State of the City hoopla

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Foster was on vacation and unavailable for comment.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From: Lakewood Accountability Action Group | LAAG

Subject: RV/Trailer private property parking code revisions

Dear Councilman Rogers:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

Lakewood Accountability Action Group

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

Lobbyists call the shots now

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

They haven't done anything

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Coming to a City near you

Folks..its here...Time to pay the piper. Long Beach is just now realizing it. Read more here at LBReport.com. When will your city realize it? This year? Next year? You voted for these idiots (or failed to vote them out) and once behind closed doors they start shelling out pensions, perks and pay raises. Are you going to let them get ways with it? Orange County is not. John Moorlach is leading the charge. Read more here. But in the Socialist Republic Nanny State that is LA county we have no leaders with the guts to stand up to public labor unions, especially After Arnie's little run in with them last year in the fake proposition failure.


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

Perchlorate hearings delayed

Marchers Label Polluters ‘Public Enemy #1'
Thursday, 23 August 2007
RIALTO
http://www.blackvoicenews.com/content/view/41190/4/

By Chris Levister

Braving the scorching heat, dozens of angry residents and members of the Riverside-based Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice marched and rallied down Foothill Boulevard Tuesday demanding that polluters clean up water contamination.

Tuesday was supposed to be the first day of state hearings to determine if three companies should have to clean the chemical perchlorate from drinking water wells that serve thousands of Rialto and Colton residents. On Friday the group learned a Los Angeles judge issued a temporary stay to stop the hearings - thus postponing the proceedings - for the fifth time.

"We are shocked and alarmed that addressing this environmental disaster has been delayed through legal tactics by these polluters," said Jan Misquez, staff member of CCAEJ.

For nearly three years the group has been working to raise awareness on the issue of groundwater contamination by Goodrich, Black and Decker and PyroSpectacular.

The companies accused of the contamination all operated on the 160-acre industrial site used since World War II on the north end of the city.

"The state's inability to get these hearings off the starting block, leave us wondering who is protecting us? Who can we count on to protect our families?" said CCAEJ executive director Penny Newman.

Newman called the polluters "environmental terrorists" and called on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to assemble a task force to order the companies to clean up the mess.

"Justice delayed is justice denied. What do we want - clean water now," protesters chanted in English and Spanish.

The show of blue and white placards demanding clean up was dotted with WANTED posters embossed with photographs of the heads of the three companies accused of being responsible for the pollution. The signs labeled them "Public Enemy #1."

Newman lamented that with each postponement the plume of chemicals flowing south toward Colton and west toward Fontana endangers thousands of families. She said Rialto residents have paid $10 million in perchlorate surcharges since 2004.

Perchlorate is used in the production of explosives, including rocket fuel and fireworks. The chemical affects the thyroid gland, which controls growth, development and metabolism.

Rialto estimates it will cost $300 million to clean up the pollution. Perchlorate was discovered in the city's water supply in 1997. Newman said the latest postponement of 62 days will cause the city to lose another 800 million gallons of fresh drinking water.

"If necessary we will take this protest to Sacramento and beyond. We've got an environmental disaster on our hands. You can expect to see more pressure on elected officials."

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

laser show will replace the fireworks show due to perchlorate risks

People are starting to see the connection. When will congress which has two Perchlorate bills pending, both sponsored by Calif Senators Feinstein and Boxer, see the connection?

Novato drops Labor Day fireworks after concerns over water contamination

Joe Wolfcale
Marin Independent Journal
Article Launched:08/22/2007 06:03:19 PM PDT
http://www.marinij.com/marin/ci_6691972

Novato officials have canceled the fireworks display at the annual Labor Day at the Lake celebration because a chemical that contaminates drinking water was found in lake water after last year's event.

Water samples from Stafford Lake taken after last year's pyrotechnics showed a trace amount of perchlorate, a chemical dangerous for human consumption.

Water district officials believe the source of the perchlorate was an unexploded shell or shell casing that contaminated water in one area of the lake. City officials said, however, the contaminant level was so small it did not pose a danger to humans or require official notification to state agencies that monitor water systems.

A three-dimensional laser show will replace the fireworks show.

