[Majin]

Lets get a news thread and discussion going about Sacramento politics. I haven't seen anything in the paper lately relating to KJ or anything related to any policies/changes in our government hes been trying to get through.

I thought of the idea of this thread since today on LRT I encounter a guy getting signatures for KJ's strong mayor proposal. I thought he pushed it aside for now to focus on the budget mess but it looks like hes back to pushing for it again at the grassroots level. I haven't seen anything in the paper about it though so maybe it's under wraps.

Anybody want to provide any insight or anything politics related? Lets try to keep this thread politically neutral/bipartisan and just discuss news and policies rather than ideologically.

[cozmoose]

I thought of the idea of this thread since today on LRT I encounter a guy getting signatures for KJ's strong mayor proposal. I thought he pushed it aside for now to focus on the budget mess but it looks like hes back to pushing for it again at the grassroots level. I haven't seen anything in the paper about it though so maybe it's under wraps.


There were couple of people seeking signatures for the same thing in front of Natomas Target few days ago.

[Web]

Lets get a news thread and discussion going about Sacramento politics. I haven't seen anything in the paper lately relating to KJ or anything related to any policies/changes in our government hes been trying to get through.

I thought of the idea of this thread since today on LRT I encounter a guy getting signatures for KJ's strong mayor proposal. I thought he pushed it aside for now to focus on the budget mess but it looks like hes back to pushing for it again at the grassroots level. I haven't seen anything in the paper about it though so maybe it's under wraps.

Anybody want to provide any insight or anything politics related? Lets try to keep this thread politically neutral/bipartisan and just discuss news and policies rather than ideologically.

new fbi investigation of deleted emails.......

[Majin]

new fbi investigation of deleted emails.......

?

[wburg]

?
http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1952940.html

FBI probes obstruction of justice claim by former St. HOPE official
ShareThisBy Melody Gutierrez, Denny Walsh and Ryan Lillis
mgutierrez@sacbee.com
Published: Wednesday, Jun. 17, 2009 - 12:00 am | Page 1A
The FBI's Sacramento division is investigating a former St. HOPE executive's allegations of obstruction of justice, Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence G. Brown confirmed Tuesday.

The news fuels the controversy that has followed Mayor Kevin Johnson since 2008, when his brainchild St. HOPE Academy first was investigated for misuse of public funds.

That investigation appeared to end in April when Brown's office announced a settlement with Johnson, St. HOPE and former executive director Dana Gonzalez.

The settlement, hotly contested by the office of the inspector general for the federal Corporation for National and Community Service, required the repayment of more than $400,000 in misused grants for AmeriCorps volunteers.

However, Rick Maya, who officially left his position as executive director with St. HOPE last week, alleged in an April resignation letter that a member of the charter schools' board deleted Johnson's e-mails during the federal investigation. Those claims, uncovered by a public records request by The Bee, caught the interest of Brown's office, who asked the FBI's Sacramento division to look into it.

"The FBI has, in fact, opened an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the alleged destruction of e-mails, and is working with criminal prosecutors in this office," Brown said in a statement to The Bee. "Beyond confirming the existence of an investigation, we are not at liberty to discuss the details of the investigation."

Johnson's office and an attorney who represented St. HOPE Academy during the AmeriCorps investigation both said they would cooperate fully with what they characterized as a "preliminary inquiry" by the FBI.

"We are … confident the inquiry will quickly confirm that nothing inappropriate occurred," said attorney Malcolm Segal.

Maya alleged in his resignation letter that on Aug. 22, while the academy was under federal subpoena in the AmeriCorps investigation, he notified the charter schools' board that board member Sam Oki had accessed St. HOPE's e-mail system and deleted some of Johnson's e-mails. Maya wrote that Oki acted at the request of an unnamed St. HOPE Academy board member.

Maya discovered the breach, he wrote, when his own e-mails also were deleted.

"We had to pay thousands of dollars to recover the information deleted from our e-mail system as a result of this highly inappropriate and potentially unlawful incursion into our e-mail system," Maya's letter said. "We are still unsure whether all of the deleted information has been recovered."

Maya has not returned repeated phone calls from The Bee.

Oki, the CFO of a local research and technology company, reiterated Tuesday that the allegations are untrue. Oki said he could not comment further.

"My understanding is that (the matter) is under investigation and it's inappropriate for me to make any comments," Oki said.

