxpayers to stop swallowing the BS. Quite frankly I could do with less government "social" programs at the state and local level. Use what money you have for infrastructure. And lets cut way back on the billion wasted on forest fires. As you have surely read from the latest news posts on this we are pouring money down the fire department "overtime rathole" when it some to fighting the wildland fires that are not endangering homes.


August 2, 2008

State, local governments flirt with fiscal disaster as budgets grow bigger

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080802/OPINION11/808020312/1004/OPINION

State and local governments in this country seem to be running out of budgetary tricks.

In June Delaware's General Assembly had to swallow hard and cut deep into the state budget.

In California this week, Gov. Schwarzenegger escalated his fiscal battle with the Democratic Legislature by cutting the pay of 200,000 state employees. In New York, Gov. Paterson called the state's revenue situation dire, asked for federal help and suggested privatizing the New York City subway.

The economic slowdown is hurting revenues. In addition, expenses at the state and local levels are mounting across the country.

USA Today estimated on Friday that state and local governments are likely to spend $3 trillion in 2008. That's about 13 percent of the country's gross domestic product.

On top of that, many state and local governments are in hock for pension and post-employment health benefits they have promised an ever-growing number of public employees. In addition, every state has seen mounting costs for the state share of Medicaid health and nursing costs.

The federal General Accountability Office warned earlier this year that those bills will come due within 10 years as the employees begin retiring in large numbers and more older citizens need long-term care paid for by Medicaid.

The scramble is on for extra sources of revenue. And that's where the tricks are starting to miss. Maryland, for example, just raised its tax on cigarettes by $1 a pack. But so many people have simply stopped smoking that despite the tax increase the state will be short $40 million t0 $60 million in revenue this year.

The rise in gasoline prices forced Americans to cut driving so much that the Highway Trust Fund is near bankruptcy. Fewer driven miles translates into fewer dollars collected from gasoline taxes. The downturn in the financial markets is crippling New York's economy and reducing revenues in every state, including Delaware, that depends on the credit industry for revenue.

The housing slump has cut revenue from real estate transfer taxes. Likewise, the high cost of gasoline and the shaky economy have depressed the market for cars. That, in turn, means fewer autoworkers.

Help from the federal government is likely to be limited. Just this week it was announced that the 2009 budget deficit will be $482 billion. That is beginning to worry a lot of investors.

Some of these developments may turn out to be temporary. But others won't. The long-term outlook, at least, calls for an end to tinkering with budget. Cuts are in order. So are better management and, unfortunately, increased fees and taxes where appropriate.

Most of all, the tricks must stop.

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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

graffiti "community service" bill

This law sounds good. First problem. You have to have police catch someone and that has to hold up in court. I want to know how many successful graffiti prosecutions LASD has prosecuted on the San Gabriel River or in the city of Lakewood in the past year. I am going to take a shot at none. And as the LASD and city of Lakewood reads this blog regularly we challenge them to prove us wrong. They send the stats we will post them.

The law (on the surface) is a common sense measure which ones does not usually see out of the legislature. Of course how do you really make a graffiti artist clean up the area for a year? You don't. Also the press release makes it sound like the "clean up" sentencing is mandatory, until you read the "weasel words" the legislature put in the bill to make sue some bleeding heart liberal judge can still let the defendant off. Really this sounds like nothing more than a press release event (to attempt to show how "hard working" our legislature is) rather than a real enforcement or punishment tool. I cant wait to see how often this is used. I suppose next the ACLU will challenge it as "cruel and unusual punishment" for "artists" and that what we need is more taxpayer funded "afterschool programs" to "channel their talent".

We found the law interesting due to the rise of graffiti in Lakewood and the San Gabriel River. Looks like we got our hopes up for nothing.

PRESS RELEASE

07/30/2008 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Gov. Schwarzenegger Signs Graffiti Vandalism Legislation

Continuing his commitment to public safety, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today signed legislation to hold offenders accountable for crimes of vandalism and to remove graffiti from California's streets and neighborhoods. AB 1767 by Assemblymember Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco) mandates community service for a person who has committed a criminal act of graffiti vandalism, and AB 2609 by Assemblymember Mike Davis (D-Los Angeles) requires defendants convicted of graffiti vandalism to clean up or repair the defaced or damaged property.

"As Governor, I have made the safety of our communities my top priority," Governor Schwarzenegger said. "By cleaning up graffiti and holding offenders accountable for their actions, this legislation will make our streets and neighborhoods a safer and cleaner place to live."

AB 1767 authorizes the courts in San Francisco to launch a pilot program where violators of graffiti vandalism are ordered to participate in a minimum of 24 hours of community service, when available, if they have reached a civil compromise with the victim. This law targets graffiti abatement service programs as the community service outlet for offenders and remains in effect until January 1, 2012.