"We can't have that in our water supply, so it's a big concern for the water district," Novato City Manager Dan Keen said. "We had discussions right after the event last year and we just didn't have the comfort level we all wanted to have to proceed. I've seen a preview of the laser show, so it should be pretty interesting.

"We'll still have plenty of kid-friendly stuff."

Nearly 5,000 people attended last year's celebration. To date, the event has raised $180,000, with the proceeds benefiting the Novato Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department scholarship fund, Division Manager Katy Graves said.

"The fireworks was such a big draw for the event, we didn't want to lose it," Graves said. "We're really looking forward to the laser show and think it will be one of the first and biggest in the county."

Subsequent samples of Stafford Lake water showed no trace of the chemical. Water officials tested Stafford Lake after each fireworks show but found a high level of perchlorate only after last year's event, according to a Jan. 12 memorandum from Pablo Ramudo, water quality supervisor for the North Marin Water District.

Perchlorate breaks down slowly in the environment and is used primarily as a component of solid propellant rockets, missiles and fireworks. About 20 percent of Novato's drinking water comes from Stafford Lake; the rest comes from the Russian River.

"Our mission is to provide good quality water and we can't let entertainment get in the way of that," said David Bentley, acting general manager for the North Marin Water District.

"There are perchlorate-free fireworks made, but this is such an important matter, we didn't want to take any chances," Keen said.

Read more Novato stories at the IJ's Novato page.

Contact Joe Wolfcale via e-mail at jwolfcale@marinij.com

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

Fireworks and air pollution

Wildfires causing Valley air pollution
Regulators alert citizens with respiratory problems
FROM STAFF REPORTS
Article Last Updated: 08/16/2007 02:36:07 AM PDT
http://www.insidebayarea.com/trivalleyherald/localnews/ci_6637383

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has issued a cautionary warning for much of the San Joaquin Valley due to two fires in southern California.

The fires — the Zaca fire in Santa Barbara County and the Tar Canyon fire in Fresno County — have spiked particulate levels to 55 micrograms per cubic meter in Bakersfield, or 20 micrograms above the federally accepted level, said Brenda Turner, a spokeswoman with the air district.

Though those closer to the fires have more to be worried about, residents in San Joaquin and Stanislaus counties with respiratory problems, such as lung disease or asthma, or heart disease may want to stay indoors if they smell smoke, Turner said.

The immediate threat is small, but heavy winds could send smoke farther north.

To put particulate levels in perspective, fires in a fireplace also elevate the air to about 55 micrograms per cubic meter, Turner said. Fireworks raise the air to extremely high particulate levels. Modesto's fireworks boosted levels to 302 micrograms per cubic meter in July 2006.

However, particulate readings are averaged over a 24-hour period, and levels hit the 55 mark only once Wednesday.

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

Let the voters do what politician are too afraid to do

Once again the initiative system has to step in as pandering politicians wont do the heavy lifting. Why do we even bother with Sacramento? Lets just have initiatives all year long. Clearly they have lost the ability to govern and only do what the public employee unions want or threaten. Man are they going to get a wake up call when all these dumb ass taxpayers realize what lucrative pensions they are funding for these public employees (who retire at 50) while eeking out an existence on social security at 65 (their private job pension having been blown out years ago by mergers). WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Let people decide on public pensions
BY MARYLEE SHRIDER, contributing columnist | Friday, Aug 17 2007 7:05 PM
Last Updated: Friday, Aug 17 2007 9:51 PM

Public employee unions and the elected officials who cozy up to them have, for years, denied the growing crisis that is California's ponderous pension system.

It's a system that may yet break taxpayers' backs, but few in Sacramento are willing to stand up to union leaders who insist that plush pensions are their due.

So private citizens will have to do it for them.

One of those citizens was in Bakersfield last week with the good news that voting taxpayers may soon have the chance to take public pay matters into their own hands.

Keith Richman, a former 38th Districtassemblyman, R-Grenada Hills, who termed out last year, then helped form the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, said the foundation's sole purpose is to tackle the skyrocketing costs of public employee retirements.

During a speech before an appreciative lunchtime crowd at the Great Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce, Richman said the foundation's pension reform measure, which he hopes to see on the ballot in 2008, promises to check the spiraling costs of retiree benefits.