Johnson's mayoral spokesman, Steve Maviglio, previously said the incident involved an information technology person from St. HOPE working to separate Johnson's mayoral campaign and St. HOPE e-mails. Maviglio said e-mails deleted from one account were fully backed up by another.

News of the FBI investigation comes on the heels of the controversial firing of Gerald Walpin, who as inspector general for the Corporation for National and Community Service investigated the misuse of federal aid by Johnson and his nonprofit St. HOPE.

In a letter to Congress last Thursday, President Barack Obama said he had lost confidence in Walpin.

The timing created speculation about whether Johnson asked the Obama administration to fire the outspoken federal inspector general.

Speaking at his weekly news conference Tuesday morning, Johnson said the decision to remove Walpin was "100 percent within the purview of the (Obama) administration."

"Obviously, I was not consulted in that decision," Johnson said. The settlement "was resolved in full public disclosure, and I really don't have much more of a comment."

Other politicians have had plenty to say, namely Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill and House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform ranking member Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista.

[Cynikal]

I'm curious to see where people on here still stand on our new Mayor. It's been almost a year, are people happy with him? Is there support for the strong mayor system? I won't start off the discussion with my thoughts because I don't want to taint anyone but I want to pick your collective brains.

[Cynikal]

I have to say that I'm surprised that no one has thoughts on this. :shrug:

[wburg]

I spend enough time on the subject on other sites, I don't have much desire to re-hash them here. But I too am curious as to what people think.

[Cynikal]

I know where you are in terms of this debate Wburg. :) With all the discussion here before the election, I'm surprised that so little is being talked about here.

[Majin]

I know where you are in terms of this debate Wburg. :) With all the discussion here before the election, I'm surprised that so little is being talked about here.

I have been dissapointed to say the least with the progress made by the KJ team. He hasn't really been in the media much and I at least expected him to keep the Arena issue in front of the media to put pressure on the Maloofs/NBA/Cal-Expo. I thought an ex NBA star as our mayor would all but ensure an Arena but after all the campaign talk KJ doesn't seem all that motivated to do anything about it.

Also disappointed in him not finding a way to get around needing a vote for the strong mayor system. Since he is a developer funded machine I would of figured he would of paid the right people off by now and just got it secretly amended in the city character without anybody finding out about it until it was too late.

K Street is still a mess with no end in sight, the currently streetscape improvements aren't going to be enough. Downtown plaza still hasn't been ED and razed.

He just hasn't been as strong of a mayor as I'd like in general. We need someone who is more "in your face" and will actually throw around the money they get paid off with by the developers. I think with the St Hope thing hes just been too chicken shit to start paying people off. Weak. If I was KJ I'd be willing to risk prison or find out who I need to pay off inside the fed.

[wburg]

I have been dissapointed to say the least with the progress made by the KJ team. He hasn't really been in the media much and I at least expected him to keep the Arena issue in front of the media to put pressure on the Maloofs/NBA/Cal-Expo. I thought an ex NBA star as our mayor would all but ensure an Arena but after all the campaign talk KJ doesn't seem all that motivated to do anything about it.

Also disappointed in him not finding a way to get around needing a vote for the strong mayor system. Since he is a developer funded machine I would of figured he would of paid the right people off by now and just got it secretly amended in the city character without anybody finding out about it until it was too late.

K Street is still a mess with no end in sight, the currently streetscape improvements aren't going to be enough. Downtown plaza still hasn't been ED and razed.

He just hasn't been as strong of a mayor as I'd like in general. We need someone who is more "in your face" and will actually throw around the money they get paid off with by the developers. I think with the St Hope thing hes just been too chicken shit to start paying people off. Weak. If I was KJ I'd be willing to risk prison or find out who I need to pay off inside the fed.

You should talk to Steve Maviglio, he might have a job for you as a "volunteer." You've got the right sort of moral compass.

[Majin]

You should talk to Steve Maviglio, he might have a job for you as a "volunteer." You've got the right sort of moral compass.

Sorry to disappoint you but that's how things get done everywhere. Money needs to change hands.

Do you think cities like NYC and Chicago came to be without the politicians getting bought off by developers and investors?

If Sacramento wants to join the big leagues we need to start learning how to pay to play. Fargo and the rest of the city council was bought off by NIMBYs for the past 8 years and what has been the result? Natomas.