Similarly, AB 2609 requires the court to order offenders paroled for a graffiti violation to clean up, repair or replace the damaged property. Defendants would also be required keep the damaged property or another specified property in the community free of graffiti for up to one year.


BILL NUMBER: AB 2609 CHAPTERED
BILL TEXT

CHAPTER 209
FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE JULY 30, 2008
APPROVED BY GOVERNOR JULY 30, 2008
PASSED THE SENATE JULY 3, 2008
PASSED THE ASSEMBLY JULY 14, 2008
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 10, 2008
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 17, 2008

INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Davis
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Anderson and Solorio)

FEBRUARY 22, 2008

An act to amend Section 594 of the Penal Code, relating to
vandalism.



LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


AB 2609, Davis. Vandalism: penalties: community service.
Existing law, amended by Proposition 21, an initiative measure
enacted by voters at the March 7, 2000, statewide primary election,
and requiring a 2/3 vote of the Legislature to amend, makes a person
who maliciously commits specified destructive acts with respect to
another's property guilty of vandalism. Existing law grants the court
the authority to order a defendant who is convicted of violating
this provision, or to order the defendant and his or her parents, if
the defendant is a minor, to clean up, repair, or replace the damaged
property or keep the damaged property or another specified property
in the community free of graffiti for up to one year.
This bill would, in addition, require a court, when appropriate
and feasible, to impose the above cleanup penalties for any defendant
who was convicted of violating those vandalism provisions, as
specified. By increasing the penalties for a crime, the bill would
impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 594 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
594. (a) Every person who maliciously commits any of the
following acts with respect to any real or personal property not his
or her own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is
guilty of vandalism:
(1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material.
(2) Damages.
(3) Destroys.
Whenever a person violates this subdivision with respect to real
property, vehicles, signs, fixtures, furnishings, or property
belonging to any public entity, as defined by Section 811.2 of the
Government Code, or the federal government, it shall be a permissive
inference that the person neither owned the property nor had the
permission of the owner to deface, damage, or destroy the property.
(b) (1) If the amount of defacement, damage, or destruction is
four hundred dollars ($400) or more, vandalism is punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison or in a county jail not exceeding
one year, or by a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars
($10,000), or if the amount of defacement, damage, or destruction is
ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more, by a fine of not more than
fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), or by both that fine and
imprisonment.
(2) (A) If the amount of defacement, damage, or destruction is
less than four hundred dollars ($400), vandalism is punishable by
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine of
not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine
and imprisonment.
(B) If the amount of defacement, damage, or destruction is less
than four hundred dollars ($400), and the defendant has been
previously convicted of vandalism or affixing graffiti or other
inscribed material under Section 594, 594.3, 594.4, 640.5, 640.6, or
640.7, vandalism is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for
not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than five thousand
dollars ($5,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(c) Upon conviction of any person under this section for acts of
vandalism consisting of defacing property with graffiti or other
inscribed materials, the court shall, when appropriate and feasible,
in addition to any punishment imposed under subdivision (b), order
the defendant to clean up, repair, or replace the damaged property
himself or herself, or order the defendant, and his or her parents or
guardians if the defendant is a minor, to keep the damaged property
or another specified property in the community free of graffiti for
up to one year. Participation of a parent or guardian is not required
under this subdivision if the court deems this participation to be
detrimental to the defendant, or if the parent or guardian is a
single parent who must care for young children. If the court finds
that graffiti cleanup is inappropriate, the court shall consider
other types of community service, where feasible.
(d) If a minor is personally unable to pay a fine levied for acts
prohibited by this section, the parent of that minor shall be liable
for payment of the fine. A court may waive payment of the fine, or
any part thereof, by the parent upon a finding of good cause.
(e) As used in this section, the term "graffiti or other inscribed
material" includes any unauthorized inscription, word, figure, mark,
or design, that is written, marked, etched, scratched, drawn, or
painted on real or personal property.
(f) The court may order any person ordered to perform community
service or graffiti removal pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision
(c) to undergo counseling.
(g) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2002.
SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the
Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the
meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA
A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™<b>r>
click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Fireworks for Firefighers...now we have heard it all

When are the pyros going to stop? The article below from West Virginia actually contemplates shoring up sagging pensions funds for firefighters (which are already too high in CA) with the sales of currently illegal fireworks! Hey is you cant get taxpayers to do get the lobbiests to fund it peddling fire! This is too much. The legislators must be breathing in too much fireworks smoke and it has affected their thinking. When you read further you will see that the fireworks industry rakes in $900 million nationally per YEAR. (So maybe its just the effects of the fireworks money on the legislators)...All that pollution and California is just regulating leaf blowers and fireplaces for air quality? Also does anyone see just a little irony in using fire starting fireworks to fund the pensions of firemen? So we start more fires due to all the firework sales, then have to hire more fireman, then have to sell even more fireworks to fund their over bloated pensions. This creates a never ending cycle. Perhaps we should use drug sales to fund police departments (oh wait we already do with asset forfeitures...sorry what were we thinking).

