We told you so

We hate saying that but its true. We objected to this free for all spending way back in Nov 2006. Unfortunately elected officials are just like 16 year old girls with their first credit card. Of course as the savings rate in this country is negative 1% I guess we could say that politicians are just a reflection of the nations reckless spending habits which is now going to cost the taxpayers but also the savers. It really is too bad that government no longer responds to or works for the people. It only operates to serve and feed itself. I suggest county Chief Executive Officer Bill Fujioka take the first step and cut his nearly 400,000 yearly salary.

L.A. County awaits fiscal wallop
By Troy Anderson, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 11/28/2007 11:58:10 PM PST
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_7584881

Los Angeles County officials are bracing for a round of belt-tightening as property tax revenues fall short of expectations on drooping home values and the state prepares to cut off additional funds.

While soaring property values have poured millions into county coffers in recent years, officials say they expect revenues to increase just 2 percent to 5 percent next year - compared with 9 percent this year - as the real estate market cools.

At the same time, California's fiscal woes are worsening as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has asked all state departments to prepare for 10 percent cuts amid a slowing economy and unexpected setbacks that have created a nearly $10 billion budget shortfall over the next two years.

While county Chief Executive Officer Bill Fujioka said he is optimistic, he is preparing a report on the potential effects on the county budget as the first property tax checks start rolling in Dec. 10.

"We aren't seeing any negatives in that area yet," Fujioka said. "As far as the state budget, it's early ... I've been talking to friends of mine in the Legislature and they are saying the problem is much worse than what is being publicly reported."

In the past five years, property tax revenues collected countywide have nearly doubled to $4.6 billion, helping to boost the county budget to $21.8 billion.

Flush with cash, the Board of Supervisors has approved hundreds of millions of dollars on everything from
Advertisement
pay raises, bonuses, pension and health-benefits improvements for the 100,000 county employees.

Hundreds of millions of dollars also have been spent to reopen jails, hire new sheriff's deputies, probation officers and social workers, and set aside about $100 million to address homelessness in the county.

Financial problems

Still, the county continues to face a variety of financial problems, including a health department deficit expected to hit as much as $854 million by 2010-11 and liabilities to pay for retirees' health-care costs estimated at $13 billion to $20 billion.

"My only observation is, the government will spend every dollar they are given and then some," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

"There is no discipline to save for the future. The warning signs with the subprime fallout have been there and yet the county and the city continue to spend like nothing is wrong - as if taxpayers have an endless supply of revenues for government needs."

The city of Los Angeles collects about $1 billion in property taxes each year, providing 20 percent of the general fund. So far this year, property tax revenues are still strong and the collection rate is 97 percent, finance specialist Rex Olliff said Wednesday.

"There's no reason to think there will be a big drop in property tax this year. It's (in) the 2008-09 budget that we'll start to see the effect of the real estate downturn," he said.

Collection rates are expected to fall as foreclosures rise. And the big boost in tax receipts generated by home sales and high new prices will slow.

But the cooling market already has had an effect on money generated by the real estate transfer tax, which is a fee charged when a property is sold.

Transfer tax receipts from November have dropped 35 percent compared to the same period last year.

"While the real estate decline has not played out fully in the city of Los Angeles, as it has in other surrounding markets, these latest numbers do not bode well for the city budget or local economy," said Controller Laura Chick.

As the housing market slumps in California, local governments are seeing declines in property tax and sales tax revenues, said Paul McIntosh, executive director of the California State Association of Counties.

"So most counties are starting to take a look at their budgets in the current year to see how they are faring," McIntosh said. "I haven't heard about anybody having to make any cuts, but they are certainly concerned about the next budget.

"And we expect the state to have a $10 billion deficit and look for ways to balance that. Counties are always cautious and concerned when that happens."

Despite a measure that bars California from raiding local coffers, it does allow the Legislature to borrow local governments' property tax revenues in times of need.

While Board of Supervisors Chairman Zev Yaroslavsky said he doesn't see that as likely, he said because the county is a pass-through agency for state and federal funds, any broad cuts could affect health, welfare and other services the county provides.

"The degree of seriousness will vary from county to county and city to city depending on how they have managed their budgets," Yaroslavsky said. "We are better positioned than, say, the city of Los Angeles, or other counties.

"But we will be impacted. If we have to dip into reserves, that will be an impact. If we have to defer capital spending, that's an impact. Those are things we'll do before making cuts."

Values dropping

Meanwhile, although the assessed values of properties in the county rose from $570 billion in 2000 to more than $1 trillion this year, the rate of increase is expected to significantly slow next year.

And as some people who recently bought homes watch the values drop, Assessor Rick Auerbach said he's seen a slight increase in the number of people appealing their assessed values.

Two years ago, 12,172 homeowners appealed their valuations - this year that's expected to hit 13,000 to 14,000.

Auerbach said he doesn't expect to see that increase significantly until 2008, when people get property tax bills reflecting the recent declines in housing prices.

The bills homeowners will receive next month reflect January 2007 assessments.

Meanwhile, the number of foreclosures as of Sept. 29 totaled about 8,800 - or 8 percent of reappraised transactions - nearly triple the 3,184 last year that accounted for 1.7 percent of transactions.

"My general impression is we're lower than most places because most places have had more development in the last couple of years and the areas with more development have had the newer loans, the problem loans, and so there is more chance of foreclosures," Auerbach said.

In an effort to properly assess the value of homes that may have dropped in price, Auerbach said his office will use computer modeling to determine homes that will need reductions for property tax purposes.

"Hopefully by the end of May, we'll be notifying taxpayers for their 2008 assessment if they deserve a reduction in value," Auerbach said.

"Obviously, for most people, a reduction in value means the actual value of the property has gone down in the last year. That's the bad news because, for most people, their home is their largest investment.

"The good news, at least in some small way, is that their property taxes will also go down."