[Pistola916]

[QUOTE=Majin;4468475]I have been dissapointed to say the least with the progress made by the KJ team. He hasn't really been in the media much and I at least expected him to keep the Arena issue in front of the media to put pressure on the Maloofs/NBA/Cal-Expo. I thought an ex NBA star as our mayor would all but ensure an Arena but after all the campaign talk KJ doesn't seem all that motivated to do anything about it.


Mayor Johnson calls for progress on new Sacramento Kings arena
ShareThis
Buzz up!
By Ryan Lillis
rlillis@sacbee.com
Published: Tuesday, Sep. 22, 2009 - 7:29 pm
Last Modified: Tuesday, Sep. 22, 2009 - 7:52 pm

After learning that Arco Arena is considered unsuitable to host a major college basketball tournament, Mayor Kevin Johnson said Tuesday that Sacramento could lose the Kings if efforts for a new arena aren't stepped up.

"If we don't have a clear path to an arena in the not too distant future, then we as Sacramentans need to know that (the Kings) very well may look elsewhere," Johnson said.

The mayor made his statements after finding out the NCAA had bypassed Sacramento's bid for hosting the regional round of the men's basketball tournament. Arco Arena has hosted the money-making event four times since 1994.

Most recently, in 2007, fans filled the arena, and the event injected $4 million into the local economy, officials said.

Sacramento Sports Commission officials said they were told the city's bid to host tournament games through 2013 had been denied because of concerns over the conditions at Arco Arena.

"They said, 'I hope you will consider bidding in the future when you get your arena issues resolved,'" said John McCasey, executive director of the Sacramento Sports Commission, which filed the bid.

An emotional mayor said it was "staggering and mind-boggling" that Arco - home of the NBA's Kings since 1988 - is no longer considered suitable for big-time college basketball.

In response, Johnson said he wants to see a proposal to build a new arena at Cal Expo soon.

If one doesn't materialize - and if the city doesn't start seriously considering alternate options for a new arena should the Cal Expo plan fall flat - the threat of the Kings leaving town will become more real, according to the mayor.

It's unclear what, if anything, the mayor can do about pressuring the NBA and Cal Expo officials to come up with a plan.

Johnson said last week he'd like to see an arena proposal at Cal Expo take more solid form by the end of this year.

On Tuesday, however, he expressed a greater sense of urgency, and a desire to look for other sites and ideas for getting a new arena built.

"I don't have all the answers right now, but I will tell you this: When you look at Cal Expo as an option, the clock is ticking," he said.

NBA representative John Moag, who is leading the NBA's three-year effort to build a new arena at Cal Expo, said he understands the mayor's frustration about the slowness of that effort.

"I think the mayor is expressing a sense of where we all are," Moag said. "We are in a bad economy in a state that doesn't have any money. Lending has dried up. We can't force developers to borrow money they can't get."

[Cynikal]

There you have what? I see no plan for money or location. There isn't the political will for this right now and the Mayor is spread very thin trying to get his crown.

[snfenoc]

My opinion of Kevin Johnson as Mayor is mixed.


The Good:
As a "weak mayor" KJ is basically an at-large city council member who runs the meetings; and I think he has done a satisfactory job at this. The Mayor is also a figurehead. It's his job to represent the city - paint it in good light nationally, hear citizen complaints and talk about city-related issues in the media. Again, I think he has done a satisfactory job.

The notion that KJ is spread very thin trying to get his crown seems pretty ridiculous to me. Yes, he is focused on increasing his power, but I don't think that hurts his ability to do his job. As a weak mayor, it's not like he has many responsibilities. All the day to day stuff is the City Manger's problem.

The Bad:
I don't like his push for a strong mayor system. I don't think any one office should hold that much power.


The Arena/The Ugly:
I don't think KJ can do any more than he's already done to get a new arena built in Sacramento. It's a function of financing and profit and market. It's not a function of how many times the Mayor holds a press conference or how many strong words he uses. If a new arena is not financially viable, it won't happen.

Even if Sacramento's mayor was "strong", I doubt he could ramrod the necessary legislation through the council. He'd have to get at least 5 of 9 legislators to support something that the people clearly don't want. For some reason, spending hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars on the billionaire Maloofs is unpopular. In addition, there is not much he could do to force the private sector into building a new arena either.

