Circuit City hanging on in Lakewood

Circuit City Stores Inc. said Monday it is closing about 20 percent of its U.S. stores -- cutting thousands of jobs -- in an effort to return to profitability as it finds consumers reluctant to spend and its vendors less eager to give it credit.

The nation's No. 2 consumer electronics retailer said it will shut 155 of its more than 700 stores and leave at least a dozen markets entirely. It will lay off about 17 percent of its domestic work force, which could affect up to 7,300 people.

Stores in Southern California that will be closed include those in City of Industry, Compton, Escondido, Fontana, Foothill Ranch, Mira Loma, Moreno Valley, Murrietta, Pomona, Riverside, Thousand Oaks, Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and Vista. The list of store closures can be found here. The Lakewood Center Circuit City store will remain open as will one store in Long Beach, as well as stores in Signal Hill, Norwalk and Seal Beach (in this area). That is good news for Lakewood Center which has already been decimated by the recession. Mervyn's filed for bankruptcy in September and the Macy's / May Co. / Robinsons consolidation racked the retailing world a few years back, drastically effecting Lakewood Center's major anchor tenants. The Costco store required the demolition of a brand new Macy's store which was only open for a few years before closing.

I suspect the recession will put Circuit City into bankruptcy after the dismal Christmas season this year which will likely be a bloodbath. The only bright spot might be flat screen digital TV sales in advance of the looming February 2009 analog TV signal transmission cut off (for those using over the air antennas). But I doubt there are a lot of sales left as most people have cable or satellite and most in Lakewood likely already have digital TV's.

The Costco store opening in Lakewood Center has been delayed by a number of "utility" issues. (It was supposed to open in November 2008) Apparently there is a groundwater problem of some sort. This has not been reported on from what we have seen. It is not slated to open until spring (when the recession is in full swing) and after missing the key holiday purchasing season which will be a big hit on Lakewood.

Lakewood behind cities such as Downey, Carson and Cerritos in sales tax, as only 6 percent of the city is zoned for commercial or industrial uses. The rest of Lakewood comprises homes, schools, parks and other entities.

Given that the city has a lot of work to do as they are wasting the 6% they do have. Look at the South and Bellflower location which lost Vons in the late 1990's and recently lost Bakers Square restaurant. We reported on this intersection over a year ago. Both anchor tenants likely never to be replaced without serious action by the city. That is a prime location being squandered. The city is not stepping up doing what it can to attract businesses. It focuses all its attention on the mall while the rest of the city goes downhill. Soon the loss of these businesses ans well as the home values plummeting will mean more blight and more crime as less desirable residents are attracted, such as renters and those who fail to keep their houses and surrounding property neat and tidy. And this is how the death spiral begins in a city. It takes years for the decay to spread but it does spread.

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

Vote NO on Measure "L" the Utility Users Tax: Tell the City Back to the Drawing Board

Measure "L" Utility Users Tax: The Tax Grab Broadens its Reach

This November 4 election will not only involve a new President but many state and local measures which are making a grab for your wallet. Clearly the Utility Users Tax (UUT) "increase" (or rather broadening in reach and scope) could not come at a worse time given the current economic "meltdown".

As it typical with Lakewood city government, the city is not telling voters the whole story on the UUT tax increase in Measure "L". (Lakewood kept LAAG's "No on L" argument off the November ballot while accepting the "Yes on L" argument) They claim Measure L is simply “updating” the existing tax ordinance but in reality it is a broadening of the ordinance in order to make the tax apply to more services and utilities likes calls made over the internet. That was the whole reason why this UUT in Measure L required another vote. The City does not want to do this again so they are broadening the ordinance to not only bring in more revenue (by taxing more types of services and utilities like VOIP phone service, and other future technology like femtocells etc.) but to make it easier in the future to tax "yet unknown" or unforseen sources of revenue ...without a further vote by the taxpayers. All while duping the taxpayer into not thinking they are getting a tax increase just because the tax "rate" is not increasing.

So for right now they are claiming that internet access, email and related content and services are not being taxed under Measure L but this is only due to the fact that Federal law prevents it at this time. But if that changes in the future then Lakewood could use Measure L to tax those new services, without asking for your permission or taxpayer approval via an election.

The city claims the 3% rate will not increase without a vote but nothing in Measure L prevents them from further broadening the application of the tax to other "services" or "utilities" without taxpayer approval.

Another very sneaky tactic is telling voters that the funds will be used for a certain service, project or activity when the proposed ordinance does not mandate such use. The reason the city has done this is it knows that voters are less likely to approve a “general slush fund” tax especially when the money can be funnelled to special interests (like those entities or their representatives who signed the ballot argument in favor of Measure "L"). Voters are more likely to approve a tax that is earmarked for “specific services”. However it takes a 2/3 majority vote in order to pass a “special tax”, whereas a “general tax” (such as this proposed UUT) only needs a simple majority to pass. Deceptively, the voter booklet voters are provided with tells voters:

"Shall an ordinance be adopted to ...fund law enforcement, gang and drug prevention programs, after-school activities, senior transportation, parks, street and traffic signal maintenance and other essential services, ... regardless of technology used, annual audits, public review of expenditures, no rate increases without voter approval, and local control of revenues?"

