jaisizzle's blog

Eleventh hour in Sacramento

jaisizzle — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 23:04:01 +0000

Labor unions have been working on resurrecting a controversial bill in an eleventh hour maneuver in Sacramento over the weekend.

Assembly Bill 155 (Mendoza) would authorize the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (CDIAC) as a filter for municipalities to go through before filing for bankruptcy, originally created to provide information and technical assistance about debt issuance to public agencies and other public finance professionals.

AB 155 essentially died when Tony Mendoza capitulated in a Senate Local Government Committee hearing and refused to take his bill up for a vote because it didn’t have the support to pass, and now its back with a vengeance disguised in a completely different bill.

In what is known as a gut and amend, labor unions are using language similar to that of AB 155 and inserting it into SB 88 (DeSaulnier) in a less than transparent manner, mangling the democratic process and oversight through a gauntlet of trickery and allegiance. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

If SB 88 passes, CDIAC would have the authority to establish conditions, limit or deny changes to labor contracts. This is if CDIAC approves the request for a municipality to file for bankruptcy.

CDIAC is being sold by labor unions as an added measure of economic security for municipalities to weave through, claiming municipalities will file for and abuse bankruptcy to get out of honoring union contracts.

The great bamboozle with CDIAC, which consists of the State Treasurer, the Governor or the Director of Finance, the State Controller, two local government finance officials, two Assembly Members, and two Senators, and a bankruptcy court is that a bankruptcy court isn’t beholden to political influence or to particular group. Neutrality should dictate municipal bankruptcy, not political agendas.

The labor unions evidently aren’t going down without a fight, and that means there will be some hucksterism in the last days of the legislative session. In the wise words of Hunter S. Thompson, “Only losers play fair.” and moderately decent fiscal policy is at stake.

SB 88 was chosen by the labor unions to insert the language of AB 155 into because SB 88 has already been through most of the legislative process, it has been amended and is now eligible for a vote on the assembly floor.

Why this is so important for the public safety and labor unions throughout the state, because this bill will provide labor unions more control over municipalities finances and make permanent union contracts, should municipalities go bankrupt. This leaves public safety unions unscathed and immune to economic realities, and perpetuate unsustainable fiscal policy within each municipality.

It is arguably the most important bill for labor unions this legislative session and thus the most important bill municipalities as well in order to maintain the little control they already have over their finances.

In a phone conversation today with Dwight Stenbakken the Deputy Executive Director for the League of California Cities he noted that, “Unions want to stop a local government from breaking a collective bargaining contract with them.”

Consider the raid of cities’ coffers by the state to the tune of $3.7 billion to close the budget gap. The state of California will borrow $2 billion from cities and counties and $1.7 billion from local redevelopment agencies.

In a press release from the LOCC on May 5 it states that this raid by the state, “will threaten the safety of every Californian…For most cities police and fire protection make up 60 - 80 percent of their budgets.“

This legendary raid and the possible implementation of CDIAC increases the probability of cities filing for bankruptcy and on top of that make it much more difficult to file for bankruptcy protection.

The fate of the labor union bill is even more precarious. Substantial changes to a bill that are as monolithic as SB 88, Assembly Rule 77.2 states that the speaker can refer the bill back to a policy committee to be heard, if Assembly Rule 77.2 is invoked.

Just this afternoon the bill was passed off the Assembly floor and is being sent back to the Senate.

According to Stenbakken it is unlikely that the bill will be sent back to a committee since Senator Pat Wiggins (D-Santa Rosa) decides whether or not that happens as the Chair of the Senate Committee on Local Government, she also happens to be a coauthor of AB 155.

The bill could be heard as early as this evening but its more likely to be heard tomorrow.

Last Friday was the last day to amend bills, that same day a floor alert was sent by the LOCC to the legislators in both houses warning of the gut and amend to SB 88.

SB 88 opens the door for labor union abuse of contracts while hijacking the taxpayer unnecessarily for their insatiable demands.

Another interesting twist and not without heavy doses of irony is that Mark DeSaulnier the author of SB 88 was appointed by Darrell Steinberg to chair the legislative committee in charge of examining reform of the legislative process.