Staff Writer Kerry Cavanaugh contributed to this report.

troy.anderson@dailynews.com 213-974-8985

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

More Tesco "Fresh and Easy" Protests

We are going to take a wait and see approach with Fresh and Easy. We want to see how good their prices and selection are and if they give Pavillion$ a run for their money. We dont like Tesco's (Fresh and Easy's parent) animal rights position in China, but quite frankly their labor position makes sense. Pay 10.00hr to start and keep unions out. Just like Food for Less. Ever compare non union Food for Less prices with Vons/Safeway prices? Huge difference. We had family visiting from NY this Thanksgiving that said Vons/Pavillions prices were out of control. I guess that is due to caving into the union (in the 2007 strike threat) and paying for all that overpriced healthcare for what should be an after school job and not a career. Welcome to $3.00 potatoes and "hidden inflation" due to union pressures. Like the bumper stickers say "Live better Work Union". No wonder many of these cities in this area are working so hard to keep Wal Mart grocery stores out. The city leaders are all pro union or at least beholden to them.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-fresh27nov27,0,5284237.story
From the Los Angeles Times
Community groups protest Tesco's Fresh & Easy
By Jerry Hirsch
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

November 27, 2007

The British owner of the new Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Market grocery chain had to contend with uninvited guests Monday, when about 100 activists from a coalition of community groups protested outside a meeting with investors.

Tesco, Fresh & Easy's parent company, had hosted U.S. and British institutional investors and money managers at a Santa Monica hotel to update them on plans for the chain, which began opening stores in Southern California this month.

The stores debuted to crowds of curious and excited shoppers, many of them welcoming the stores to their neighborhoods and cheering the chain's convenient locations and selection of fresh and prepared foods.

The Alliance for Healthy and Responsible Grocery Stores, which comprises 25 community groups, was protesting Fresh & Easy's refusal to meet to discuss a proposed "community benefits agreement." It sought to bind the food retailer to certain wage levels, affordable health benefits and greenhouse gas reduction.

The coalition also has questioned Fresh & Easy's commitment to open stores in under-served and low-income neighborhoods.

"Financial analysts and investors from all over the world have been gathered here by Tesco so that they can tell them how profitable Fresh & Easy will be," said Elliott Petty, a retail policy analyst at the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy. "However, we are also here to educate -- and make absolutely certain that those men and women understand that Fresh & Easy will face incredible resistance if they continue to refuse to engage this community."

Tesco, the world's third-largest retailer, is spending $2 billion to build hundreds of small grocery stores in Southern California and the Southwest.

It has opened eight Trader Joe's-size stores in Southern California and plans to open one in Lakewood and another in Laguna Hills on Wednesday. It doesn't accept coupons and has no plans for a club card program.

And it does not have a union workforce, which was a big reason behind the protest. At the rally, Maria Elena Durazo, head of the 800,000-member Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, protested Fresh & Easy's refusal to meet with labor and community groups.

"Tesco, remember everywhere you go, we are going to be there. We are not going to give up until you treat our community with respect," she said.

Fresh & Easy has no plans to meet with the community groups or labor officials, said Brendan Wonnacott, a spokesman for the chain. "Any outside representation will be up to our employees," he said.

Despite the criticism from the coalition, he said, Fresh & Easy remains committed to opening stores "in all neighborhoods" and is building a Compton location. He said that the chain had identified 18 store sites in Los Angeles where it would like to build and that some were in low-income areas.

jerry.hirsch@latimes.com

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

Not just in LA or Ca anymore..its all over

Sooner or later the voters/taxpayers will wake up. But it will likely be too late. The taxpayers need to take on the government workers and the unions as the politicians sure as hell are not going to do it.

Why L.A. is going broke
City worker costs up 7.5% a year, but revenue up just 5.7%
By Beth Barrett, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 11/18/2007 12:52:27 AM PST
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_7494599

Online Poll
Do you think city workers are overpaid?
Yes 72.5 %
No 27.50 %

Salaries, pensions and benefits for Los Angeles city workers have soared in the past seven years, outstripping revenue growth and pushing the city toward a serious budget crisis, according to a Daily News study.

Since 2000, Los Angeles workers' costs have surged 53 percent - to $4 billion a year - rising an average 7.5 percent every year.

General fund revenues also grew strongly but only at an average 5.7 percent a year.

The result is a swing of almost $1 billion, pushing the city from a surplus to an anticipated shortfall of $300 million next year.

"It's almost like we're working for them; they aren't there to serve us. The situation has gotten badly out of whack," said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the nonprofit Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp.

Why the large gap between employee costs and revenue growth? It's the power of city employee unions to get politicians elected to office, said Alice Rivlin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office and now a senior fellow at Brookings Institution, a highly respected think tank based in Washington, D.C.

"It's very hard politically for mayors or city councils to go against (unions)," Rivlin said. "They can turn out the votes and turn out the lights."

One example of city employee unions' clout in Los Angeles is the recently negotiated contract covering most city workers - except police and firefighters, who usually do as well as or better than
Advertisement
other municipal workers.

The contract - which comes at a time when when revenue growth is expected to fall sharply - provides 23 percent wage increases over the next five years. Those increases come on top of regular "step" increases that can add as much as 5.5 percent a year to workers' pay.

The new contract attempts to contain health-care costs long term, but comes after pension costs have skyrocketed 231 percent.

As the city races to keep up with worker costs, its $7 billion budget - including the general fund - gets balanced because of reductions elsewhere. Liability claims, for instance, have declined 11.4 percent this decade.

City Administrative Officer Karen Sisson said officials are now taking a longer view to address the gap as the housing downturn is predicted to slow revenue growth to just 1.3 percent next year.

Sisson said a central element will be working with unions to boost employee productivity - including offering cash incentives in the latest contract - without cutting services to the public.

"Part of that process is to work with the city to make it more efficient and innovative," Barbara Maynard, spokeswoman for the Coalition of L.A. Unions, said of the city unions' recent contract deal.

And that includes trying to reduce costs of health care, which the unions think is the primary driver behind escalating city expenses.

"It's in everyone's best interest to lower insurance costs," Maynard said.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has ordered general managers of all departments to absorb cost-of-living increases but not cut services. He also has asked them to submit budget proposals that contain their plans if faced with cuts of as much as 8 percent.

The city is using a recently approved trash-fee hike to pay for new police officers, and it is putting $16 million more into new police facilities, increasing firefighter-recruit training, continuing extended library hours, and increasing the number of homeless shelters.

About 4,000 of the city's nearly 40,000 positions are unfilled and could stay that way. At the same time, the city is grappling with the potential loss of a telephone-users tax that could sap $270 million a year from the budget.