Government never ceases to amaze me with stupidity. As former Senator Fritz Hollings said last week in an interview with Bill Moyers to promote his new book (Making Government Work)...the lobbyists on K street write the legislation as the legislators are too busy trying to go to fundraisers with lobbyists to raise money for re-election. There are two rules in politics: 1. get elected. 2. Get re-elected. Looks like the 900 million from the fireworks industry is being put to good use in the West Virginia legislature.


Published: July 26, 2008
Fireworks for firefighters?

Lawmakers look at source to provide revenue for pension fund
By Mannix Porterfield
Register-Herald Reporter
http://www.register-herald.com/local/local_story_208230000.html

Fireworks are a thing of majestic beauty and scientific marvel in the eyes of one beholder.

In the minds of some lawmakers, they could also provide a source of revenue to underwrite a pension fund for West Virginia’s volunteer firefighters, providing the beleaguered departments an incentive to attract fresh recruits and retain them.

Before the year is out, Select Committee F expects to hear retired Dow Chemical engineer Clifford Rotz explain how the state can benefit financially from legalizing fireworks.

For now, under state law, only the wimpy variety are kosher — the innocuous sparklers and the like.

The kind that shower the night skies with a burst of colors and loud noises — the rockets, Roman candles and firecrackers — remain illegal.

Rotz worked with Sens. Billy Wayne Bailey, D-Wyoming, Shirley Love, D-Fayette, and Ron Stollings, D-Boone, last winter on a failed bill that would let ordinary citizens buy and set off the so-called “explosive” fireworks, but the legislation never reached the Senate floor for a vote.

“I have no financial interest,” Rotz said. “I have just a personal interest. I’ve loved fireworks since I was kid growing up in Minnesota. My interest in fireworks and rocketry as a kid led me to study chemistry and science and ultimately to getting degrees in chemistry and physics at the University of Minnesota.”

After his master’s work in chemical engineering at Iowa State University, he moved to Charleston and began working for the former Union Carbide in 1981.

The Dunbar resident then began to share an affinity his colleagues hold for fireworks.

“Fireworks are, of course, a wonderful mixture of science, chemistry, art and beauty,” he said.

“One of my degrees is in chemistry. I enjoy studying the chemistry of how they work and seeing how different chemicals go into your different effects and colors, producing the effects they’re supposed to. I think it’s just kind of a bottom line, a kind of gut-level thing, where I think various people in the pyrotechnics field internationally love fireworks because there are so many different facets that are of interest, regardless of what your personal interests are in life.”

What the Big Bang theory holds forth in the Legislature is that several million dollars are there to be realized, allowing for creation of a pension fund for volunteer firefighters at a time the departments are struggling to keep their stations open for business. Rising fuel costs, workers’ compensation premiums and a difficult economy which compels many volunteers to hold down two jobs are taking their toll.

West Virginia has but 11 paid departments, and the 424 volunteer units have become a source of special legislative attention this year.

A full range of fireworks is legal in 18 states, but only a decade ago did West Virginia even permit the less threatening variety.

Firecrackers, if legalized, could contain no more than 50 milligrams of powder as approved by the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

“A common aspirin tablet is 325 mgs, so the amount of powder in a firecracker is one-sixth of that inside an aspirin tablet,” Rotz said.

Decades ago, Rotz pointed out, states began outlawing fireworks in response to the carnage, at a time when no federal controls existed.

“Things like the M-80s and even bigger explosives were allowed, and a lot of kids were getting hurt,” Rotz said.

Consequently, rather than approach the issue from a selective basis, the tendency was to make all such fireworks illegal.

“Now, with the CPSC, we don’t have to ban all of them,” he said.

“There’s been a trend in this country over the past 30 years or so to actually re-legalize fireworks.”

Rotz is a member of Fireworks Alliance, which seeks to maintain a legal status for the devices, and Pyrotechnics Guild International. (wait I thought Rotz said he has no financial interest..LAAG) The latter meets annually, attracting thousands from across the nation — professionals, amateurs, businesses and the academics.

“There is a literature of fireworks as a rich heritage that goes back hundreds and hundreds of years,” Rotz said.

“People even collect rare books.”

From the standpoint of money — one that catches any politician’s eye — Rotz says that in 2006 fireworks amounted to a $900 million industry nationally.