"If we don't there may be some government entities that go bankrupt and those that don't are going to die from a thousand cuts in services," Richman said. "Because of the strength of the public employee unions as a special interest group in California, I don't have any confidence at all Sacramento will address this issue."

The controversy started to swell in the late 1990s, when pension funds were making big investment gains in a booming economy. When that bubble burst early this decade, critics began to sound the alarm that lawmakers would soon be scraping to find the billions necessary to cover government workers' pension benefits.

They're remarkably generous benefits that I, as the wife of a retired city police officer, am well and gratefully acquainted with. So, unlike union leaders who continue to clamor for more and better benefits while dismissing the state's pension problem as wildly overblown, I can affirm that state, county and city employees -- particularly police officers, firefighters and prison guards -- enjoy some of the most lucrative wage and retirement benefits in the country.

It's time, said Richman, to "stop digging the hole deeper" and create a fair retirement benefit for new employees who complete a full career's work. That plan, as spelled out in the initiative, includes raising the retirement age for police officers and firefighters to 55; to age 60 for other public safety employees and to Social Security retirement age, 65 to 67-- for all others.

That step alone will save billions, Richman said.

"The 10 more years they'll be paying in gives the capital 10 more years to accumulate," he said. "The estimates for the changes we propose in the initiative are that the savings would be about $500 billion over the next 30 years -- more than enough to pay for the unfunded liability we've already accrued."

City Councilman Zack Scrivner, who has been accused by some in the media and undoubtedly at local union meetings of "demonizing" the public pension problem, said the issue is no longer what public employees deserve, but what the taxpayer can afford.

"What Richman is doing is looking at political reality," Scrivner said. "I am perfectly willing to accept the challenge to make any necessary changes locally, but the fix ultimately needs to happen on a statewide level. Because elected officials are not willing to take that stand, this unfortunately is a problem that will have to be solved by a vote of the people."

Leave it to the people -- a good idea that's long overdue.

To read the text of the CFFR's Public Employees Benefits Reform Act visit http://californiapensionreform.com/initiative.htm.

Marylee Shrider's column appears on Saturdays. Reach her at 395-7474 or mshrider@bakersfield.com.

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

The Summer 2007 California budget fiasco

Bush is the worst thing to have happened to the republican party in 50 years. He cant control spending (what Republicans used to be known for), he has this little "war on terror" thing going in Iraq (and elsewhere) which has cost a few dollars and lives and then there are the scandals (too many to name) that go along with being the party in control of congress and the white house for years Then there is the Stem Cell ideology (and related far right propaganda) that turns off main stream Republicans. But at the state and local level we need fiscal conservatives, regardless of what you label them (Dems or Republicans, or Independents). Unfortunately when all is done in Nov. 08 the Dems will control the Whitehouse and the Congress, the tab will come due on Iraq, healthcare, pensions etc. and the Dems will kill anyone making more than 60k a year with taxes. Just remember one thing. The "Republicans" in the Ca legislature are the only ones holding their finger in the dyke holding back a flood of spending. Dont confuse them with "Bush's party". Read more on the budget fiasco (and "driveby media" lies) here

GOP holdouts are on our side

By: North County Times Opinion staff

Our view: Republican senators block budget for state's fiscal future, traffic relief

Despite what you may have heard, Republican state Senators aren't blocking the door to a budget deal out of petulance or to score petty political points. Nor are they needlessly and recklessly jeopardizing the fortunes, finances and fates of all those relying on reimbursement from the state. Nor, for that matter, are 13 GOP senators holding up a long-overdue budget compromise so they can gut California's environmental laws.

The baker's dozen holdouts -- including the local state senators, Mark Wyland, R-Carlsbad, and Dennis Hollingsworth, R-El Cajon, who visited our editorial board Wednesday
audio (listen here) -- are taking a principled, critical stand on behalf of a balanced budget and traffic relief North County desperately needs.

In fact, these recalcitrant Republicans may not be going far enough: The "balanced" budget they are holding out for won't be balanced by any standard acceptable anywhere outside of Sacramento, not without factoring in the massive unfunded liabilities hovering over California's fiscal future like a sword of Damocles.

For too long, enough Republican legislators have acquiesced to the Democrats and Gov. Schwarzenegger's bloated budget demands. This year, finally, every senate Republican save one has drawn a line in the sand against deficits that our state can no longer afford even to slough off on our grandchildren.