Two courts already have found that changes in the tax three years ago made it illegal. In anticipation of a definitive ruling next year, Villaraigosa and the City Council last month declared a fiscal emergency and put a new phone tax on the February presidential-primary ballot, where it will need only a simple majority to pass instead of the two-thirds required for nonemergency measures.

"With the crisis in the housing market and other developments in the economy, we can no longer expect to get unanticipated revenue at the end of the year, which means we must budget very, very closely," Sisson said.

"We're going to be forced to continue to deliver services with fewer resources than we've had historically."

City Controller Laura Chick, the watchdog on city spending, warned the city is adopting a crisis mode that will hamstring general managers' creativity.

"What we never do is figure out that if we're increasing the cost of delivering services, where are we getting comparable revenue? How are we delivering services more efficiently and effectively?

"What the city does in a reactionary way to these crises ... (is) we stop hiring, let positions go vacant. We run on a crisis/emergency budget where we slash and burn wherever it's doable - and not necessarily in a strategic way.

"It's a bad situation."

The fact that the city's elected officials are the highest paid in the nation has been a particularly sore point. In the past two years, the mayor, City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo, Chick and council members have seen their paychecks increase 20 percent.

The policy that ties their wages to judges' salaries means they get a 4.16 percent raise retroactive to July1, the fourth boost since early last year.

Meanwhile, workers' compensation also has jumped - from $100 million to $127 million. And the recent deal for workers without police or firefighter status will cost taxpayers more than $200 million. While most of these employees' last contract was for a 6.25 percent pay raise over three years - no raise the first year, 2 percent the second and 4.25 percent the third - their average raises were about 7.7 percent with the step increases factored in.

Maynard said that while some employees got the step increases, others reported they still couldn't keep up with rising costs in Los Angeles.

"Back in the good old days, there was a trade-off: If you worked in government, you didn't get what the private sector did, but you had security and good benefits, and that seems to be tossed on its side," Kyser said.

But Sisson said city officials are now working differently with unions.

The new contract says that if workers can find $25 million in sustainable, verifiable savings, they will get an equal payment in "flex dollars" in the last year of the contract to buy additional benefits or take in cash.

Sisson said the five-year contract provides budget stability. And she said that with six unions participating, it has resulted in standardization of bonuses and other financial items.

It also delays by six months when most new employees get their first 5.5 percent step increase in pay, which amounts to a $4 million to $6 million annual saving.

Sisson said that with stagnant revenues, the city is facing a tough situation. But, she said, it's manageable.

"'Crisis,' to me, implies that you haven't thought about it and you don't know how to get out of it," she said.

"And I think we have thought about it, and we have planned for it, so in that sense, it's not a crisis."


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

email re San Gabriel River Bikeway Safety/Crime Concerns

Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:24:17 -0800

To: "Capt. Dave L. Fender" , "Lt. Terry W. Benjestorf" , "Diego Cadena, Dep. Dir." , "Afshari, Shari, Div Head" , "Paul Maselbas, Principal Eng" , "El-Rabaa, Maged, Program Dev." , "Alma Fuentes, Bicycle Coord." , "Connie Sziebl, LB rep" , "Erin Stibal, Lkwd rep" , "Carol Oberman, lkwd office" , "Julie Moore, DPW coord" , mayor@longbeach.gov, "3d Dist Gary DeLong" , "Julie Maleki, Ofc of Councilman DeLong" , "4th Dist. Patrick O'Donnell", "5th Dist. Gerrie Schipske" , "Joy Janes, chief of staff 5th dist" , "Todd Rogers, Lkwd City Council" , "David N. Carmany, City Manager" , "Lee Whittenberg" , Dina_Zapalski@longbeach.gov, "City Mgr" ,

From: Lakewood Accountability Action Group | LAAG

Subject: San Gabriel River Bikeway Safety/Crime Concerns
Cc: (media)

I assume this task force (noted below) started due to LAAG's emails months ago re the crime problems all along the river. We feel LAAG should be part of this task force as far as making or reviewing some recommendations as we dont need more tax dollars wasted on ineffectual approaches. We know where the problems are. One thing would be to suggest a crime hotline (posted on all the overpasses visible to users) and email address for users to report suspicious people. LAAG has been doing that for months now. Most of these criminal types hang around for a while down there before striking. Police cannot get them as they cant sneak up on them in cars as cars stand out like a sore thumb down there unlike on the street. Very hard to get cars in down there secretly. (thus the cops on bikes approach)

Another idea is the "cage off" some of those water inlets right at the opening to the channel which would close off hiding areas. Those are where the criminals hide from the police cars that roll above (as police dont go into the channel bottom with cars). This could be done in a way to allow water flow. Also caging off some of the underpass "caves" like at willow as we suggested (and was done) years ago at south st. undercrossing. Path lighting would not hurt either (as we suggested) and was done at del amo underpass. Cameras on poles like at intersections and on freeways? Plenty of ideas if you know what the problems are.

LBReport.com
News

Councilwoman Schipske Says Multiple Agencies To Tackle San Gabriel River Bikeway Safety/Crime Concerns

(Nov. 14, 2007) -- Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske tells LBReport.com that multiple agencies -- including LBPD, Seal Beach PD, Cypress PD, the L.A. County Sheriffs Dept, the office of L.A. County Supervisor Don Knabe and Schipske's Council office -- are preparing to tackle safety/crime-related issues regarding the San Gabriel River bikeway.

Councilwoman Schipske says that for the past four months, her staff has been working with Supervisor Knabe's office to launch the bike path safety task force...and its formal launch is expected to be announced shortly.

"We've been concerned about safety issues along that bike path for some time...and it's very unfortunate that we had another incident on Monday" Councilwoman Schipske said...referring to a story reported by LBReport.com.

On Nov. 13, LBReport.com reported that a man riding his bicycle on the San Gabriel River bike path near El Dorado Park on Nov. 12 was ambushed, hit and robbed of his bicycle and cell phone, and sustained injuries to his face

LBPD Public Information Officer Sgt. Zapalski said that the bicyclist was riding on the east side of the San Gabriel River bike path near Spring St. when he was confronted by a male subject who hit the victim and caused him to fall off of his bicycle. The assailant took the victim's bicycle and cell phone...and left with a second male subject.

The bicyclist sustained injuries to his face and was transported to a doctor by a familymember.