If you want to read the entire 15 page ordinance of Measure L please click here (PDF)

Again they city has attempted to enumerate those uses that they know will garner votes for the measure but fail to explain to voters that the tax revenues can be used for what ever the city council decides to use them for. That is there the sneaky phrase "and other essential services" above comes into play. What does that mean? Only the city council will decide. For example if the city council decided to use the revenues to redecorate their offices, there is NOTHING in Measure L that prevents that.

There is nothing in Measure L that governs the use of the taxes. That includes even restricting where this tax money cold be used. For example it could be used outside the city of Lakewood. This ordinance does not change anything with respect to existing law on such matters.

Another feature the city likes to tout in Measure L is the "public review of expenditures". Nowhere in Measure L is there any change to existing law with respect to the "transparency" that they city will allow or promoting the use of the internet to increase public awareness of the use of tax dollars like this. There is nothing in Measure L that increases public review or accountability or even visibility. Ask yourself this: if the city council is so transparent why have they never posted the full city budget on line or the audits and budget expenditures of all the prior $35 million (the city's figure) collected since 1992 under the existing UUT? Because they dont want to to know where the money goes and they dont want you to know what is going on with your tax dollars. The devil is in the details! Other city’s UUT ordinances specifically allow for citizen oversight on the utilization of the new funds. Not Measure L.

There are other problems with Measure L. Lets say you use a cell phone, a land phone and VOIP all together. You will be taxed on all three devices, so there is overlap in the tax. The tax is regressive in that it is a greater burden on low or fixed income residents and the more you use the phones and other services the more you will be taxed. However as we all know utilties are now mostly taxes and have very high minimum monthly fixed charges. This tax feeds off those minimum charges. Also if your neighbor only uses a land line and not other technologies he will only be taxed once. So the fairness of Measure L is not as big a selling point as the city makes it out to be.

Also do not assume that 3% is a "low" tax rate. Take a look at your utitlty bills with 10 or so different taxes on it and see which one is higher than 3%. Likely none. So why is 3% deemed reasonable? Especially when Measure L will now be covering more of your services and utlities. The problem of course is the cumulative effect of all these "low" taxes on your overall bill. That is why utility bills are always advertised without all the taxes, which can add as much as 15% to the total. And we have all seen how these taxes are wasted.

Lets not forget the other tax increases on the horizon either; the 0.5% county and 1% state sales tax increases that combined will increase LA County’s sales tax to 9.75%, the highest in the country. This is another tax grab when voters can least afford it.

Also voting NO on Measure L leaves the old tax in place. It does not eliminate the old tax or the revenue. If this were not a chance to get more revenue why would the city and the Sheriff's department be in favor of it?

Dont buy the City's deceptive tax grab. Tell the city to get this right by increasing oversight and accountability provisions to prevent abuse of your hard earned dollars. (Just like the Federal bailouts) VOTE NO on Measure "L"

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

Got Towing Fees?

Fortunately in Lakewood no ones car is ever towed as their is no parking enforcement and even when there is, LASD is not involved in it in any way, especially enforcement. It is the city civilian "parking enforcement staff" who have to call the city council to get an ok to write a parking ticket (for fear of pissing of one of the 2500 people that elects the council). This is a good idea given what we have to pay cops per hour to do this. (only problem is the parking enforcement people dont even pay for themselves with the fines collected; but I digress). Oh one other point... the parking staff leaves at 5pm when all the parking violations occur (once people come home form work). At that point you have to call LASD to complain about a parking problem. Perhaps if the violation is parking in front of a cops driveway you might get someone to respond.

The stories below are really a sad commentary on the greediness of law enforcement. Here are people who we pay very well to enforce the law yet they take advantage of their position to rip off the taxpayers even more. According to a high ranking cop I know the argument for paying police extremely high salaries in CA was to prevent corruption. Well I guess it has not worked at LASD. Even sadder is the fact that the LASD sheriff retired before being accused (caught). So he was making the top pay scale when he "allegedly" ripped off the city. What do you think the chances are this will ever get to court or that this cop will refund the money off his 100k a year pension benefits we are paying? Not likely.

LAAG hopes to revisit this story but we are pretty sure we will not hear of this story again. What is even sadder is this has likely happened before and never made it into the press. Also the LASD is also "reviewing several other internal policies" where I suppose graft and corruption could exist but that have not even been looked at yet. Very sad. I wonder if there are any investigations going on in Lakewood? Surely not (an no one in this city questions anything LASD does) and if there were you can be sure we will never know about it. Wonder if the city ever finished this "investigation"? Where are the results?

Probe of alleged theft prompts L.A. County sheriff to review impound policies
Lee Baca says he plans to have tow-truck operators collect the fees instead of department officials. Investigators are looking into the alleged theft of $400,000 by a sergeant.
By Richard Winton
October 23, 2008

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca said an investigation into allegations that a sergeant stole more than $400,000 in car impound fees has prompted a review of the way his department handles such transactions for the dozens of cities it patrols.

Baca said he plans to have the towing operators collect the administrative fees directly from motorists, rather than involving sheriff's officials in the process.

"I don't see the need for the department to be a cashier," he said. "The system has to be tightened."

Sheriff's officials initiated the review after La Puente officials reported a significant shortfall in the fees that were supposed to have been collected by the Sheriff's Department, authorities said.

The sergeant retired from the department in May shortly after he was placed on leave as a result of the ongoing investigation, authorities confirmed this week. He could not be reached for comment. No charges have been filed in the case.