Broken down, that amounted to 26.2 million pounds marketed to professional pyrotechnics and 252 million pounds to amateurs. (wow that is a big difference; LAAG) Using those figures, that means about $815 million worth were snapped up by individuals. Rotz considered the rural nature of West Virginia, where fireworks tend to be more popular than in suburban locales of other states, and figured this state could witness some $12.6 million in sales.

Imposition of a special, 10 percent fireworks safety fee could translate into some $1.26 million that could be applied to a firefighters pension account, which Rotz considers “a very, very noble” idea.

Rotz isn’t sure when he is to appear before Select Committee F, but one panelist, Sen. Mike Green, D-Raleigh, while not sold on the idea of legalized fireworks, intends to invite him.

“I’m still up in the air,” Green said.

“I’m not sure I’m a proponent of legalizing those fireworks. His take is that people are going up into Marietta, Ohio, and different places and bringing them in. There’s no oversight. I just don’t know what the public outcry or response would be for legalizing those things. But it’s something worth looking at to face the problems we have with the volunteer firemen.”

In the proposed legislation, no one under 16 could buy fireworks. Anyone under 18 would be required to wear some type of eye protection, such as goggles folks strap on while using weed-eaters. And, in every type of fireworks sold, a safety brochure for the proper use of handling must be included.

Modern history appears to be on the side of proponents such as Rotz.

Available data kept by the industry show the number of injuries has been falling “very, very rapidly” since the 1970s, even as more and more people are setting off fireworks, he said. (note there is no mention of pollution effects as that is a loosing argument the fireworks industry does not want investigated or discussed; oh and lets trust the lobbyist supplied data on injuries, which by the way are only for injuries on one day a year unlike all other injury statistics for other products; LAAG)

On its Web site, the American Pyrotechnics Association shows that 29 million pounds of fireworks were touched off in 1976, and there were an estimated 11,100 injuries, for a rate of 38.3 per 100,000 pounds. Two years ago, the consumption soared to 278.2 million pounds and injures had plummeted to 9,200, or a rate of 3.3 per 100,000. Growth in the industry has been nothing less than phenomenal. In 1997, it reported sales of $350 million, but two years ago, the figure had leaped to $900 million.

Contact Mannix by email at mannix@register-herald.com

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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

An answer to our question

For some time now LAAG has posed the question: What to "civic groups" do to raise money in cities like Long Beach (the majority in CA) that have outlawed the sale of safe and sane fireworks? Well the story below is one answer. A golf tournament. Also then raised over 100,000 in donations. But I guess selling smoke and fire (also enriching the Chinese fireworks factories) is a more "environmentally friendly" way to raise quick cash. I think the problem we have with the economy right now is people trying to raise funds "the quick and easy way".

We post this story for the benefit of all the more enlightened cities (or rather city councils) out there battling the fireworks money/lobbyists and the civic groups who cry about not being able to raise the money via "bake sales" to replace the toxic fireworks sales. It can be done, but of course fireworks is the "quick and dirty" way to do it. Again, like selling crack, which another quick and easy way to make to make big profits.


L.B. Kiwanians raise $50,000 for campers
By Pamela Hale-Burns, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 07/26/2008 09:33:26 PM PDT

LONG BEACH - A $50,000 check from Kiwanis Club of Long Beach, made out to the Send-A-Kid-To-Camp program, has been presented to Press-Telegram Executive Editor Rich Archbold and columnist Tom Hennessy.

Founded in 1915, Kiwanis International is an organization of service clubs headquartered in Indianapolis that emphasizes service to children and youth.

"The Kiwanis' mission is to essentially change the world one child and one community at a time," Long Beach Kiwanis President Bob Reilly said at the Tuesday luncheon where the check was presented. "I think if we don't take care of our children our future's going to look pretty dim."

Reilly encourages others to contribute to the youths in their community.

"If there's anything society can do it is take care of our children. Give them hope and educate them," he said.

Each year, proceeds from the club's annual golf tournament reach the $50,000 goal, but they hope to give more this year.

"We give as often as we can," Reilly said. "We would like to try and increase that this year to $60,000."

Hopes for campers

"We hope that for each child it's a life-changing experience for them," Reilly said. "Many of the kids we send to camp have never been to camp and many of the kids we send, even in Long Beach, have never seen the ocean that they live four to five miles from."

Every little bit helps, said Reilly.

"If you just get kids to do happy things for one week it's something they will never forget," he said.

"There's a famous person who once said `Suffer the little children,'... if there is any reason to take care of children, I'd think that would be one."