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

Bike Jacking on San Gabriel River

Like we have said before, the San Gabriel River is just an invitation to criminals. We need bike mounted patrols there and more helicopter patrols. We see loitering all the time by very suspicious looking people. Now we have to assume they are not "harmless homeless". I spoke to another rider there who passed the area just before this happened and did see 2 or more Hispanic males loitering in the area where this occurred. This is a Nature Preserve area and there are lots of hiding places just east of the river trial. Big police presence after it happened (5 cars mostly blocking other riders from getting through)

Local crime briefs
Article Launched: 11/12/2007 10:02:17 PM PST
Cyclist robbed near S.G. River

A cyclist riding on a bike path along the San Gabriel River was robbed by two suspects on Monday morning, authorities said.

The victim was riding southbound on the east side of the San Gabriel River near Spring Street at 10:09 a.m. when he was punched in the face by a suspect, said Sgt. Dina Zapalski of the Long Beach Police Department.

The blow knocked the man off his bike, Zapalski said. While he was struggling on the ground, the suspect took his cell phone and rode off on his bike. The robber was followed on foot by a second accomplice, she said.

The victim suffered injuries to his face and was taken by a family member to a nearby hospital. The suspects are described as two Hispanic males in their late teens to early 20s, Zapalski said.

One suspect was described as very tall, wearing a baseball cap and a blue jacket. The other was described as short, with a buzzed haircut and dark jacket.

Anyone with more information is urged to contact LBPD's Robbery Detail at 562-570-7464.

- Kelly Puente

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

The Party's Over Folks

Unless you have been living in a cave over the last month you know we are headed for both inflation AND a recession. This was likely triggered by the sub prime mortgage melt down. Of course it does not help that the dollar is tanking, oil is rising to counteract the falling dollar and China realizes they are holding half of the debt of the entire US. But this is no worry for Government employees. Full speed ahead on the Titanic. Poblem is that when the Titanic goes down only Govt. employees will get lifeboats. Taxpayers will have to go down with the ship. Like the article says below, the slow people, those that only Oprah or entertainment TV (the lowest denominator voter) is starting to at least as questions about the pension issue.

Sutter debates public pensions Its controversial move to boost its benefits echoes statewide fight

By John Hill, Sacramento Bee, September 3, 2007

Sutter County may be a little off the beaten track, but it finds itself at the center of a statewide debate over whether local governments have granted extravagant pensions to public employees.

Three years ago, the Sutter County Board of Supervisors sweetened pensions for county workers, arguing that generous retirements would help the county recruit and retain workers.

The move was controversial from the start, with one prominent local official, Auditor-Controller Robert Stark, objecting that he and the public were given no chance to comment on the dramatic change.

Three years later — this June — the county grand jury called the decision "flawed" and laid out the fiscal consequences. The county’s pension plan had gone from being $38 million in the black in 2000 to $36 million in the red five years later.

"This has gone on all over," said Keith Richman, a former assemblyman behind a proposed initiative to scale back government pension costs by offering a less generous retirement to new state and local employees.

Organizers have not yet started gathering signatures for the initiative, which they hope to put on the November 2008 ballot.

"The fundamental problem is that more and more of government budgets are going to pay for retirement costs, whether you’re talking about the state or local governments," Richman said. "The money is not going to pay for other services like education or health care or public safety."

Public-employee unions counter that the state retirement system is sound, and that if the state and local governments roll back pensions, they will have to compensate by increasing salaries.

Sutter County officials defend their 2004 decision as a sensible way to maintain a qualified work force. They deny that it plunged county finances into a crisis.

"Our pensions are in great shape," said Larry Munger, a lifelong Sutter County resident who ran a market for 22 years and became a county supervisor in 1995.

Munger said he is not worried about the $36 million "unfunded liability" mentioned in the grand jury report.

"You buy a house, you’ve got an unfunded liability," he said.

The controversy, he said, has been kept alive by malcontents who have other bones to pick with the county. Munger said his constituents aren’t worried about pensions but are "sick and tired" of the critics.

Government pensions became a hot topic across California four years ago as state and local governments struggled to meet pension obligations in the midst of a fiscal crisis. The state and many local governments boosted pension benefits during the dot-com boom, when investment returns soared for the California Public Employees’ Retirement System.

Then the stock market tanked, even as the richer benefits kicked in.

In 2005, public-employee unions fought off Richman’s earlier attempt to cut costs by replacing the traditional pension system, which guarantees a set retirement income, with 401(k)- style accounts for new workers. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger scrapped the initiative after the unions waged a campaign saying it would cut off death and disability benefits for fallen peace officers.

Late last year, Schwarzenegger formed a 12-member commission to come up with a new proposal for dealing with pension costs. The commission is scheduled to issue its report by the end of the year.

In the meantime, local governments across the state have continued to struggle with pension costs. County grand juries and others have criticized the generosity of the benefits and how decisions were made.

Sutter County, Sacramento’s neighbor to the north and home to some 91,000 residents, increased pension benefits in 2004, after the pinch had already been felt in other jurisdictions.

Government pensions are based on a percentage of a worker’s highest annual salary multiplied by the number of years served.

In January 2004, the Board of Supervisors agreed to give rank-and-file county workers 2.7 percent of highest annual salary for each year on the job at the age of 55. That was a substantial increase from 2 percent. That August, safety employees got 3 percent at age 50.

The grand jury report faulted the Board of Supervisors for failing to consult with Stark, the auditor-controller, as required by its own rules.

Citizens got to comment only after the pension hike was a "done deal," the report concluded.

Some of the biggest beneficiaries were in upper management, the same officials who negotiated the deal, the grand jury found.

"The grand jury is not implying that these changes were engineered to primarily benefit those responsible for making them," the report states. "However, if that was their intent, they could not have designed a better process for leaving that impression."

Even though the pension hikes were meant to recruit and retain a county work force, critics say, just the opposite has happened, as workers with richer retirement prospects have headed for the door.

"I defy you to find any pension expert who says that allowing people to retire younger with more money encourages them to stay," Stark said.

The pension payments, meanwhile, take away from other pressing needs, critics say. Busy roads have not been resurfaced for years, said Wade Arnold, who describes himself as a "concerned citizen." The museum and the arts council have seen their budgets cut, he said.

The county’s backlog on maintaining roads is about $50 million, said Robert Mackensen, president of the Sutter County Taxpayers Association.