"Our residents have been stolen from," said La Puente Mayor Louie Lujan. "This is a large amount of money. It will have a direct impact on our city budget."

According to authorities, the sergeant supervised La Puente's car impound program and also ran the drunk driving task force and other programs that led to impounds.

John Stites, president of the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Assn., said a union attorney was ready to rebut any allegations made against the sergeant.

"They have been playing around with this for about a year and they have yet to present anything," Stites said.

As part of the investigation into the missing funds, Baca said, detectives have seized money but "not enough to cover the shortfall." He did not say from whom the money was seized.

Michael Gennaco, head of the Office of Independent Review, which serves as the Sheriff's Department watchdog, said the way the cash was handed to deputies by vehicle owners at the Industry Sheriff's Station was problematic.

"That is not a good practice. There is a need for systemic change to avoid this kind of problem," he said.

Gennaco said other stations have had issues. Compton, for example, had accounting discrepancies, but authorities did not establish that money had been stolen, Gennaco said.

Winton is a Times staff writer

richard.winton@latimes.com


Sheriff's department re-thinking towing fees
By Tania Chatila, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/24/2008 10:55:17 PM PDT

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is reexamining how it collects towing fees after allegations emerged a former traffic sergeant took nearly $500,000 from the city of La Puente.

Sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore said while several potential policy changes are on the table, Sheriff Lee Baca wants to take the department out of the collection process completely.

"The sheriff has a strong feeling that the sheriff's department should not be a cashier," Whitmore said.

The department has been reviewing their policies for the past few months, Whitmore said. It stems mostly from an ongoing investigation into allegations former Industry station Sgt. Joe Dyer was stealing tow money from La Puente.

The department's Internal Criminal Investigations Bureau has been investigating Dyer since the beginning of the year.

Officials believe he was collecting towing fees intended for La Puente, but not turning over all of those fees to the city.

La Puente is supposed to receive $168 each time a car is impounded.

That fee is paid to the sheriff's Industry Station, which issues a receipt that the driver must provide to reclaim his or her vehicle at La Puente-based Haddick's towing company. The driver then pays a separate fee to Haddick's and the car is released.

La Puente Councilwoman Lola Storing said officials believe Dyer was only dropping off a portion of those fees and receipts at City Hall - which were never reconciled with the Haddick's records.

Dyer retired in May. He did not return calls seeking comment.

"Let's just say that this has been a wake-up call for the department," said Michael Gennaco, chief attorney for the Office of Internal Review.

The OIR is an independent agency that reviews alleged policy violations within the Sheriff's Department. They are aware of the allegations against Dyer and expect to receive a copy of the case once it is submitted to the District Attorney.

"It's still an ongoing investigation," Whitmore said. "But once it's done we will seek prosecution."

There has been one other case within the department involving mishandled tow fees, Whitmore said.

The incident took place in 2007. It involved a deputy in Compton who was suspended for 10 days after failing to follow the department's money handling procedures, Whitmore said.

Gennaco said that while there was initial concern this deputy might have stolen money, the evidence didn't bear that out.

"There was no evidence of any funds missing," Whitmore said. "Apparently he was not doing the paperwork properly. There was no money involved."

The incident is chronicled in an OIR quarterly report released earlier this year.

Gennaco said strides have already been made at the sheriff's Industry Station to reduce the potential for theft.

"The way things are done now in Industry are totally different," he said.

The department is also reviewing several other internal policies and will consult with the Board of Supervisors, Whitmore said.

Other options include taking the department to a cashless system, he said.

"One of the difficulties is we've got 40 cities and each city kind of has its own way of doing things," Whitmore said. "The whole key here is to encourage people to be honest."

La Puente officials are also reviewing their own cash handling procedures.

Staff Writer Frank C. Girardot contributed to this story.

tania.chatila@sgvn.com

(626) 962-8811, Ext. 2109

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

Bailouts for CA pensions next up

I knew this was coming. You could see the writing on the wall 3 years ago or more. So we the taxpayers bail out the banks and Wall St. Then we bail out AIG. Now we are going to have to bail out the pension funds of those hard working cops who bring lawsuits upon us taxpayers (when the shoot and taser people "accidentally") as well as all their "hard working" civil servant cousins. Yes that's right Joe Taxpayer. You go to end of the line. Too bad your 401k just ate it in the last two weeks. No one to bail you out. But who will pay the cops $100,000 a year retirement and gold plated healthcare for life with cost of living when Wall St. dented their pension funds? YOU WILL of course. Wake up private sector zombies! You better get in line for your bailout before its all gone! You know what rolls down hill...and guess who is at the bottom. You cant really have a bigger train wreck can you? Idiots in government running a pension fund the size of a small country and when they screw up they get bailed out.

Like I say all the time. The solution to the problem is that we all go work for the government and leave the private sector jobs to third world (soon to be first world) countries. Next we will nationalize the banks. Ahh socialism is great ain't it? Well it is if you are a public employee. The rest of us have to pay for it.

Retirement system bailout feared
By Troy Anderson, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/08/2008
http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_10674612

The Wall Street meltdown has siphoned tens of billions of dollars from local and state public pension systems over the past year, and elected officials and taxpayer groups expressed worry Wednesday that taxpayers might ultimately have to bail out the plans.

The state retirement system has lost about $50 billion in investment value since June 30, 2007, a drop of about 20 percent in just over a year.

Los Angeles County's system has dropped 8 percent, from $40.9 billion down to $37.8 billion, during the same period.