Kiwanis' Golf Tournament 2008 will be Oct. 27 at the Old Ranch Country Club, 3901 Lampson Ave., Seal Beach. It is open to the public. Entry fees are $250 per person. All proceeds are given to Send-A-Kid-

To-Camp. For information, call 562-495-3193.

Including the Kiwanis donation, $102,680 has been raised so far this year by 457 donors to help send kids to camp.

pam.hale@presstelegram.com, 562-499-1476

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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Will the fireworks money win like it did in Lakewood?

Well we wish Petaluma a lot of luck in dealing with the fireworks industry and their lobbyists (the so call civic groups or "non" profits) in the story below. I for one love to see all the money thrown around. Proof once again that its not patriotism but cash that drives the fireworks lobby. Its a bit like fighting the SUV driving soccer moms and their allies the oil companies when it comes to off shore drilling. Hey California only had one spill...Hey Petaluma only had a few fires caused by legal fireworks (that we KNOW of). Its very hard to wean people off their addiction to oil just like fireworks when the only immediate beneficiaries you can point to are the environment and the peace and quiet that all the other residents not working for a so called "civic group" enjoy (as do the animals). Where is Al Gore when you need him?


Battle over fireworks heats up
Council members favoring ban face opposition from nonprofit groups, pyrotechnics industry
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20080720/NEWS/807200384&title=Battle_over_fireworks_heats_up

By PAUL PAYNE
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Sunday, July 20, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Sunday, July 20, 2008 at 10:55 a.m.
A political brawl shaping up in Petaluma over whether to outlaw fireworks could mirror one in Santa Rosa nearly five years ago that set records for campaign spending and ended in a citywide ban.

Battle lines were drawn during the recent Northern California wildfires when Petaluma Mayor Pam Torliatt appealed to the City Council to place a prohibition on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Although none of the fires were started by fireworks and there have been few mishaps in the city that can be traced to them, she said residents have expressed concern about dry conditions and are asking to put the matter to a vote.

Several council members appeared to support the idea and some said they favor an immediate ban to spare the $7,000 to $14,000 expense of an election. A decision is expected at the Monday council meeting.

"It becomes an issue and has been an issue over the years," Torliatt said July 7.

However, opposition is mounting from 16 city nonprofits who sell fireworks to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars each year and leaders in the fireworks industry who organized the Santa Rosa campaign.

New rules suggested

Dennis Revell, a spokesman for American Promotional Events, the distributor of Red Devil, Freedom and TNT fireworks, said in a letter to Torliatt and council members that outlawing state-approved fireworks is wrong.

Instead of a ban, he asked the council to consider restricting sales and use and imposing stiffer fines for first-time violators, which could put money in city coffers.

Rather than allowing sales for the six days before the Fourth of July, Revell said the city could reduce it to four days. Likewise, the use of fireworks could be cut from 96 hours over 6½ days to 13 hours on the holiday only.

A fine of $1,000 would make people who possess or use illegal fireworks such as skyrockets say "ouch," Revell said in his letter.

"Everyone agrees that when it comes to fireworks, the problem has always been and continues to be illegal fireworks, not state-approved fireworks," Revell said.

Nonprofits also object to any ban.

Dick Sharke of the McDowell Drug Task Force said fireworks have allowed his group to raise an average of $53,000 a year since 1999 to spend on worthy programs that benefit students, Vietnam veterans and the poor.

He has vowed to fight any effort to stop fireworks.

"(The group) has been in the community for 26 years and has never asked for or received any local, state or federal funding," Sharke said in a letter to council.

Similar arguments were made in Santa Rosa in 2003, when the council enacted a ban after a house was destroyed by state-approved fireworks.

SR referendum lost

The fireworks industry brought a referendum to voters in March of the following year and lost, 57 percent to 43 percent. The two sides in the fight over Measure F spent a combined $372,130, a record for municipal elections in the county.

American Promotional Events, a Florence, Ala.-based fireworks distributor, and its allies spent more than $280,000.

Yes on Measure F forces spent $87,634. Most of the money came from companies that do business with the city or rely on the city for building approvals.

On Monday, the Petaluma council will consider options that could trigger similar responses from the industry and nonprofits.

Three scenarios

Fire Marshal Michael Ginn said the council can decide to place a ban on the November ballot, enact an outright prohibition or do nothing.

If the council enacts a ban, opponents likely would begin the referendum process to put the question to voters in November 2010, Ginn said.

Certification of a referendum would temporarily suspend any ban until voters can chime in, he said.

The Fire Department has long fought for restrictions over the years, but Ginn said there is little evidence that state-approved fireworks are to blame for fires.

On July 4, one person was cited for possession of illegal fireworks and a small grass fire was blamed on the legal kind, Ginn said.

The city will have to decide if the risks outweigh the benefits, he said.