But Supervisor Jim Whiteaker said the critics are crying wolf.

"We’re very frugal and very conservative in allocating money, and we thought it was justified for our employees," he said.

Since the change, Whiteaker said, the county has filled 19 deputy sheriff positions that had been vacant.

Supervisor Munger dismissed the complaint that the public didn’t have a say. The pension concessions were made in contract negotiations with public employee unions, he said, and those meetings are never open to the public.

But critics say that the public is angry. Mackensen, of the taxpayers association, said he gets stopped on the street or the grocery store and told to keep up the good work.

The pensions can’t be rolled back without approval from public-employee unions. But they can be changed for newly hired workers.

"I think there’s hope because I think the public is waking up," Stark said. "This issue has been in the public’s eye for three years now up here, and that’s practically unheard of for something that for many people is an esoteric thing."


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

Fresh & Easy news

LAAG has confirmed that the Fresh & Easy in Lakewood opens Nov 28, 2007. Perfect timing. Looks like the activists are upset. We have had lots of hits on our prior articles

The Alliance for Healthy and Responsible Grocery Stores mentioned in the article below looks primarily like labor union issues (a-la walmart) vs environmental or animal rights folks like these along the lines of the PETA people. Looks like Fresh & Easy is really fighting hard to shed the bad image of Tesco Plc using some high powered PR on its website. Bring your turtle to the protest!


Tesco readies U.S. grocery debut as activists challenge
Wed Nov 7, 2007 1:39pm EST
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN0752902620071107?pageNumber=2&sp=true

By Nichola Groom

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Tesco (TSCO.L: Quote, Profile, Research) will debut its U.S. grocery stores on Wednesday to a select group of local officials, though activists skeptical of the British retailer's promise to bring wholesome foods to overlooked neighborhoods have pledged to challenge the company.

Tesco officially will open six Los Angeles-area "Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Market" stores on Thursday, though at least one of the grocery stores -- in the small town of Hemet, California -- opened last week.

The grocer's U.S. launch is being closely watched, with industry experts predicting it could cause a shake-up of the world's largest and most competitive consumer market. Tesco initially plans to roll out more than 120 stores across the southwestern United States beginning with the Los Angeles area and including San Diego, Las Vegas and Phoenix.

Later Wednesday, Tesco will unveil its first L.A. Fresh & Easy store in the Glassell Park neighborhood, and a group called the Alliance for Healthy and Responsible Grocery Stores has organized a press conference outside the store.

In a statement on Tuesday, the group said Tesco's track record raises doubts about its promises to create good jobs and environmentally friendly stores in neighborhoods that have been ignored by traditional grocers. The group's aim is to strike a binding agreement with Tesco that would insure that local residents share in the benefits of its stores.

London-based Californian Allyson Stewart-Allen, author of the business book "Working with Americans," said Tesco's experience with producing ready meals could provide it with a strong advantage over local players.

"Californians increasingly want ready meals. They are tired, it's 6 o'clock and they've been battling LA traffic for an hour," she said.

But Stewart-Allen warned the U.S. consumer movement is even stronger than in Britain where Fresh & Easy's parent company is a target for criticism by not-for-profits and media angered by its dominance of British retailing and how it has reshaped the consumer landscape.

This week, Los Angeles-area Occidental College professors Amanda Shaffer and Robert Gottlieb said Fresh & Easy's first 13 locations are "primarily in middle-class suburban areas, where income is generally higher than the county average and where the community already has access to a full-service supermarket."

Tesco, which has irked labor unions by opting against union membership for its employees, said on Tuesday that entry-level positions at its California stores would start at $10 an hour.

Employees working more than 20 hours a week will be eligible for health benefits, a retirement plan and quarterly bonuses of up to 10 percent, it said.

Tesco's Fresh & Easy launch is the most high profile British entry into the U.S. retail market, but reflects a wider Atlantic crossing by British brands. Marks & Spencer Group PLC (MKS.L: Quote, Profile, Research) Chief Executive Stuart Rose said on Tuesday he envisaged relaunching M&S in the United States through its Internet site M&S Direct and luxury-goods brand Burberry (BRBY.L: Quote, Profile, Research) is opening a slew of stores across the country.

Health-and-beauty chain Boots is seeing success with the sale of its own brand of products in Target Corp (TGT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) stores throughout the United States.

(Additional reporting by Rachel Sanderson in London; editing by Maureen Bavdek)

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

More bonds anyone?

Great Advice. Lets face it. No matter how many taxes we pay or bonds we taxpayers pay interest on (no bonds are not free) there will never be enough money for the voracious appetite of the "public safety" unions. Orange County passed some bond measures a few years ago just for firefighting readiness and the money was pissed away on foolish nonsense (in addition to out of control salaries and pensions). Pay more in taxes and it will get wasted. 90% that is true with so called "freebie" bonds advertised on the phony propositions. The reason is that the people we elect to guard the money are crooks and liars. The goal is to get govt. to use the money it already has more wisely before we turn into a socialist republic. Better yet just keep your fire and flood insurance up to date and quit pinning your hopes on the govermnet to help you out. Can't wait until the region is hit with a large earthquake. That will make Katrina look like like a holiday.

C A L I F O R N I A C O M M E N T A R Y
A weekly opinion column from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Don't Get Burned Twice
By Jon Coupal


Those who have suffered loss in the fires that have ravaged Southern
California could, along with other California citizens across the
state, get burned again.


There is no minimizing the extent of the calamity. During the worst
of the crisis, nearly one million people were compelled to evacuate
their homes. All those who were not in immediate danger had to do to
grasp the magnitude of the disaster was to watch the continuous
television coverage, or just look out their windows at the smoke on
the horizon.


While the vast majority of citizens feel genuine compassion for the
victims and admiration for the firefighters who have stood between
us and the inferno, there are those who have mixed feelings. These
folks may also feel for those who have lost their homes, and in some
cases their lives, but they also experience a quiet feeling of
elation. These are the members of the political class who see
opportunity in misfortune.


The debate has already begun as to what should and could have been
done to head off or minimize fire damage. Some have even gone so far
as to blame, without evidence, U.S. involvement in Iraq or global
warming. But back in the real world, a serious evaluation of our
fire suppression techniques and resources is justifiable. And it is
certainly appropriate that we look for lessons that will help us
reduce future risk.