The city of Los Angeles Fire and Police Pension System dropped 13 percent, to $12.1 billion.

And the state teachers retirement system has also dropped 8 percent, down to $158.6 billion.

Former Assemblyman Keith Richman, who heads a foundation seeking pension reform in California, said the drop in assets "is going to put a severe financial strain on the taxpayers."

He noted that state taxpayers already are on the hook for several hundred billion dollars in unfunded liabilities for public employee pensions and retiree health care plans.

"The public employee pensions were going to place a heavy cost on the taxpayers before the drop in the stock market and it's going to be even more costly now," said Richman, president of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said the drops in the funds, especially the $49.2 billion drop in CalPERS, are "Exhibit A" in why state lawmakers should have adopted Richman's plan a few years ago to shift new state employees into 401(k)-type retirement plans.

"So not only do private employees see their own 401(k) retirement accounts shrinking, they are now also on the hook to pay additional costs for public sector pensions that are unfunded," Coupal said. "This is highly unjust."

But California Public Employees Retirement System spokeswoman Patricia Macht said the system has experienced heavy losses before, only to recover fairly quickly. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the fund lost about $50 billion but ultimately rebounded with a $120 billion gain, she said.

CalPERS holds about 56 percent of its investment portfolio in the stock market, she said, but no more than 0.5 percent of that in any single public company, with additional diverse investment in bonds, real estate and commodities.

"One lesson we learned in the early 2000s was the need to hold back some of our gains - to spread our gains over a longer period of a time," she said.

Macht said the taxpayer contribution to CalPERS won't need to be increased in the fiscal year starting July 1. But she said CalPERS will have to wait to see how the market does before determining if the taxpayer contribution will need to be increased in future years.

Les Robbins, chairman of the Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, said the board has plenty of money to pay for county employees' pensions.

"We haven't seen anything like this since 1929," said Robbins, a retired sheriff's sergeant. [is this not inconsistent with his prior statement...never mind he is a cop already on the dole...LAAG Editor] "But we're in this for the long haul. We work in 30-year cycles. We are a conservative fund." [Yes and so were my 401k stocks..again public employees in denial of reality]

Michael Perez, general manager of the city's Fire and Police Pension, said the fund has dropped significantly and he's gotten lots of calls from worried members.

"It's affected us as it has every other public pension system," Perez said. "We're a well-funded and well-diversified plan and we smooth asset values over a five-year period. We've been in existence since 1899 and have been through a lot of market cycles."

At Tuesday's Board of Supervisors meeting, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky expressed concerns about a recent LACERA report noting the fund has exposure to several large investment banks that filed for bankruptcy, received a federal bailout or were purchased by another bank, including Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., American International Group Inc. and Merrill Lynch Co. Inc.

LACERA Chief Investment Officer Lisa Mazzocco wrote that the fund has more than $150 million invested in companies that could be at risk.

"The magnitude of this week's events is incomprehensible," Mazzocco wrote. "In a matter of 10 short days, the country's financial system has been dramatically altered."

Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke said LACERA had initially estimated it may lose $84 million.

"We had a lot of warning," Burke said. "And so I was really surprised that there was such a difference in terms of the approach of the county and the approach of LACERA as it related to some of those investments."

But Yaroslavsky said the $84million is "pocket change" compared to what the losses may eventually total. Yaroslavsky said the county may ultimately have to bolster the LACERA fund with hundreds of millions of dollars.

The annual taxpayer contribution to the fund has risen from $194million in 2001 to $752 million last year.

"The real impact is going to be when we have to make up what could be in the nine figures on the retirement contribution - to make up the difference between what they lost in earnings and what has to be put in to meet the requirements of funding the pension plan," Yaroslavsky said.

troy.anderson@dailynews.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

LAPD innovation needed at LA Sheriff's Dept.

Once again LASD (Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept.) is way behind the times and LAPD (Los Angeles Police Dept.), an organization just as large as LASD and just as bureaucratic. Yet with forward thinking leadership via "Broadway Bill" Bratton (appointed not elected no less) we get some pretty innovative ideas. His crime mapping idea borrowed from his ideas while in NYC seems to be making progress. The latest idea is the tip site. We like the idea and will monitor its progress. Another idea is LAPDTV which this week is airing live crime scene work from the excavation of a possible burial site of a murder victim from the 1960's. Pretty innovative stuff. LAAG likes government transparency. That is very hard to come by with LASD. We all know what happens without oversight (i.e. the subprime mortgage financial mess).

Don't expect anything like this from LASD which is still policing in the 1970's. Time for some fresh leadership at LASD. Too bad we have to leave LASD leadership election up to the voters.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-text18-2008sep18,0,2533933.story
From the Los Angeles Times

LAPD unveils new tipster tool: anonymous text messages
Chief William J. Bratton says he hopes the new technology will generate more crime tips from the public.
By Richard Winton, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 18, 2008

Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton on Wednesday unveiled a new system allowing people to provide anonymous crime tips to police through text messages and the department's website.

Bratton said he hoped the new technology, which protects the sender's identity, would generate more crime tips to the LAPD from the public.

"Far too often, victims and witnesses are too afraid to come forward out of fear of retaliation. Today, we're changing that," said L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who appeared at a news conference with Bratton.