"One misused firework and we could have something like what happened in Santa Rosa a few years ago," Ginn said. "I hate to be the guy saying, 'the sky is falling,' but the potential is there."

You can reach Staff Writer Paul Payne at 762-7297 or paul.payne@pressdemocrat.com.


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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Verizon fios update July 19 2008

A LAAG reader writes:

"Do you know whether they will be offering us all the FIOS services internet, tv, phone right away? I've read that in some places around the country, they don't offer everything at first. Maybe they offer internet and phone, then tv later, for whatever reason."

No reply from Verizon on that yet. However one other development. Verizon recently (week of July 14, 2008) placed curbside/parkway terminals (called "FDH's" or "Fiber Distribution Hubs") on Ashworth near Ibbetson and 2 FDH's side by side on Allington near Ibbetson. These are tan "vault like" cabinets that look virtually tamper proof (don't want anyone stealing fios or hijacking the fiber!). They are about 3.5 feet all and about 1/3 the size of a standard refrigerator. The Verizon linemen "on the ground" (not contractors) told me those are placed near where all the loops are seen on the poles and hooking those boxes up is one of the last steps done before the fiber is lit up. The boxes do not look like they are hooked up yet. Once they are all those loops of fiber on the poles above them will disappear as they run them underground into the boxes. This is where all the splicing takes place. Different teams of linemen are used on this hookup operation than running the fiber on the poles. Also keep in mind that some of the main trunk lines of fiber are run underground but most of it in this area is aeriel. We have seen some fiber run from the poles to underground conduits in a few spots in Lakewood.

This link has a nice example of what the street mounted FDH's look like from the inside and videos of how Verizon hooks them up. Also in some states they use the same size FDH but pole mounted. Here in Lakewood they are using the sidewalk or parkway level mounted boxes. Verizon apparently calls these "pedestal" mounted FDH's. Also note the red or dark orange wrappers on the fiber lines on the poles on the link above. They use those here in Lakewood too so I guess the linemen working with copper will not touch those fiber lines.

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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Fundraising at any cost

This editorial writer below must have read some of LAAG's articles written in the November 2006 election cycle as the selling of drugs line sounds familiar. LAAG did not "advocate" the selling of drugs just nice legal ("safe and sane") cigarettes. Those sell really well, are high priced (good profit margin), sell year round, and have very reliable big companies behind them that I am sure would be willing to share a little profit "for the children" just like the fireworks companies. The added benefit of allowing this form of distrobution is that you get the kids to back the selling of the product. And who can argue against sales of anything that benefits kids!! Plus like fireworks, tobacco has a long "honored tradition" in this country. Its almost un-American not to grow and sell tobacco. Lets not forget that a few of the founding fathers were tobacco farmers. (long American tradition as you recall is a big agrument fireworks promoters try to throw in if the "children" argument does not work on someone) And tobacco is still grown today. Plus its totally legal and when used responsibly does not start fires.(so we could label them "safe and sane" ciagarettes...but just the ones sold for the kids) So whats the problem? Well you see cigarettes got a bum rap a few years back by these darn "health advocates" as we learned that even though people really like them it turns out they have no redeeming qualities and cause harm...sort of like fireworks. Sooner or later as the effects of global warming ravish this state and fires are a year round condition and people have to pay a carbon tax for the air pollution they cause (via fireworks), perhaps the civics groups and the "kiddies" will have to give cigarette sales another look. After all the ends always justify the means when comes to the kiddies new baseball uniforms right?

OP ED: MY TURN - July 16, 2008
By Peter S. Beck, Pacifica CA
Article Launched: 07/16/2008 02:00:00 PM PDT
http://www.pacificatribune.com/ci_9900406?source=most_viewed

Every year on the 4th of July, our city becomes one of only a few in the entire Bay Area to allow fireworks to be sold and ignited within the limits of the city.

Not only do we allow it, we pursue the sale of fireworks with such abandon, that we attract citizens of many other, more sane communities, to our rapidly constructed, temporary sales offices.

For the 17 years that I have lived in this city, I have read the numerous arguments for preserving this idiotic tradition.

It is always the same drivel, "without the fireworks revenue, our programs could not survive", or "We would have to pursue other means to raise the money that would never make as much money as the sale of fireworks", or "We make all the money we need all year in just a few days selling fireworks".

Might I suggest a few alternative measures: sell drugs, sure they're illegal, but with a little effort, our local city council could probably declare them necessary to support our various civic programs.

But drugs are harmful and people get addicted, you might say. No more addicted than all the people in our city who simply must celebrate the birth of our nation, by blowing up fireworks all night long.

Actually, that makes a lot of sense, if you blow up fireworks, you don't have to think about the sacrifices our forefathers made to establish and nurture our great country. Blowing up fireworks makes us all as smart as 5th graders and isn't that what we all strive for?