Unfortunately, it is as certain as night follows day, that prior to
thoroughly evaluating any actual need, there will be politicians,
bureaucrats and leaders of public safety employee unions who will be
advocating new taxes "to keep us safe." Indeed, an opinion piece in
the San Diego newspaper has already blamed Proposition 13 -- "which
slashed property taxes" -- for the inability to organize a more
regionalized response to fire dangers. (Never mind that per capita
property tax collections in San Diego, even adjusting for inflation,
are far higher than they were just prior to Prop. 13).


The appropriate level of service and taxation is always a legitimate
subject for public debate. But before we let our emotional reaction
to the fires cloud our judgment, we should take a collective deep
breath.


Those who want more and higher taxes, which is most of the political
establishment, have no shame when it comes to playing on emotions to
get taxpayers to open their wallets. Their favorite tools to
manipulate votes are children, public safety and natural disasters
-- an extension of the public safety issue.


Almost everyone can remember being asked to approve a new tax
because "it's for the children." In recent years, Rob Reiner has
backed several tax increase initiatives, one that succeeded and one
that failed, that used children in this way.


For tax raisers, anything related to public safety is also
considered a good bet to squeeze more from taxpayers. Not long ago,
Los Angeles County voters were asked to consider a bump in the sales
tax for police. Backers of the higher tax ran a television ad
showing a woman and her daughter cowering in their home as someone
tried to break in. It was not hard to get the intended message that
you or your loved ones would become victims if the new tax did not
pass.


Natural disasters have played a major role in the high level of
sales taxes all Californians pay today. During the special election
of 1993, the Legislature placed on the ballot Proposition 172, a
permanent half-cent sales tax increase that would go to local
government for public safety, including fire suppression. Ten days
before election day, tracking polls showed the measure lagging. Then
several major wildfires broke out and made fighting fires a topical
issue. The tax promoters seized the opportunity and ran a
last-minute television blitz featuring soaring flames and sweating
firefighters. The dramatic ad turned the political dynamic on its
head and the tax for public safety was approved with 58 percent of
the vote.


Ironically, we are all paying more and we still have fires.
Politicians who will propose new taxes in the aftermath of the
recent disaster are hoping voters will have forgotten that we are
already paying higher taxes for fire protection. Let's be careful
not to get burned again.

Jon Coupal is President of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
-- California's largest taxpayer organization -- which is dedicated
to the protection of Proposition 13 and promoting taxpayers' rights.

This column can be found on the HJTA website at:
http://www.HJTA.org/commentaryV5-44


Friday, October 26, 2007
Pols, voters said no to fire funds
Firefighters' 2005 effort to fund new equipment was defeated 3-1
By NORBERTO SANTANA Jr. and TONY SAAVEDRA
The Orange County Register
http://www.ocregister.com/news/county-fire-orange-1911091-firefighters-resources#

Two of the Orange County politicians now complaining about the lack of air support for the Santiago Fire opposed firefighters' effort to purchase new helicopters and trucks two years ago.

In fact, county officials today are sitting on more than $80 million in excess revenue from a statewide public safety sales tax adopted 13 years ago.

That surplus has been a longstanding sore spot for OC firefighters, who at times this week were so overwhelmed they had to seek refuge inside fire retardant tents.

The firefighter's 2005 ballot initiative would have redirected a small portion of the ½ cent sales tax, providing $8 million for new helicopters and $33 million for new fire trucks.

But the entire Board of Supervisors, the sheriff and district attorney opposed the measure, saying it was an attempt to pick the pocket of county law enforcement. County voters rejected the initiative, with 73 percent voting no.

This week, State Assemblyman Todd Spitzer, R-Orange and Orange County Supervisor Bill Campbell joined Orange County Fire Authority Chief Chip Prather in blaming state fire officials for not sending enough air support during the early hours of the fire.

Spitzer called the lack of resources being delivered by the state "unconscionable."

That rankled firefighters, who remember that both Campbell and Spitzer campaigned against their funding measure and signed the ballot arguments against it.

"Many of those who are now complaining about inadequate resources are the very people who opposed firefighters' efforts to secure those resources," said Dan Young, who represents the Orange County Professional Firefighters Association.

Orange County firefighters have argued with the supervisors for years about the proceeds of the public safety tax. Firefighters say politicians used the devastating 1993 Laguna fire to sell the tax to the public. Orange County has collected more than $2 billion since the tax went into effect in January of 1994.

County officials maintain that the tax proceeds belong to the sheriff and the district attorney. They say the Fire Authority only serves 43 percent of the county and has its own property tax funding base.

The same argument has raged up and down the state, pitting firefighters against numerous county boards. In some counties, supervisors have shared the proceeds of the tax with fire departments.

In 2005, Orange County firefighters gave up on the lobbying and spent more than $600,000 to put a special ballot initiative together that would have diverted up to 10 percent of the county's share of the public safety tax to the Orange County Fire Authority. That would have been about $20 million a year.

In a February 2004 resolution adopted by the Orange County Fire Authority, the board of directors noted that "due to lack of sufficient funding, the authority has been forced to keep equipment in use that should have been replaced long ago, including Vietnam-era helicopters and aging wildfire fighting trucks."

A document presented to supervisors in 2004 noted that the consequences of continued funding shortfalls at the fire authority would mean a "greater likelihood that initial resources will be unable to control fires in their early stages so as to prevent additional losses."

The county supervisors, Sheriff Mike Carona, District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs and the Orange County Employees Association all fought a bitter campaign against the ballot measure, titled Measure D.

Supervisors Campbell, Spitzer and Chris Norby argued that the union-sponsored initiative sought to cover bad spending practices by the fire authority and dip into critical law enforcement resources.

"They weren't asking the voters to raise revenue. They just wanted to stick their fingers in the sheriff's and DA's pie. I didn't feel fire should be competing with law enforcement," Spitzer said.

Campbell saw Measure D as a move by the firefighters' union to "add new union members."

He came up with a novel idea for thwarting the ballot initiative: The supervisors placed three other initiatives tinkering with proceeds of the public safety tax on the ballot. .

All four were defeated by a three-to-one margin in November of 2005.

Young and the firefighters now say the funds from that ballot vote would have made a big difference during this week's fires.