Villaraigosa demonstrated the new text message system, sending an anonymous message from a cellphone saying he had witnessed a robbery and that the suspect had entered a grocery store at 8th Street and Broadway. After sending the message, the mayor received a reply assigning him an alias, which he could use to contact police and provide additional information.

Messages from tipsters are delivered to the Los Angeles Police Department's Regional Crime Center, the agency's information hub for daily operations through which tips are relayed to detectives and patrol officers in the field. The system also allows officers to communicate with the anonymous sender via text messages, according to LAPD Capt. Joel Justice.

Justice said the text message system was already used by police in New York, Boston and San Diego.

Tipsters send text messages to 274637 -- which spells the word CRIMES -- then type LAPD. The message is routed through a national system to Los Angeles police. Tipsters will also be able to convey information on www.lapdonline.org by clicking on the WebTips icon.

At the news conference, law enforcement officials said they hoped the public would use the system to assist police in cracking high-profile crimes, such as the Aug. 2 slaying of L.A. County sheriff's Deputy Juan Escalante, who was attacked outside his Cypress Park home, and the string of 11 slayings in South Los Angeles dating back to 1985, which police say were committed by a serial killer.

"We need more clues than we have now," said LAPD Deputy Chief Charlie Beck, who is overseeing the serial killer investigation. "We will solve this crime, but we would rather solve it sooner rather than later." richard.winton@latimes.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

Oriental fruit fly "invasion"

Fortunately this time the county/state is not using aerial malathion spraying to kill the fruit flies as they did with the Mediterranean fruit fly in the early 1990's as that likely killed off millions of badly needed honey bees that help to pollinate the fruit trees and everything else. See more on the bee crisis (colony collapse disorder) here

Crop-Destroying Fruit Flies Found In Lakewood
http://cbs2.com/local/oriental.fruit.flies.2.825940.html

LAKEWOOD A half-dozen Oriental fruit flies were found in Lakewood traps this week, causing agricultural officials to extend eradication efforts for at least eight more weeks to combat the crop-destroying pest, it was announced Thursday.

Eight of the insects were discovered in the Lakewood and Pasadena-San Marino areas between July 23 and Aug. 16.

Having emerged victorious after a long battle with the Mediterranean fruit fly, state and county officials moved quickly to protect the state's $32 billion agricultural industry, initiating a series of treatments using pesticide-laced bait to attract and kill male fruit flies.

The bait, sprayed on utility poles, is applied every other week, said Ken Pellman of the county Department of Agricultural Commissioner/Weights and Measures.

State agriculture workers also have been cutting and checking fruit growing in the area for the presence of maggots.

A quarantine established to restrict the movement of fruit and vegetables from or through the Lakewood area covers a 75-square-mile region where the bulk of the fruit flies were found.

It was not immediately clear when the quarantine would be lifted.

No aerial treatments have been planned, according to county officials.

The Oriental fruit fly is described by agricultural experts as one of the world's most destructive insect pests. Mated females lay eggs inside a wide variety fruits and vegetables. The maggots that hatch from those eggs then feed on the flesh of the produce, rendering it unfit to eat.

Originating from Southeast Asia, the insect has established itself in Hawaii and other Pacific islands.

Further information is available by calling the California Department of Food and Agriculture Pest Hotline at (800) 491-1899.

Those wanting to transport fruits or plants in or out of the region should call (562) 940-7803.

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

Use of personal email accounts for government business

see our story update 3-29-11 at bottom of this post

We reprint the story below from the Washinton Post to again put all public officials on notice that using a "personal email" account for official government communications subjects the entire contents of the email account to public records act requests. We went through this before with the Karl Rove camp using @RNC (republican national committee) email addresses for official government email as a way of subverting public records requests. We have brought this issue to the attention to the Lakewood City Council numerous times yet all five still use their personal email accounts and not accounts @lakewoodcity.org. So we wait until this blows up in their face much like it did for poor little Sarah Palin, who only a few months ago was herself a lowly city council member. We also brought up to to the city council a number of times that they did not post ANY email addresses on the city website for citizens to contact them directly. We feel the reason for this is much like Bush, Cheney and McCain who don't use email simply because they want no paper trial of any of their activities. The fewer Lakewood residents that email the council about issues the better. That way there is no trace of the issue, the date, or the response or lack thereof. Then like most politicians, when the the problem blows up they can say they never knew about it (and you have no way of proving it)

All the Palin email was posted at Wikileaks.org and that site was overloaded all evening. Apparently the news media is pouring over it or the secret service is trying to take it down. Gawker had some posted.

Once again Lakewood City Council, you are on notice that this practice is wrong and needs to stop. Oh and for those that dont have the councils "non official" (and only) email addresses here they are:

Todd Rogers -- tsrr@msn.com
Joe Esquivel -- bayoujo@aol.com
Larry Van Nostran -- oldeacon@aol.com
Steve Croft -- stacro@aol.com
Diane DuBois -- diane4citycncil@aol.com

Hackers Access Palin's Personal E-Mail, Post Some Online

By Michael D. Shear and Karl Vick
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 18, 2008; A04

A group of computer hackers said yesterday that they had accessed a Yahoo e-mail account of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee, publishing some of her private communications to expose what appeared to be her use of a personal account for government business.

The hackers posted what they said were personal photos, the contents of several messages, the subject lines of dozens of e-mails and Palin's e-mail contact list on a site called Wikileaks.org. That site said it received the electronic files from a group identifying itself only as "Anonymous."