[Ghost of Econgrad]

State can take cities' redevelopment funds, judge says

By Scott Hadly

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Economic development efforts in Ventura County took a big hit Tuesday after a Sacramento judge upheld a state move to take $2 billion in redevelopment agency money from communities across the state.

The case filed by the California Redevelopment Association challenged the legality of the state’s move to divert redevelopment money toward education.

The state will take what amounts to about $30 million from 12 redevelopment agencies in Ventura County.

Redevelopment agencies are set up to revitalize downtowns and urban core areas. The law allows agencies to capture an increment of property taxes from the appreciated value of properties in the designated zones. The money is poured back into the zone to make improvements, encourage economic development and for low- and moderate-income housing.

But with the state facing a budget crisis, the Legislature shifted $2.05 billion to county-based “Supplemental Revenue Augmentation Funds.” Those so-called SERAF accounts gets the state off the hook for maintaining minimum funding for schools, which is required under Proposition 98.

Last year, a court challenge was able to block a similar effort. But redevelopment agencies weren’t so lucky this year.

On average, redevelopment agencies are seeing a grab equal to about a third of their revenue, but operating budgets could take the biggest brunt because some funds are dedicated to certain expenses.

“My budget isn’t even close to that,” said Curtis Cannon, director of Oxnard’s Community Development Department, referring to $6.2 million his agency must transfer to education.

Although Oxnard anticipated the transfer and set aside the funds over the last year, Cannon said it is a considerable chunk of money that would otherwise go toward capital improvements such as lighting, new sidewalks and repaving streets.

Other cities are seeing a similar kind of hit. In Simi Valley, the transfer adds up to about $6.3 million, said Brian Gabler, the city’s economic development director.

“That’s about 60 percent of the tax increment,” Gabler said.

That’s money the city won’t be able to use for loans for renovations, infrastructure improvements, sewer upgrades and city beautification projects, he said.

After the court decision Tuesday, the California Redevelopment Association board of directors met and voted unanimously to appeal the court’s ruling.

“The Legislature needs to deal with its budget problems by making hard decisions using its own limited resources — not by taking away local government funds,” said John Shirey, executive director of the California Redevelopment Association.

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Lloyd Connelly upheld the state budget bill that requires redevelopment agencies statewide to transfer the $2.05 billion over the next two years. The ruling came in response to the California Redevelopment Association’s lawsuit, filed in Sacramento Superior Court, seeking to invalidate provisions of Assembly Bill X4-26, which passed in July as part of the 2009-10 state budget.

The first payments must be made by May 10 to an account overseen by the county Auditor Controller.


http://www.vcstar.com/news/2010/may/04/judge-upholds-state-transfer-of-redevelopment/



:yuck: This is what you get! More examples of Gov. Gone Wild!

[Ghost of Econgrad]

California can raid local redevelopment funds
From AP and Staff reports/
Posted: 05/05/2010 01:01:08 AM PDT

SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday won the right to raid local redevelopment funds to help close California's budget deficit, but it will likely do little to save the state from having to make deeper cuts to education, social services and health care for children and the poor.

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Lloyd Connelly ruled that the state can take more than $2 billion from local redevelopment funds and transfer the money to school operations. Local governments objected to diverting the money, which generally is used to promote public works projects and rehabilitate downtowns.

"We dodged a bullet," said Schwarzenegger's spokesman, Aaron McLear. "This would have added $2 billion to our deficit."

California is projecting a revenue shortfall of roughly $20 billion in the fiscal year that starts in July, and that number is likely to go up, meaning the governor and state lawmakers will have to consider raising taxes or, more likely, make deeper spending cuts. Teachers, labor groups and social service advocates are already gearing up for battle before Schwarzenegger releases his revised budget later this month.

In Vacaville, leaders expressed disappointment with the court ruling.

"Last year, in the previous budget, the state had determined to take $2 million of our redevelopment funds. We took them on and we won," said City Manager Laura Kuhn on Tuesday.

But when the state decided to appropriate $9.5 million this year, similar recourse

"We sued again and lost," Kuhn said. "So what happens next? Will the state take more and more money, or is this it?"

Despite the ruling, it seems Vacaville will pull through. For now, at least. In the event that the latest lawsuit failed, city officials made a variety of cuts and put aside $9.5 million. All that's left to do is to write the check to the state. The deadline, apparently, is Monday.