Fire officials and experts from outside the county agree.

John "J.P." Harris, a retired 38-year veteran of the Los Angeles County Fire Department, said Orange County has only itself to blame for the lack of air resources this week.

"If Orange County wants to have adequate air resources for an initial attack on a wildland fire, the only way they can guarantee that is to own it," Harris said. "I feel (Fire Chief Chip Prather's) frustration. I just think citizens of Orange County, if they want to have air resources, they need to pay for it themselves and not depend on the state."

The Los Angeles City Fire Department has four helicopters -- double that of Orange County. The Los Angeles County Fire Department, the biggest on the West Coast, has 10 aircraft, including three large Sikorsky Firehawks. The city also rents two "Super Scooper" planes from September through January.

"Why do we have a fleet and others don't? Because the taxpayers of Los Angeles County pay for it," said Los Angeles County Fire Inspector Sam Padilla. "Where do you spend your budget?"

Orange County's Campbell said Friday that the fire authority does need to look at its resources. Perhaps, he said, the county should keep the two old helicopters and add two more.

"The fact we weren't able to get the resources we always assumed would be available, says we've got to relook at the assumption," he said.

Contact the writer: Contact the writer at nsantana@ocregister.com

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

Why corporate "lobbying" is a problem

This is not a new issue. Govt. regulators "perks travel" (really disguised vacations) paid for by trade groups comprised of companies that they are supposed to regulate. LAAG did not think this was going on at the CPSC level (just large agencies like FDA), but apparently the fireworks industry (most notably in bold below) and others are now accused of the practice. Now you wonder why the CPSC was so slow on the uptake on the lead problem in children's toys. So now how safe do you feel using so called "safe and sane" fireworks? Do you think the CPSC is really checking into their safety?

LAAG also did a little checking beyond what the Washington Post did and found that Tad Trout, the president of American Promotional Events West (doing business as TNT Fireworks) was, as of 2006, the president of the Board of Directors of the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory and regularly speaks on their behalf.


Industries paid for regulators' travel
Heads of product safety agency took trips from manufacturers, lobbyists
By Elizabeth Williamson
The Washington Post
updated 12:56 a.m. PT, Fri., Nov. 2, 2007
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21589678/

The chief of the Consumer Product Safety Commission and her predecessor have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children's furniture industries and others they regulate, according to internal records obtained by The Washington Post. Some of the trips were sponsored by lobbying groups and lawyers representing the makers of products linked to consumer hazards.

The records document nearly 30 trips since 2002 by the agency's acting chairman, Nancy Nord, and the previous chairman, Hal Stratton, that were paid for in full or in part by trade associations or manufacturers of products ranging from space heaters to disinfectants. The airfares, hotels and meals totaled nearly $60,000, and the destinations included China, Spain, San Francisco, New Orleans and a golf resort on Hilton Head Island, S.C.

Notable among the trips -- commonly described by officials as "gift travel" -- was an 11-day visit to China and Hong Kong in 2004 by Stratton, then chairman. The $11,000 trip was paid for by the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory, an industry group based in an office suite in Bethesda [conveniently where the CPSC is headquartered...LAAG editor] whose only laboratories are in Asia. The CPSC says that at the time, the group had no pending regulatory requests. But since then the fireworks group has urged the commission to adopt its safety standards, an idea that is still pending, according to an organization newsletter.

Intensified criticism
Consumer groups and lawmakers intensified their criticism of the CPSC this summer after several highly publicized recalls of Chinese-made toys that contained hazardous levels of lead. Critics have long charged that the agency has become too close to regulated industries, opting for "voluntary" standards and repeatedly choosing not to take legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products.

Government-wide travel regulations state that officials from agencies such as the CPSC should not accept money for travel from nonfederal sources if the payments "would cause a reasonable person . . . to question the integrity of agency programs or operations."

But CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions.

"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added.

Several ethics experts and lawyers say the two administrators' travel records, some of which they reviewed at the request of The Post, suggest a conflict of interest.

"This is a blatant violation of the ethics code," said Craig Holman, an expert on governmental ethics law for the nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. The rules allow nonfederal sources to pay for trips, "but not if you're a private party with business pending before the agency," he said.

Differing travel patterns
The agency's travel patterns during the Bush administration, detailed in internal agency documents, differ from those of the Clinton era. Ann Brown, who served as chairman from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls, according to the documents.

"We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown.

The records show that Nord and Stratton repeatedly accepted gift travel for events from industries subject to CPSC enforcement. In February 2006, the Toy Industry Association provided Nord with rail fare, two nights in a hotel, meals -- and even $51 to pay her Union Station parking bill -- to attend the American International Toy Fair in New York, one of the industry's biggest product exhibitions.

Joan Lawrence, the association's vice president who oversees toy safety, said that "I have heard some enforcement officials say that they consider attending vital" because "they are able to see new products before they hit retail shelves" and suggest safety improvements. She added that "approximately 50 percent of the CPSC budget is used for children's products."

But Lawrence could not say why, given the importance of the event and the industry, the agency did not pay for its own travel. "If they came up with the money, that's okay," she said. "The educational component, of course, is our priority, and that's why we pay for the chairman."

Vallese, the CPSC spokeswoman, said Nord gave two speeches at the meeting, toured "new toy exhibits," watched "product demonstrations" and participated in "product safety discussions."

In a presentation to a trade group of product regulators and manufacturers last year, Nord said the agency was "working aggressively" to limit deaths from residential fires and carbon monoxide poisoning, according to an account published on the group's Web site. She noted that "fuel-fired heating equipment" is linked to more than 300 deaths a year.

Makers of that equipment are represented by the Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association, for which Stratton, Nord's predecessor, was a guest speaker at two annual meetings. In 2003 Stratton spoke at the group's meeting on Hilton Head Island in South Carolina. In 2005, he spoke at its annual meeting in Orlando.

The meetings drew more than 300 manufacturers' representatives and spouses for seminars, a dinner dance and golf. While the association's manufacturers are regulated by three other government agencies, its vice president, Joseph Mattingly, said he could not recall paying for any attendees from those agencies.

Stratton said: "My view was we needed to engage industries and not only tell them what we expected but also to learn what they were thinking. . . . You can't do that sitting in the ivory tower at the CPSC."

The records also detail several trips that were paid for by lawyers who represent manufacturers in product liability lawsuits.