"At around midnight last night some members affiliated with the group gained access to governor Palin's email account, 'gov.palin@yahoo.com' and handed over the contents to the government sunshine site Wikileaks.org," said a message on the site.

Rick Davis, the campaign manager for Republican presidential nominee John McCain, issued a statement yesterday afternoon condemning the incident.

"This is a shocking invasion of the Governor's privacy and a violation of law," he said. "The matter has been turned over to the appropriate authorities and we hope that anyone in possession of these e-mails will destroy them. We will have no further comment."

The episode focuses attention on Palin's use of her personal e-mail account as lawmakers in Alaska look into whether she fired the state's public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan, because he refused to take action against her brother-in-law, a state trooper at the time.

Palin has been criticized in recent days for using a personal e-mail account to conduct state business. An Alaska activist has filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking disclosure of e-mails from another Yahoo account Palin used, gov.sarah@yahoo.com.

That account appears to have been linked to the one that was hacked.

Both accounts appear to have been deactivated. E-mails sent to them yesterday were returned as undeliverable.

Andrée McLeod, who filed the FOIA request, said yesterday evening that Palin should have known better than to conduct state business using an unsecured e-mail account.

"If this woman is so careless as to conduct state business on a private e-mail account that has been hacked into, what in the world is she going to do when she has access to information that is vital to our national security interests?" she asked.

McLeod's Anchorage attorney, Donald C. Mitchell, said Palin declined to comply with a public records request in June to divulge 1,100 e-mails sent to and from her personal accounts, citing executive privilege.

"There's a reason the governor should be using her own official e-mail channels, because of security and encryption," the attorney said. "She's running state business out of Yahoo?"

McCain officials did not return calls and e-mails seeking further comment on the hacking and McLeod's remarks.

The images of the Yahoo inbox posted by hackers are stippled with the names of Palin aides using both official and private e-mail addresses.

Among the e-mails released as part of the records request in June were several from Ivy Frye, an aide, asking a state official whether private e-mail accounts and messages sent to BlackBerry devices are immune to subpoena, then reporting the answer to the governor and her husband, Todd, who also uses a Yahoo e-mail address.

One referenced "Draft letter to Governor Schwarzenegger/Container Tax" and another said "DPS Personnel and Budget Issues," an apparent reference to the Alaska Department of Public Safety.

Michael Allison, chief executive of the Internet Crimes Group, a private company specializing in Internet security, said the hackers may have accessed Palin's account by using publicly available information to guess her password, or by using a small program called a trojan to capture her keystrokes.

"I would hope the authorities would be all over this," Allison said. "The only deterrent is that people know the certainty of being caught."

Government Uses Commercial Email and Texting to Avoid FOIA Laws
Read More: Democracy, Disclosure, Email, Foia, Texting, Transparency, Twitter, Politics News
Peter Scheer
lawyer, writer and advocate for 1st Amendment rights
Posted: August 22, 2009 01:27 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-scheer/government-uses-commercia_b_265809.html

All public officials favor open government in principle. Who would dare say otherwise? In reality, however, they are in a perpetual search, guided by clever lawyers, for new ways to circumvent disclosure requirements--at best, because they view requests for records as a nuisance, and at worst, because they have something to hide (which can range from the merely embarrassing to the indictable).

The latest device for openness avoidance is the use of personal email accounts (and, increasingly, text messaging too) for government communications. Mayors, city council members, agency executives and school superintendents have been told that if they do government business on their gmail or yahoo accounts--anything but their official .gov email--their communications, no matter how focused on government matters, will never see the light of day.

What do your elected representatives do when they believe that their messages about government business are secret? In San Jose, city council members, like proverbial puppets on a string, take instructions during council meetings on how to vote, according to a San Jose Mercury News report on text messages sent by representatives of unions and other special interests.

The former San Bernardino County Assessor, who was arrested on drug charges and is under grand jury investigation, used electronic messaging on personal cell phones to direct his staff in partisan political activities, according to a report of an independent investigation commissioned by the county. The investigators found that the assessor and his staff had chosen this means of communicating in order to avoid creating public records.

You don’t have to be a legal scholar to appreciate the size of the loophole that this practice creates. If all it takes to avoid the obligations of the Public Records Act, California’s freedom of information law, is to use a commercial email account for official communications, then all such communications--except the occasional anodyne and self-serving message actually intended for public consumption--will shift to that private channel. The Public Records Act, already porous with special interest loopholes, might as well be renamed the California Official Secrets Act.

Lawyers for local government say that email and text messages sent or received on a private account, no matter their content, are not “public records” because they are not “. . . owned, used, or retained by” a government agency, as the Public Records Act requires. Electronic communications are “owned, used, or retained by” government only if they reside on a government server, they say. Despite the superficial plausibility of this reasoning, it is, indeed, only superficially plausible.

A government agency doesn’t do anything except through people--employees, elected officials, consultants, whatever--who are the government’s agents. Without getting too deep into legalese here, the point is that the actions of the government’s agents are imputed to the government, and the government is responsible for those actions. An arrest by a police officer, a mayor’s promise to a campaign contributor, a public school teacher’s grading of a student paper--all are actions of and by the government entity that these people represent.

The same is true for written communications about government matters that these people create or receive, regardless of the technology used or the account status. The communications are “owned,” “used” and “retained” by government because they are owned, used and retained by persons in their capacity as agents of the government.