A quirk of our state constitution enables a minority party to block the budget, requiring a two-thirds vote for approval. Although Democrats enjoy a majority in both houses, they can't pass next year's budget without the votes of eight Republican Assembly members and two Republican senators.

Holding fast to a demand that $700 million be cut from the budget, Ackerman's 13 -- the holdout senate Republicans led by Minority Leader Dick Ackerman, R-Tustin -- have succeeded in delaying a budget deal long past the July 1 deadline, and long after enough Assembly Republicans approved that chamber's budget deal for it to pass on July 20.

Ackerman's 13 have been accused of not taking "yes" for an answer, especially after Schwarzenegger vowed to use his blue-pencil power to trim $700 million from the Assembly-approved budget and balance next year's operating budget.

They may need to swallow hard and approve a budget under these less-than-ideal conditions. While the coming storm of unfunded health care and pension liabilities owed to state employees darkens California's fiscal horizons, we'd settle this year for a budget that at least begins to regain its balance.

But the senate GOP holdouts have also been accused of tying up the budget with ancillary issues, such as their demand that the state's still-fuzzy greenhouse-gas goals not delay the distribution of transportation funds. But the holdouts are right here, too: This isn't a trivial matter, and the billions of dollars we approved in bonds last November are part of this year's budget process.

Republicans argue that Attorney General Jerry Brown is threatening a speedy disbursement of transportation funding by insisting that California's counties account for greenhouse-gas emissions in their planning processes. Brown wants to use the California Environmental Quality Act to enforce last year's ambitious Assembly Bill 32, the "greenhouse gas bill" that aims to reduce such emissions 25 percent by 2020.

We support that goal, but we question Brown's strategy, and we're not alone. Even the head of the California Air Resources Board, the agency that is clearly mandated to implement the greenhouse gas law, has fretted that Brown's meddling could actually result in lax regulations.

Republicans are right to warn that Brown's grab for headlines and power will lead to lawsuits that delay long-overdue transportation projects. Those greenhouse-gas goals won't even be spelled out until 2012, far too long to wait for traffic relief. It's as if Brown wants to continue the crusade that he started as governor against the roads and highway improvements our growing state needs now more than ever.

Californians, especially North County commuters, must oppose this ill-considered effort, which would also hurt the environment Brown purports to defend. After all, traffic-caused smog is one of our greatest threats to human and environmental health.

Democrats could have approved stop-gap funding to pay state bills during the budget impasse. Instead, they went on a three-week vacation. When they return to their jobs, we hope they return to Republican lawmakers who continue to represent our interests, as unpopular and underappreciated as their stand may be.

Useful links:

Information about California's unfunded liabilities

http://www.lao.ca.gov/2007/ret_health_val/ret_health_val_050907.aspx

http://www.lao.ca.gov/retireehealth/RetFAQ.aspx

http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_2007/general_govt/gen_22_anl07.aspx

http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_2007/general_govt/gen_12_1920_anl07.aspx

http://www.lao.ca.gov/2007/ret_health_val/ret_health_val_050907.aspx

http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/5012/

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

The Public Employee Benefits Reform Act (2007)

1262. (07-0024) Reduces Public Pension and Retirement Health Care Benefits. Constitutional Amendment.

Summary Date: 8/13/07 Circulation Deadline: 1/10/08 Signatures Required: 694,354

Proponent: Keith Richman, John Moorlach, and Kris Hunt c/o Thomas W. Hiltachk (916) 442-7757

For peace officers, firefighters, public safety, and other public employees hired after July 1, 2009, this measure: reduces pension and retirement health care benefits; increases minimum retirement age; restricts early retirement; increases minimum age and years of employment needed to qualify for retirement health care benefits; and limits post-retirement pension increases. For all public employees this measure: prohibits retroactive increases in retirement benefits; requires public employers to make annual payments to fund future benefit costs; and allows public employers to adjust retirement contribution rates in future labor agreements. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Major reductions in annual pension contribution costs for employees hired on or after July 1, 2009, offset to an unknown extent by increases in costs for other forms of public employee compensation. Major short-term increase in annual governmental payments to prefund retiree health benefits, more than offset in the long run by annual reductions in these costs. (Initiative 07-0024.) click here to read full text of initiative

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