In a recent press release from Speaker Bass’s office outlines the Joint Select Committee’s responsibilities including making government more transparent and accessible from around the state, diminishing the influence of special interests.

The fox is officially guarding the chicken coop and dusk is approaching.

Justin Smith can be reached at justinsmiths@gmail.com

Topics:

Politics

Yell Tort Reform to prevent socialism

jaisizzle — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:22:44 +0000

The town halls are all the rage nowadays, now that people are bringing weapons to them and healthcare is assumed to be synonymous with Socialism.

I remember the days when the Iraq war was still important and you couldn’t drag or pay the community to these things in any significant numbers, and there was always a seat. A friend of mine you know as DF on some of them bloggin’ sites people are reading nowadays for their crazy ideas, and I went to the recent Dan Lungren Town Hall in Citrus Heights with the intention of getting into a fake fight about Socialism and platitude.

Our main talking point was essentially this, use the LaRouche and right wing lexicon and exclaim to repeal Medicare and Social Security on top of preventing a healthcare system, since it is ostensibly Socialist in nature anyway. We just thought we’d use their (il)logic to get rid of big government. A government I would naturally assume too big too fail, right? Since it is of course the physical size of things that determine whether something is successful or not. We just thought it would be funny to see the old white peoples’ reaction when given a taste of their own medicine.

I had felt no more right rolling up in my car blasting Evil Cowards, looking upon the crowds roaming back and forth along the streets and seeing the local news and protest signs milling about. There were crowds of people unable to get inside when we arrived, I would imagine close to a hundred people, mostly older folk. We ducked in across the street for some fish and chips talking about the state of the union I guess, and fuckin’ crazy the general population seems to be.

I didn’t expect to see guns I guess that’s the hot shit now, to exercise a right whenever possible albeit largely confused with intimidation. At this point we are just trying to feel the scene in the parking lot. I was thinking to myself town halls are a fuckin’ freak show that everyone wants to be a part of now. Everyone is an expert on everything but all in all don’t really know shit. We couldn’t get into the City Hall and judging from the pictures it looks like it had a maximum occupancy of 20 people.

One gray haired man(Gray) with glasses caught our attention quickly when he was pushing a cameraman insisting that he ask permission to take his picture. This guy was a town haller if there was one. DF and I lost count of how many times Gray cried Socialism after about 80 times. He and the cameraman started yelling at each other and it looked as if it was about to get physical, about four Citrus Heights Police Officers came into view and stood and watched.

Gray turned to the police and shouted, “He bumped me.” His childish and unreasonable nature exemplifies town halls at least reaching the media. Little whiny bastards who couldn’t define socialism or Obamacare, or even night soil if they were paid. The fight fizzled and argumentation became nothing but a bunch of unsolicited caveats and prerequisites, in the form of, “What do you read?” and fanatical self proclamations on the first amendment. I wonder about these people sometimes and I think if they are even capable of the irony they exude. Is there any self examination at any point…?

At one point I’m just going to assume a democrat and Gray were arguing about Socialism, “What is it?”
Gray “I already know what it is you tell me” This is the state of the union when neither party can simply define a word enough to correlate it to the present situation, yet they will fight about it and become vicious over it. Luckily one guy chimed in,”Well there really isn’t a bill right now anyway” everyone had capitulated and looked down, at least for a fleeting few moments. By god that was the most sober and honest thing to be said in the parking lot in probably years.

I am convinced the town hall has come to resemble nothing democratic if nothing of substance is being argued. Furthermore approving certain reading material and self appointed caveats is tantamount to having the privilege of simply arguing with opposite parties, no thanks. Town Halls needn’t be as disgraceful and filled with pure shit propaganda to its gills, but they are.

DF and I didn’t get into the town hall but we walked around talking here and there amongst ourselves wondering about these people. What Dan Lungren said is probably totally meaningless anyway. He’s a guy I never liked, respected, and always just assumed he hated his constituency. I know I would if I had to deal with the lowest common denominator, and he is supposed to represent these slobbering fools screaming “TORT REFORM” three feet from Lungren’s ear. DF noted Lungren looks like a moderate compared to these people, and rightly so he did.