The worry, though, is the $3.5 million set to be taken in 2011. There's little doubt that future programs and projects will be affected, or that already-approved projects may be reevaluated in light of the new situation.

The city's Department of Housing and Redevelopment is responsible for implementing housing, revitalization and neighborhood services. The department operates the Section 8 rent subsidy programs for both the city and Solano County, and administers federal Community Development Block Grant funds to benefit lower income households and neighborhoods.

Also, the DHR functions as a community revitalization lender for low-income housing, operates the code compliance program, serves as staff for the Vacaville Redevelopment Agency and more.

Meanwhile, there are more signs of economic distress in California.

State income and corporate tax collections took an unexpected drop last month after four months of steady improvement. The controller's office reported personal income taxes in April were down about $3 billion, or 30 percent, from administration projections. April is a critical month because it's when most Californians pay their taxes.

Taxpayers could have sought more refunds and 2009 could have been economically weaker than expected, said Michael Cohen, deputy legislative analyst of the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office.

"For those people who thought revenues were going to contribute a major piece of the $20 billion problem, that doesn't seem very likely at this point," Cohen said. "All the same bad options we had in January are still there, except in some cases, now we've lost the lead time to get things up and running."

Anticipating the difficult budget season ahead, Democratic Assembly Speaker John Perez and Senate leader Darrell Steinberg traveled to Washington, D.C., this week seeking federal aid. They were scheduled to meet with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to discuss the effect of federal health care reform on California.

In January, Schwarzenegger proposed $82.9 billion in general fund spending for the upcoming fiscal year, which would take the state back to its spending level six years ago.

The governor said he would not agree to any tax increases, unlike last year when the state imposed temporary sales and income tax hikes. That extra revenue will begin to expire at the end of this year, just as federal stimulus funding begins to run out.

Schwarzenegger on Monday also ruled out a plan to expand oil drilling off the California coast after the explosion on a Gulf of Mexico drilling platform that caused a massive oil spill. The plan would have provided some $100 million to keep state parks open next year.

Unless the federal government provides a $6.9 billion increase, the administration has said it will seek to eliminate many social service programs, including in-home care for frail seniors and the disabled, and the Healthy Families program, which provides health care for millions of children from poor families. CalWORKS, the state's main welfare program, also could be wiped out.

Students have already rallied statewide to protest college fee increases, and union groups last month organized a 365-mile march through California's Central Valley calling for greater investment in education and home health care under the state's In-Home Social Services program, known as IHSS.

"Our members live this economic crisis every day and it's always real that California is in a cash crisis," said Laphonza Butler, president of SEIU United Long Term Care Workers, which represents 179,000 in-home care workers. "But what's also real is, having IHSS brings federal money."

Tuesday's court decision settled just one piece of the budget puzzle, although The California Redevelopment Association, the leading plaintiff in the case, said it will appeal.

Schwarzenegger and lawmakers had agreed to use more than $2 billion from redevelopment funds for schools in those districts as a way to make up for declining general fund revenue.

The redevelopment association and local governments argued that shifting that money was unconstitutional and would halt projects that create jobs at time when California's unemployment rate is at 12.6 percent.

Judge Connelly sided with the state, saying California could use that money to help support schools located within redevelopment agency boundaries because it served a public purpose.


LINK:

http://www.thereporter.com/news/ci_15020585

[Ghost of Econgrad]

As Goes Greece,…

Posted By Roger Pilon On May 7, 2010 @ 12:27 pm In International Economics and Development, Law and Civil Liberties | Comments Disabled

Today Politico Arena [1] asks:

What are the implications for us of the crisis in Greece?

My response:

The questions posed to Arena contributors this morning, prompted by the unfolding Greek tragedy and its implications, are several, but they go well beyond economics. “Unwise lending and excessive borrowing” led to the tragedy, Steven Pearlstein notes in the Washington Post [2], but he adds that “there is little doubt that Greece’s debt crisis is of its own making, the result of corruption and tax avoidance and that seductive Mediterranean coupling of high living and low productivity.”

More immediately, in the Wall Street Journal [3] today we find that when it comes to “overall ease of doing business,” the World Bank ranks Greece 109 out of 183 countries — “dead last among the 27 members of the European Union,” the Journal notes. “You have to go up 30 slots to find the next worst EU performer, Italy.” Pointing to Sacramento, Albany, and Washington, for good reason, the Journal’s editorialists conclude that “Greece shows that the welfare state model of development, dominated by public unions, onerous regulations, high taxes and the political allocation of capital, has hit the wall.”