In February, for example, Nord accepted more than $2,000 in travel and accommodations from the Defense Research Institute to attend its meeting in New Orleans on "product litigation trends," according to her report. The institute is made up of more than 20,000 corporate defense lawyers. In 2004, Stratton attended the group's meeting in Barcelona, at a cost to the group of $915 for his hotel room.

'Cordial and accommodating'
They are the biggest government agency that would have impact on the stuff that we do," said Steve Coronado, a former chairman of the group's product liability committee, which has 3,000 members. "They've been very cordial and accommodating and gracious," he said of the agency's past three chiefs.

Coronado said that Nord was the group's main presenter in New Orleans and that she briefed 1,000 lawyers about "what their processes and procedures are, rules and regulations changes." He added: "I don't think it was a very politically oriented presentation." A CPSC spokesman did not respond to a request for direct comment by Nord on this trip and others.

Coronado said Brown, the Clinton-era agency chairman, also spoke to the group. But agency records of her non-CPSC-financed travel do not list that trip, suggesting that it was not paid for by the lawyers group. Gilbert, the former CPSC executive director, called DRI's contribution toward Stratton's hotel bill in Spain "amazing."

Stratton said the group "wanted to know where the CPSC was going on various product issues, and they wanted to know what the companies [the lawyers represented] could expect, what the government was thinking in regard to their issues." He said lawyers who sue companies over product-related injuries never invited him to speak.

Stratton gave a general defense of his more than 25 trips, which included a trip to China that the Toy Industry Association paid $8,000 to help finance. "Everybody wants to see the chairman," he said. The fireworks group that paid for a separate China trip did not respond to an e-mailed request for comment about its contacts with the CPSC.

Some say the commission's approach to gift travel points to a Bush administration philosophy that favors engaging corporations in policymaking that affects them. "This administration apparently has taken the position that speaking and appearing before the regulated community, even where there are enforcement matters pending, does not create the appearance of a conflict," said Kenneth Gross, an ethics lawyer at Skadden, Arps.

Different lines
"These are difficult and subjective lines to be drawn," he said. "Prior administrations have drawn that line in a different place."

Nord was a corporate lawyer at Eastman Kodak before her appointment. Stratton led Lawyers for Bush in his home state of New Mexico during the president's 2000 campaign and co-founded the Rio Grande Foundation, which advocates limited government and supports free-market economic principles.

The CPSC refused a request to review copies of internal documents related to several trips or its internal gift-travel regulations. But the records document a pattern of travel that varies from the stated habits of top officials at four other regulatory agencies.

The Securities and Exchange Commission, for example, "does not accept host-paid travel reimbursements or in-kind payments from any organization regulated by the agency," said spokesman John Heine. Food and Drug Administration rules likewise do not permit outside travel payments from regulated companies, organizations "engaged in any lobbying activities" or those that receive "more than ten percent of their income from a corporate source," among other restrictions.

The Federal Communications Commission bans travel paid for by regulated companies or others with business before the agency, for officials from division heads upward, according to spokesman Clyde Ensslin.

F. Gary Davis, who helped establish the Office of Government Ethics in 1978 and served as its general counsel and deputy director until 2000, said the government-wide regulations were imposed "to ensure that there is no appearance of impropriety when you're dealing with a prohibited source." He said that it is conceivable that some of the CPSC's industry-sponsored trips were justified but that in those cases, the agency should be prepared to make its decision-making records available.


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

Sales tax vs property tax "incentives"

Well sales tax or property tax LAAG really does not like seeing tax dollars used as incentives for mega-wealthy private corporations. If all cities were barred from this practice by state law then there would be an even playing field. In any event since this practice is going on and no one seems willing to stop it, LAAG suggests that some tax money "incentives" be used on the South and Bellflower shopping center.


http://thedistrictweekly.com/wp_dev/daily/investigations/2007/10/22/turns-out-lakewood-gives-away-public-money-too/
TURNS OUT LAKEWOOD GIVES AWAY PUBLIC MONEY, TOO
Dave Wielenga
October 22, 2007

Every time Long Beach offers to rebate sales tax to mega-retailers in an attempt to lure their business to town, some reporter is sure to call Lakewood City Hall for comment. That’s what I do, anyway. Lakewood kinda likes to righteously remind the world that it doesn’t stoop to such self-cheapening tactics.

“Lakewood has never given away sales-tax revenue to induce businesses to come here or to keep them here,” the city’s longtime spokesman D.J. Waldie told me in June–a few days after the Long Beach City Council voted to kick back nearly $1 million in sales tax to Best Buy in hopes of luring the electronics store to the Marina Pacifica Mall.

But it turns out that the Lakewood Redevelopment Agency has found other ways to pay the Macerich Company — the gigantic shopping center development conglomerate that owns the Lakewood Center Mall — approximately $7.9 million during the past seven years. The money has been laid out in a couple of multi-million-dollar lump sums and a curious long-term arrangement to lease parking spaces.

The rationale for the payments — authorized on September 14, 1999 — was to entice Macerich to expand the Lakewood Center Mall, which is the city’s biggest economic engine and provides the bulk of the sales-tax revenue that Lakewood uses to supply services to its residents.

Who are the members of the Lakewood Redevelopment Agency? The very same people who compose the Lakewood City Council–many of whom often receive campaign contributions from Macerich.

Their plan to put money in Macerich’s pockets has two parts:

The first consisted of a pair of $2 million payments to Macerich–one delivered when building permits were issued for the mall’s expansion and the other when the mall’s wing actually opened in 2000.

The second was a 15-year contract that commits the Lakewood Redevelopment Agency to pay Macerich between $450,000 and $750,000 per year to “lease” 1,900 parking spaces at the mall. Since 2002, those lease payments have totalled some $3.9 million. That’s an average of $650,000 per year, although for the past three years — including the most-recent payment in mid September–the outlay has been the maximum $750,000. That translates to $390 per space.

Waldie didn’t flinch when we called him for comment this time, either.

“Our policy is against using sales-tax rebates to attract retailers to a development site,” he specifies. “But this situation is a redevelopment agency spending property tax increment revenue — an increase in property tax revenue within the redevelopment district — which can only be spent within that district. It doesn’t take away money from the general fund.”

But it does make it nice to be Macerich.

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