The fear of Socialism is laughable at every turn, but trying to put myself in their shoes or mindset I tell myself, well the US fought a decades long battle against socialism, and Communism beginning in 1917 and ending in 1989. That’s no small feat and the Cold War is largely assumed to be WWIII so…yeah. There is no way any red blooded American would let something like that begin to flourish and bloom again.

There is always one thing I find interesting about political forums or protests or town halls, is that there is always this diminished ability for people to support their own arguments requiring defending parties to Google it or look it up. Lesson one, think of arguing like a paragraph, statement sentence and a couple supporting sentences. I saw butt hole surfers surrounding me arguing but trying to weasel their way out of supporting their lackluster beliefs by placing the burden of proof on their opponent, “look it up”.

Lungren finally finished his town hall and addressed the crowd outside with the PA on a squad car fielding questions from people who thought being loudest meant you were right “TORT REFORM”. I couldn’t really hear any of the questions probably wouldn’t want to either.

These town halls are a joke, they bring out the worst in people. If anything I can say about the American public is that they lack couth, argumentation skills, and most of all total disdain for each other. DF and I had enough and got a beer at the local watering hole.

Topics:

Politics

Cities May Now be Given the Option to Publish Where They Want

jaisizzle — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:57:41 +0000

Today the Senate Local Government Committee will be hearing AB 715 (Cabellero) which would allow cities to post adopted ordinances on their official city websites in lieu of adjudicated newspapers.

According to the California Newspaper Publishers Association (CNPA) it would “kill the required publication in newspapers…key public notices”. But when AB 715 went to the assembly floor on May 14, 2009 it didn’t receive a single vote against it.

Existing law requires city clerks to publish an ordinance within 15 days after it has been adopted, with the names of the city council who voted for and against the bill. Or the city should it decide to, can just publish a summary of the ordinance.

To illustrate how old this law is and the necessity to bring publishing news into the 21st century, exsisting law requires that an ordinance be published in a “newspaper of general circulation, and if there is none, posted in at least three public places in the city or published in a newspaper … printed and published in the county”.

The CNPA is up in arms about AB 715 because it provides cities and counties the option to publish ordinances in mediums other than newspapers. Typically adjudicated newspaapers are newspapers filled with legal notices and legal advertising.

A letter just so happened to come my way the other day, it was a letter of support from the Lake County News addressed to Assembly member Anna Caballero. In this letter Elizabeth Larson, Publisher and Editor of the online only Lake County News offers insight, “AB 715 ultimately will be meaningless if another step is not taken, allowing online only publications to become legally adjudicated”.

Larson continuing to provide insight, which shockingly enough isn’t found in any article referring to the bill, recommends that an overhaul of the adjudication process be considered in order to “benefit local governments and a broad number of online enterprises…and prevent publishing monopolies and predatory pricing by newspapers”.

The average cots to a city to publish an ordinance is about $5,700 a year. About half of California’s 480 cities would benefit from this bill. This means that if this many cities spent this much money a year to publish ordinances in this increasingly antiquated means of retrieving information like these adjudicated newspapers, the cost to the California taxpayers would be to the sweet tune of around $1.3 million.

Larson ends the letter by saying that “a shift in adjudication laws, which have been tied to print…newspapers would be able to shift operations online…to make their operations more viable”.

Justin Smith is a freelance writer based in Sacramento. He can be reached at justinsmiths@gmail.com.

Topics:

Politics

Unions Forcing Cities to Pay For Services They Can't Afford

jaisizzle — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:41:59 +0000

By Justin Smith

The California Assembly recently approved AB 155 (Mendoza), a bill that prohibits cities and counties from filing bankruptcy without state approval and is headed to the Senate. The bill requires local governments and counties to get approval from the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (CDIAC) before filing for bankruptcy.

The California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission consists of the State Treasurer, the Governor or the Director of Finance, the State Controller, two local government finance officials, two Assembly Members, and two Senators.

The bill is backed by several unions and the most notable among them is the California Professional Firefighters and CDF Firefighters Local 2881, who are cosponsors of the bill.

What is conspicuously left out of this politicking, which neither side is willing to admit in public, is that AB 155 grants CDIAC the authority to limit changes to a labor contract and prohibit the abrogation of contracts. This is if the CDIAC approves the request for a municipality to file for bankruptcy. It is being sold as an added measure of economic security, and that California is one of the few states left without this protection but there is a difference between policy and politics.