Indeed it has, but notice that underpinning this tale are political and moral concerns. To touch on just two, the European Union is a textbook example of the downside of political union. To be sure, there is an upside, especially when union eliminates parochial restrictions on free association, as has happened to a substantial extent under the EU. But to move beyond creating a free market, to create instead a regime of mutual obligations as reflected in the phrase “we’re all in this together,” is to invite the very moral hazard we see before us today. Angela Merkel is in a political bind precisely because, as Pearlstein notes, prudent Germans are recoiling “at the thought of bailing out the profligate Greeks.” Milton Friedman put it simply: No one spends someone else’s money as carefully as he spends his own.

And that leads to a second concern, of particular importance in our own case. It was to gain the benefits of union while avoiding its downside that America’s Founders drafted our Constitution so carefully, giving Congress the power to override state restrictions on interstate commerce, for example, but otherwise leaving us free, as private citizens and associations, to plan our own affairs and live our own lives. That, however, was anathema to the social engineers of the Progressive Era, the elites who sought “change” through the collective undertakings of the modern administrative state. “Our task now,” said FDR [4], is one of “distributing wealth and products more equitably,” precisely what the Constitution forbade. And so Roosevelt, with his Court-packing threat, turned the document on its head — or, as Rexford Tugwell [5] would later put it, “To the extent that these new social virtues [i.e., New Deal policies] developed, they were tortured interpretations of a document intended to prevent them.” There followed, of course, endless redistributive schemes, federal, state, and local, that have brought us today to the “unwise lending and excessive borrowing” that surrounds and suffocates us.

As goes Greece,…

[Ghost of Econgrad]

City budget to be released Friday, $40-$43 million gap



Sacramento city officials hope to release the draft city budget before 4 p.m. on Friday, said city spokeswoman Amy Williams.

The city is facing a $40-$43 million budget gap, according to an estimate provided earlier this month from Interim City Manager Gus Vina.

Williams said the city releases the draft budget on May 1 each year. This year the city will release it the day before May 1. She said the city’s charter dictates the timeline for the budget release. The charter calls for the city manager to issue budget recommendations at least 60 days ahead of July 1.

City Councilman Steve Cohn said last month at a Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting that he expects major cuts to city parks.

The Parks and Recreation Department received $8.3 million in cuts as part of the 2009/2010 budget.

The Sacramento Bee published information from confidential budget documents Wednesday. The documents suggested cuts may be made in several departments, including police, fire, development, general services and code enforcement.

The Sacramento Press will report additional information about the draft budget after it is released Friday.



:haha: If the City would just stick to paying for what it should be paying for, we wouldn't have to cut Fire and Police.

[Ghost of Econgrad]

Sacramento County now takes annexation in stride
lkalb@sacbee.com
Published Tuesday, Jun. 29, 2010

Sacramento County has become the government equivalent of "The Incredible Shrinking Man."

Like the cult movie's protagonist, the county is getting smaller and smaller – thanks to three new cities in 13 years, a fourth in the offing and some major annexations headed the county's way.

Next up: On Thursday, Rancho Cordova will annex 748 acres of largely commercial and industrial firms.

Will life be different along that stretch of land south of Highway 50 in Rancho Cordova by Friday?

The pro-cityhood and annexation crowd contends that turf inside city boundaries is plenty different: greater local control, better services and more of a connection to community.

Those sentiments helped fuel creation of the county's three newest cities, covering 90 square miles that became Citrus Heights, Elk Grove and Rancho Cordova, and now are home to 295,000 residents.

Cityhood proponents tapped into voter perceptions that county government was indifferent to local issues and slow to invest resources in far-flung neighborhoods.

"Before we incorporated, we had absolutely no code enforcement. People were parking on lawns," said Rancho Cordova City Councilman David Sander. "Now we have enforcement and we're detail-oriented."

He said the ratio of police officers to population is two to three times better.

Sacramento County mostly fought those early incorporation efforts, warning the loss of tax revenue would hamper its ability to provide countywide services.