Here’s an analogy. Suppose the mayor of your town, at a private meeting in her private home, signs a written agreement with a contractor to expand the local airport. The agreement is a paper document in the mayor’s house, miles away from her office at city hall. There is no doubt that this document is a public record that belongs to the town because it is “owned,” “used” and “retained” by the mayor as the town’s agent. Nothing changes if the document sits, not on the mayor’s kitchen table, but in the digital in-box of her personal email account at msn.com. Either way, it’s indisputably a public record that belongs to the town.

Finally, the objection is made that a search through a government official’s commercial email account for requested public records is overly intrusive. But any intrusiveness is due to the official’s choice to mix his personal email messages with his emails about government business. The remedy is not to deny citizens their access rights, but for government to adopt email use and retention policies that mitigate, if not eliminate, the problem.

What policies? Consider this proposal:

1) Agencies and local governments should set up one email account with gobs of storage capacity. To keep it simple and inexpensive, a corporate account (offering extra security) with Google or Yahoo will suffice.

2) Agencies’ .gov email accounts, by default, should “bcc” all emails to the government database account.

3) All government employees should be instructed that, when using their own commercial email account for government matters, they must “bcc” their business messages to the database account (and forward incoming business email there too). Basically, any email that is not strictly personal should be copied to the online storage account.

These three simple steps produce a comprehensive government database that provides the agency with a valuable archival resource; allows for consistent application of document retention policies; and, perhaps most important, is fully searchable using search engine technology with which all employees are familiar. Any public records requests for email can be quickly and simply processed through searches of the archive. (No IT personnel are needed!)

Many elected representatives have become proficient at using technology to thwart public access to government. Why not, instead, use technology to enhance the transparency and accountability of government?
----
Peter Scheer, a lawyer and journalist, is executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, based in San Rafael, CA. http://www.cfac.org


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

California headed over a cliff

People used to joke about California falling into the ocean after the "big" earthquake. Well given what has happened on Wall St. this last week and given our unprecedented late budget, California may fall into the ocean all right. An ocean of debt. Tom McClintock, who is termed out this year and is running for congress sadly summed up California's predicament at the conclusion of the budget process on September 15-16 (11 weeks beyond the Constitutional deadline of July 1...but hey that's just the state constitution...its meaningless). We felt this needed to be aired as surely the mainstream press will not cover this as it needs to be covered:

Sen. McClintock: "I believe we've now also passed the point where conventional budget reductions can restore our state's finances. I believe we've reached a terminal stage of a bureaucratic state where our bureaucracies have become so large and so tangled that they can no longer perform basic functions. This fiscal crisis will now only get worse until we are willing to tell the Prison Guards Union, sorry but we're putting our wardens back in charge of our prisons. It can only get worse until we're willing to tell the Teachers Union, sorry but we're putting our teachers back in charge of their classrooms and we're putting our principals back in charge of our teachers. The bureaucratization, and the centralization and the unionization of our service delivery systems have simply priced our government beyond our economy's ability to support...

...I close my 22 years in this legislature tonight with this final warning. California's budget crisis will only worsen until the public elects a legislature and a Governor willing to restore the governing principles and practices under which this state once flourished, or until the credit market finally stops lending the state money..."

When McClintock concluded his statement there was utter silence from the Legislature. Not one democrat or republican said anything in opposition.

So is California headed the way of Vallejo and Lehman Brothers? I guess we will know next time this year.

For the remainder of McClintock's budget statement read below:

http://republican.sen.ca.gov/web/mcclintock/article_detail.asp?PID=346
Debate on the State Budget
Senator Tom McClintock
Date: August 29, 2008
Publication Type: Press Release

Mr. President:

Last year, when some in this chamber assured us that the budget was not only balanced, but included the biggest budget reserve in the state’s history, others of us issued an urgent warning that the budget was dangerously unbalanced and that we were fast running out of the time needed to implement reforms.

The State Controller reports that during last year we received $96 billion in revenues – a new record -- but spent $107 billion. And now we’re running out of money.

I am concerned that conventional budget reductions alone will no longer bridge the fiscal gap without severely impacting delivery of vital services.

We have centralized and unionized and bureaucratized our service delivery systems to the point they can no longer adequately perform the basic tasks for which they were designed.

Simply stated, we have created a bureaucracy we cannot afford.

We cannot afford spending 1/3 of a million dollars per classroom when only a fraction of that actually trickles into the classroom to educate our kids.

We cannot afford spending $42,000 to house a prisoner when Florida does it for $18,000 and the federal government for $26,000.

We are going to have to clear away the massive bureaucracy in our public schools that does nothing to educate our children and instead put teachers back in charge of their classrooms, put principals back in charge of their teachers – including the authority to hire and fire -- and put parents back in charge of their principals through their local school boards.

We are going to have to rescind the sweetheart labor contracts in our prisons, restoring management authority to the wardens and contracting out at least 50,000 prison beds.

We are going to have to replace the massive bureaucracy in our health system with a simple prepaid refundable tax credit to bring within the reach of every family a basic health plan of their selection.

This is the only way we are going to be able to maintain vital services without bankrupting the state. But if the consensus does not exist to enact conventional budget reductions, it certainly doesn’t exist to enact a fundamental restructuring.

During my 22 years in this legislature, I and others have laid out all these proposals, but they have fallen on deaf ears. There is some bitter irony in the fact that those who have voted against these proposals year after year accuse Republicans of not offering alternatives when that is all we have done year after year. But at some point very soon, these reforms, or others like them, will have to be enacted.