Don't you love the signs on all of our fireworks stores? "Pacifica is a Zero Tolerance City".

If you have no tolerance, you have to be able to enforce it don't you? Like keeping dogs on leashes, driving 45 miles per hour on Highway 1, actually signaling when you make a turn, or even granting the right of way to the other driver.

Yes sir, we are a no tolerance city alright, the only problem is, that nobody cares and we can't do anything to stop it. So let's see, we've discussed selling drugs as an alternative, if that doesn't work, let's sell cigarettes and liquor to all of our underage residents. I bet that will give us enough revenue to support all of our civic programs.

Let's stretch our virtual reality a bit. Suppose your entire state is engulfed in wildfires. There are over 18,000 firefighters working day and night to control these wildfires. Highways adjacent to many of these fires have been closed to all traffic and, to top it all off, we have been warned to stay indoors because the wildfire smoke air we are breathing is dangerous.

What do we do to help this situation? Why here in our city, we sell fireworks and encourage everyone to set them off adding both smoke and danger to an already dangerous situation.

I realize that this sounds a little stupid, but how will we ever be able to pay for all of our civic programs without fireworks?

So let's cut down all the redwoods and sell the wood, let's burn down the forests and pollute the air because, by George, we need that revenue to run our civic programs and coming up with alternatives just takes too much thought and too much effort. Wait till next year, we'll have even bigger and better bombs for sale.

Maybe next year we can add rifles, pistols and a few rocket launchers too. Happy 4th of July folks and keep those excuses coming.

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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Lakewood, CA FIOS sales to start at the end of August 2008

LAAG has just been advised by Verizon that the Bellflower CA central office will begin offering FIOS signups at the end of August 2008. That office serves the phone prefixes listed below. Now it is not at all clear how many homes will be offered FIOS at that time as it is not at all clear how much of Bellflower and northern Lakewood (generally north of Del Amo) has the FIOS main lines strung so that "fiber drops" to residences can begin with the residential installers. But all in all this is good news as it means FIOS coverage for most of Lakewood could be accomplished by the end of 2008. Hopefully there will not be any "snags". There are approximately 20,000 single family residences in Lakewood.

Phone prefixes served by the Bellflower Central office (area code-prefix):

213-259, 213-632, 310-623, 310-696, 310-698, 310-856, 323-312, 323-345, 323-374, 323-456, 323-505, 323-508, 323-796, 323-813, 323-834, 323-835, 323-989, 323-999, 562-246, 562-248, 562-249, 562-250, 562-251, 562-263, 562-280, 562-281, 562-282, 562-283, 562-285, 562-287, 562-821, 714-210, 714-224, 714-263, 714-453, 714-698, 714-729, 714-887, 949-540, 949-545, 949-554, 949-681, 949-751, 949-945
562-461, 562-804, 562-866, 562-867, 562-920, 562-925


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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Can LAAG get on the grand jury?

Oh man LAAG loves it when common taxpayers are given power. Go Grand Jury go! Don't mind those politicians paid off by the unions...they won't bite you. The quotes and statements in the article below would be hilarious if they were not so alarming and true. City councils for the most part don't have time for independent thought and even if many were capable of such thought I would not want to hear their thoughts. Their job is to represent the taxpayers of the city. All of them. And to conserve tax dollars and hold down spending. Not to kiss the staff's a__ and suck up to rank and file union members. Gov. Schwarzenegger already does that, all the time claiming he is a republican. (don't forget his failed initiatives)

Grand jury slams Live Oak over pension OK
By Robert LaHue/Appeal-Democrat
July 12, 2008 - 10:32PM
http://www.appeal-democrat.com/news/jury_66291___article.html/pension_increases.html

The Sutter County CA grand jury targeted pension increases in its latest report, but not the long-disputed pensions of county employees.

Instead, the jury scrutinized pension increases approved for Live Oak's workers.

In the annual report released this month, the grand jury said the City Council didn't do enough independent research into the long-term impact of pension increases and did not make a strong enough attempt to inform the public — findings disputed by the city manager.

The council in March approved an increase in the pension, from a 2.5 at 55 benefit to a 2.7 at 55, meaning employees receive 2.7 percent of their salary for every year worked and are eligible to receive full retirement at age 55.

The council approved the increase 4-1. Vice Mayor Judy Richards dissented.

"The recent, and highly publicized, pension increases enacted by Sutter County should have informed the City Council as to the significance of the issue and all the variables surrounding it," the grand jury wrote.

"If the importance of their decision was evident to the City Council, it wasn't evidenced by their efforts to fully inform the public or engage the citizens of Live Oak in a meaningful dialog."

