.
.
.
.
.
As I lobby for Republican Assembly and Senate Members to shut down CA redevelopment agencies, a property rights colleague/attorney shared some related insight this morning that warrants publication.
In addressing this stalemate he points out that people should read the text and fine print of Proposition 22. Some electeds we’ve contacted have used Prop 22 as a crutch for not supporting the governors request to cast an aye vote for SB77/AB101.
His six bullet points are as follows:
- Prop 22 is intended primarily to protect local TRANSPORTATION funds, not redevelopment funds. That’s what voters were approving.
- The redevelopment portion was secondary and intended to protect funds once RECEIVED BY A CRA.
- Proposition 22 explicitly preserved the Legislature’s power under H&SC 33607 to divert funds before they arrived at any CRA. That is, expand the AB1290 diversions. The Legislature still controls the internal functions of all CRA’s since they are STATE agencies.
- The governor’s proposal merely places FUTURE funds in a receivership mechanism in order to sort out the bogus debts from legitimate debts that need to be paid.
- AB101 and SB77 have already passed the respective houses on majority (party line) votes, but less than 2/3rd’s. To go into effect immediately as URGENCY bills and change the fund allocations on 7/1/2011 they need 2/3rd’s.
- If governor Brown and the Democrats would accept a later effective date of 1/1/2012 the bills could be passed by Democrats alone. This might prevent the retroactive review of debts back to 1/1/2011, but the bill could be worded to prevent any FUTURE expenditures not approved by a committee of taxing entities and the state, and allowed only if the CRA has no other funds in its savings accounts. The state Controller’s recent audit found hundreds of millions in these accounts doing nothing but waiting for a developer to be subsidized. Starting 1/1/2012 the law could require that no check could be written on any CRA funds without the concurrence of the County Auditor and state Controller. The CRA’s would still nominally exist, but their financial and accounting powers would be controlled by new rules.
An interesting sidebar of our discussion, relating to Prop 22, is that it overtly repealed the 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 budget deals yet no one is suing to get their money back. This raises the question. Why didn’t they sue?
Prop 22 drew attention to how much money these agencies were hoarding.
While our main focus was on our state budget we also addresses pension reform which is one of the GOP sticking points. Perhaps part of the answer is altering the top heavy participants. A perfect example is the city of Bell, the poster child for pension abuse, where city administrator Robert Rizzo’s pension could reach $700,000. These mega pensions need to be investigated. City managers should not become members of PERS. We also agreed that it would be better to set a monthly, rather than a lifetime, cap on pensions.
While this is not the ultimate solution, its a start. What say you?
Larry,
Speaking of fine print – perhaps you could have used a little smaller font in this article, I can almost read it with my highest power readers.
Thought I fixed that… a blog editor’s job is never done…
these old guys write their posts on Word or something, and copy/paste from different places, and the posts sometimes turn out looking weird.
Vern,
I am not going to needle you any more about “when” you are going to call ICNA.
I want to get into psychology of “why” you felt the need to say that you were going to ask them …
“Why he’d (Malik-Ali) be chosen as a speaker for a charity event by ICNA I have no idea, but I plan to ask them today.”
Why would you say that?
OK
1. I sent an e-mail and they didn’t write back, these ICNA people piss me off. I’ll find out how to call them. BUT, most importantly,
2. I’m going to keep reminding us that the Pauly speech, much of that 4pm rally, and all of the nasty 5:30 protest, was NOT against the Imam and Malik-Ali, but against all the Muslims present. And Royce and Miller sent out dog-whistles against toleration of Islam – that’s exactly what they’re doing in the CAIR-edited video. (Interesting that your buddy George Collins is trying to protect them by hiding the full context of their remarks – I’d like to be able to analyze and discuss them further with video context.)
3. AND speaking of the Imam, I have yet to hear what the gripe was against him either. All you’ve got is this one guy, Malik-Ali’s, warlike speech. And all I have to say about HIM so far is, fiery rebellion spokesman, but poor choice for a charity-event speaker.
I’m ONLY pursuing this ICNA/Malik-Ali question out of thoroughness. It won’t change anything about the hate rally and Pauly.
Vern,
I don’t give a s**t about the iman or miliki-aliki-villi-manilli (whatever) or the “innocent” fundraiser attendees or the f**king videos.
I want to know why you would even ask the question. Because, I think that you have an inner conservative Vern. I think that you are the next David Horowitz.
Why would you ask the question Vern? I think it is because you know that the true answer, which you will never get from those people. YEAH, I said it “those people” – the terrorist supporters, all of them. You know that the true answer has real significant meaning. And you don’t really want to hear the true answer – do you Vern?
junior.
What does your comment have in common with the topic under debate?
Did I miss something? This post is about the state budget
If the protest was against just two men, then Pauly’s speech included a specific death threat: “my son and his jarhead buddies want to send them to heaven.”
So which is is it?
Tony. Your comment is on the wrong story. Larry
Hi-jacked again by Muslims…. sigh
Junior.
The size of the font I use has not changed. Therefore I would call it a software problem.
The same is true where recently I have been unable to upload my photos.
The good news is that Vern has my back. He therefore joins a long list of Dem’s who will do that for me.
Hey Vern, you got a problem with “old guys?”. Maybe we should focus for a while on middle aged balding piano players as a group to pick on—– (just a friendly jab)
So sorry Larry – mea culpa.
Tony – That was an invitation for the radical speakers to go all jihady in their homeland as guests of the USMC.