Senator Ducheny tells us that the budget before us is a baseline budget; that it merely continues business as usual. The problem is that business as usual produced $11 billion of red ink and we cannot afford to do so again.

Nor can I agree that the path to fiscal recovery is through taking the highest sales tax in the nation and raising it still higher with the second biggest tax increase in the state’s history. In that respect, I agree with Barak Obama who last night said: “In an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class.” And yet that’s the first thing this budget does.

I was here in 1991, and I warn you that raising the sales tax did not improve our finances – it made them worse.

The census bureau reports that in the last two years, a half million more people have moved out of California than have moved in. The historic migration FROM Oklahoma and Arkansas TO California in the 1930’s has now reversed itself in an historic outmigration of Californians TO those states with lower taxes and vastly less burdensome regulations (including Oklahoma and Arkansas). The difference is that the dust-bowl migration was caused by an act of God – the new migration is caused by acts of government – OUR government.

Those acts are fully within our power to reverse – but that will mean reversing the policies that have wrecked the once Golden State of California.

I would conclude with an observation on process. It is good that for the first time since the budget deadline we finally have a formal budget proposal on the Senate floor to begin deliberations. But it is unfortunate that this did not arrive on our floor in May. And it should have stayed on this floor day after day until it cleared the 27 votes needed to send it to a conference committee.

So I would ask those of you who voted to send an empty budget bill directly to the conference committee earlier this year to contemplate the damage that was done by bypassing the entire legislative process. And I would express the hope that the next session of the Senate finally return to the traditions and procedures that served this state so well for many, many decades and that produced relatively balanced and relatively punctual state budgets.


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

Remember this little gem from 2002? You will now..

Like it or not property taxes will go up in LA county this year due to a little remembered Measure B passed in Nov. 2002 that basically gave the County Board of Supervisors a blank check and a way to bypass Proposition 13's limits on property taxes. When will the voters learn? These cute little measures passed in good times (using the typical scare tactic ads that ER care will dry up if you dont pass it) come back to haunt voters years later when they can least afford it. Well voters, the next time you pass a measure like this, think ahead a few years. And remember its not the cost to the taxpayers that is the real rub...its the waste of tax dollars built into the system that is the problem. To read the arguments pro and con on the 2002 Measure B (to refresh your recollection) click here

EGP News Service
http://www.egpnews.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=browse&id=%3C!id!%3E&pageid=1270

Property taxes in Los Angeles County were raised last Tuesday, Aug. 12 in an effort to bail out the Department of Health Services.

The county Board of Supervisors approved the increase of Measure B taxes by 0.0072 cents per square foot of improved property to raise an estimated $45.2 million annually, which will be used to help alleviate the department’s massive budget deficit.

Supervisor Michael Antonovich cast the sole dissenting vote, though Supervisors Zev Yaroslavsky and Don Knabe both expressed frustration that the department’s request for more tax money was not accompanied by a plan for eliminating its structural deficit.

“To me this just represents a shell game. It’s not really dealing with the systemic issues with the department,” Knabe said. “You still have not given us a deficit management plan.”

Health Services faces a budget deficit of $93.7 million over the coming fiscal year, which is projected to balloon to $484.9 million the following year due to federal and state funding cuts as well as expected rollover of debt, according to a DHS memo.

“I think Supervisor Knabe’s frustration is shared to one extent or another by all of us, but that doesn’t change... the fact that in a global sense, something needs to be done,” Yaroslavsky said. “We need this now. We need this in this fiscal year.”

Faced with the possibility that two of the four county-run hospitals might have to close their doors, Measure B was approved by voters in 2002 to raise funds for the county’s beleaguered health care network.

Measure B previously taxed improved property at a rate of 0.03 cents per square foot, generating $142 million annually, according to a report from county Chief Executive Officer William Fujioka.

With the tax hike, the owner of a 1,500-square-foot home or business will wind up paying $10.80 more annually, or $55.80 total per year.

Non-reimbursed trauma and emergency costs at county hospitals have increased about 11 percent annually--totaling $103.3 million--since 2003. Continual funding shortfalls have been plugged with one-time funding allocations that have since dried up, leaving a structural deficit in their wake, Fujioka said.

County officials will direct $36.8 million of the money generated annually through the tax hike to offset the costs of unreimbursed trauma and emergency services, with the remaining $8.4 million to be devoted to non-county trauma hospitals and bioterrorism preparedness.

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

Likely Homicide near South St. and Woodruff St.

You can bet we will not hear anymore on this from LASD (Lakewood Sheriffs). They tend to sweep things like this under the rug. No details on if the body was in a house or just on the street. But if being investigated by homicide detectives I think it is likely that it is an obvious homicide. The 5900 block of Edgefield Street is right next to the intersection of Woodruff St. and South St. This is the LASD press release


Aug 11, 2008 4:45 am US/Pacific
Woman's Body Found In Lakewood
LAKEWOOD, Calif. (CBS) ― The death of a woman whose body was found in Lakewood was being investigated today by homicide detectives, a sheriff's deputy said.

The woman's body was discovered in the 5900 block of Edgefield Street,
near Woodruff Avenue, about 6:15 p.m. Sunday, said Deputy Byron Ward of the Sheriff's Headquarters Bureau.

No further details were immediately available, he said.

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