Tony Mendoza’s spokesperson Richard Garcia said that the bill, “is intended to help protect the state’s credit rating on Wall Street”. Should the possibility exist that California be plagued with a less than stellar credit rating, it will increase borrowing costs for California municipalities and the state…that is should California’s credit rating be compromised by its budget problems. According to the League of California Cities (LCC) it has one of the worst in the country.

Vallejo, the latest and greatest city to file for bankruptcy in 2008, certainly has unions worried, enough so as to claim cities will abuse bankruptcy in order to get out of labor contracts. During a committee hearing on April 22, 2009, those in favor of the bill argued that cities would abuse filing for bankruptcy to “obstruct employee contract negotiations.” Vallejo Mayor Osby Davis retorted, “The bankruptcy courts are set with a criteria that keeps people from filing wily-nily bankruptcy petitions…There is no elected official on my council who says we want to break contracts and get out of bankruptcy.”

One argument put forth by Christy Bouma an Advocate of the California Professional firefighters (CPF), is that this will force cities to “facilitate good decision making at the local level so the devastating impacts experienced by Vallejo will not flow to other jurisdictions.”
Vallejo Mayor Osby Davis said, “For you to pass a bill like this is a slap in the face to every elected official locally.”

Given the economic crisis of the day, municipalities contemplating or indeed needing to file for bankruptcy could increase. As of May 11, 2009, 211 cities in California declared a state of severe fiscal hardship. The state has officially raided cities’ coffers to the tune of about $2 billion, and Sacramento alone gets to loan the state just under $12 million.

In a letter the League of California Cities addressed to Tony Mendoza on March 4, 2009, it was states that ”since the adoption of chapter 9 of the state Bankruptcy Code in 1949, only two cities that have petitioned for it use, City of Desert Hot Springs in 1994 and just recently Vallejo.” That amounts to one city every 30 years.

This letter also addresses the state’s credit rating that Mendoza’s staff put forward. Mendoza’s staff references a study done in 2000 and commissioned by the California Law Revision Commission. The letter states, “The state has one of the worst credit ratings in the nation not due to a city, but due to lack of confidence among major bond rating and financial institutions that the state can’t solve its own budget problems.”

It appears that one of the many problems facing the California debt is that labor unions seem to think they should be exempt from the financial burdens the state faces. They make cuts and compromises here and there, but with AB 155 they won’t have to anymore.

It’s no secret unions are the Daddy Warbucks in the California legislature, but with this they are creating and sponsoring bad economic policy. This bill not only perpetuates bad economic policy it takes even more power from cities and gives it to the state.

Vallejo was also subject to another union hijacking backed by the state in what is known as binding interest arbitration (BIA). BIA is what happens when labor negotiations reach an impasse, and a third party is engaged. This person is usually an attorney or judge. The parties bring a list of names, they agree on one and the third party decides who gets what. Vallejo was the first city to exercise BIA in 1970, and the only city other than San Francisco to cover non-safety employees. Vallejo just gets to pay the bill for decisions increasingly taken out of their hands.

In a recent court decision on April 29, 2009, the First Appellate District ruled in Sonoma Country v. Superior Court (Sonoma County Law Enforcement Association) that SB440, a labor negotiations interest arbitrations statute applicable to public safety unions violates the California Constitution.

The court decided that BIA violates “Home Rule” which is a constitutional provision that provides cities authority over their municipal affairs. The court noted that compensation of county employees is a local and not a statewide concern.

This court also found that this “impermissibly delegates to the arbitration panel the power to interfere with county money and to perform the municipal function of setting compensation of county employees.” To drive the point home, BIA is unconstitutional because it dethrones the “Board of Supervisors of the ultimate authority to provide for employee compensation.”

AB 155 and unions’ greed are poised to run cities into the ground, by forcing cities to pay for services with resources they don’t have. Should the Senate confirm this bill, and dip their nefarious tenterhooks where they don’t belong, millions of dollars, will no doubt be shoveled out in the courts on California’s tab.

Justin Smith can be contacted at justinsmiths@gmail.com

Topics:

Politics