City Manager Tom Lando said the city held "two or three separate public meetings" on the pension increases, and allowed the public to speak on multiple occasions.

"The City Council deliberated over a number of sessions about an appropriate compensation package for employees," he said.

The pension increase was requested by city employees, who aren't represented by a union. Lando also noted staff members took the pension increase instead of a cost-of-living increase in pay.

"In terms of net impact on the city and its budget, it was better for the city and it's what the employees wanted," he said. [we dont care what the taxpayers want; LAAG]

The grand jury also noted concerns about the fact-finding efforts of the City Council. Public Employees' Retirement System actuary Richard Santos told the jury "he was disappointed that not even one question was asked of him by any member of the Live Oak City Council."

The panel also noted testimony by Mayor Diane Hodges about her reason for supporting the pension increase.

"Her response was, 'Staff thought it was a good idea and that's why they're there for,'" the grand jury wrote. "Asked if she had an independent thought as to the wisdom of the increase, she replied, 'No.'"

The grand jury labeled Hodges' response an admitted "rubber stamp" of the pension increases.

Hodges could not be reached for comment Friday. Lando defended Hodges and other council members as "diligent" in their deliberations about the pension increases.

"I have found the mayor to be very good about doing her homework on each issue," Lando said.

The grand jury said it wasn't passing judgment on whether the pension increases should have been enacted, saying its "focus is on the process that preceded the decision."

However, the jury also noted that costs of public employee benefits "have become a significant area of concern in recent years."

Lando said he could say "with certainty" the approval was not a rubber stamp.

"We will provide an official response to the grand jury report, but in my opinion it was well thought-out with the City Council," he said.

Contact Appeal-Democrat reporter Robert LaHue at 749-4713 or rlahue@appealdemocrat.com


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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email

One factor explaining increased cost of the Lakewood Sheriff's 2008-9 contract

The report below makes the increased cost of LASD (sheriff) service make sense. Look at this brilliant taser incident right here in Lakewood. What will that cost? Of course dont forget the cost of wrongful shootings like this one and the settlement costs of crashing into hapless motorists while drunk on the job.

The report notes that the in-custody claims are increasing and are more costly to resolve. We think it is likely due to the fact that juries see these in custody injuries or deaths as less justifiable than other injuries or deaths.

I think part of the reason for these incidents is poor on the job training, a "don't care attitude", (as deputies are not personally at risk for bad behavior) and just plain lack of smarts and common sense. Lets face it you are giving a gun (and tremendous power and unquestioned authority) to some guys that barely have a high school diploma. (yes some do go to college on our nickel once on the force to boost their salary)

The only good thing to be said about sheriff's "contract" service is that the pain of the cost of these settlements is spread over the whole county and all contract cities and not just Lakewood (which it would be if Lakewood had its own police force). The sore point however is that we are getting close to the tipping point of LASD costing more than they are "worth" in terms of achievements. We need more individual deputy legal responsibility. But that will happen when hell freezes over thanks to public unions and their mafia like grip over elected officials.

From the July 2008 report of Special Counsel Merrick Bobb (click on image to enlarge):





Read the full report here from the semiannual reports of Special Counsel Merrick Bobb and staff discussing the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD). These reports are prepared at the direction of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors pursuant to its appointment of special counsel to conduct ongoing monitoring and critical review of the LASD's performance.

Report: LA Inmate Deaths, Injuries Costing Millions In Settlements

POSTED: 12:35 pm PDT July 11, 2008
http://www.knbc.com/news/16856328/detail.html

LOS ANGELES -- Deaths and injuries to people in custody in Los Angeles County jails continue to cost the county millions of dollars in lawsuit settlements, according to a report released Friday.

While the number of lawsuits filed against the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has dropped in recent years, the total amount of money paid out due to litigation has increased, according to an internal investigations report released by Merrick Bobb, special counsel to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

When looking at three-year averages over the past six years -- from 2001 through 2004 as compared to 2004 through 2007 -- the number of lawsuits closed dropped from an average of 300 a year to 233 a year, but the total amount paid rose from an average of $9.9 million a year to $10.5 million.

The average amount paid for lawsuits during the earlier period was $33,000, and jumped to $44,800 over the second three-year period.

Of the 69 lawsuits against the department in which the county was required to make a payout over the last fiscal year, 17 resulted in awards greater than $100,000.

Of those, six cases involving in-custody death or injury accounted for $5.6 million in payouts -- more than half of the department's total civil liability for the past year.

"Lawsuits relating to in-custody injury and death that have resulted in significant payments to plaintiffs are not a relic of the past but rather point to an ongoing and continuing source of liability," according to the report. [snip]

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

click here to receive LAAG posts by email