As things turned out, it wasn't the incorporations that put Sacramento County on the path to fiscal disaster. Three years of a bad economy, rising salary costs built into employee contracts, future unfunded pension liabilities and massive state funding cuts combined to achieve that.

Still, questions arise:

Can Sacramento County, after three years of brutal budget losses, function effectively as more county land is transformed into cities?

Can it adequately serve the 540,000 people who live in the unincorporated area, a number second only to Los Angeles County among California counties?

Interim County Executive Steve Szalay said he thinks it can.

The county is aided by existing agreements that neutralize the loss of county tax revenue. Areas with regional shopping centers, auto rows or other key county revenue generators agreed to divert money to the county to offset losses before being allowed to incorporate.

Szalay said the loss of nearly 100 square miles of land to cities and annexations – and any future land shifts – means that county services should be scrutinized, better tailored and downsized to fit the need.

"Where you run into difficulty is the amount of overhead that a certain set of services can support," he said.

The county is exploring how to reorganize and consolidate services such as animal care, development, law enforcement and 911 emergency calls, Szalay said.

"The county is changing its philosophy with regard to those services, and I think there's more willingness to look at different ways of providing them," Szalay said.

That's not a move toward city-county consolidation, he said, a concept that voters soundly rejected in the 1970s and again in 1990.

Shared services, on the other hand, are likely to be more palatable.

Many cities already rely on special districts for basic services such as water, sewer, parks and fire, said Peter Detwiler of the Senate Local Government Committee.

"That really suggests that it's a state of mind, that incorporation is as much about community identity and political control as it is about the costs of local services and government efficiency," he said.

Businesses in Rancho Cordova's soon-to-be annexed area seem to agree. "It's really a nonevent for us," said Joel Walton, an operational manager in the headquarters of Tri Tool, an industrial tooling company with operations in three other states.

But it will mean improved access to officials in a smaller government. "That's a good thing," Walton said.

The annexation makes practical sense, too, said Bob Nolasco, an investor in large industrial buildings.

"Physically, it's a natural," Nolasco said, adding that he also favors the one-on-one relationship with Rancho Cordova. "You kind of get lost in the shuffle with the county."

The county has begun shedding its resistance to incorporation efforts, Szalay said.

He cited the proposed city of Arden Arcade, which appears likely to go before local voters Nov. 2.

"We went to the table in a very open and collaborative way and looked at the boundary and the financial feasibility study and, I think, negotiated a fair and equitable agreement," Szalay said.

Either way, Detwiler said, there is always going to be a need for counties – as the administrative arm of state government. Counties, not new cities, run public health and other social programs, operate regional parks and run large-scale public works and major airports.

Counties are the "city of none-of-the-above" for their unincorporated residents, he said.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

[Majin]

Looks like KJ is putting his strong mayor initiative on hold. How sad:

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/13/2887612/capitol-alert-kevin-johnson-wont.html?commentSort=TimeStampAscending&pageNum=1

[Web]

Looks like KJ is putting his strong mayor initiative on hold. How sad:

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/13/2887612/capitol-alert-kevin-johnson-wont.html?commentSort=TimeStampAscending&pageNum=1

yeAH maybe he will work on CITY issues.,.......

I have a friend whose daughter is an intern to this buffoon....no pay 16 hr days and most of the time it was Strong Mayor initiative.....lots of power lunchs on someones dime and an offer of a free bahamas trip to whoever could sway cohn to switch his vote......sounds like a power hungry basketball player to me.......

[Majin]

yeAH maybe he will work on CITY issues.,.......

I have a friend whose daughter is an intern to this buffoon....no pay 16 hr days and most of the time it was Strong Mayor initiative.....lots of power lunchs on someones dime and an offer of a free bahamas trip to whoever could sway cohn to switch his vote......sounds like a power hungry basketball player to me.......

Sounds good to me. Thats exactly the type of person we need leading this city.

[Web]

Sounds good to me. Thats exactly the type of person we need leading this city.

A CROOK offering city money to sway votes??

A person spending NO time on city issues but a big ego trip?

cmon

and I still think there is something to the st hope stuff....etc
after hearing the "free lunchs" and a trip to the bahamas etc.....probably have a rendevouz/....

This site isnt worth the time of day lately

[Ghost of Econgrad]

http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/08/12/v-print/2039763/the-swarm-ray-kerridge-happy-to.html


The Swarm: Ray Kerridge happy to be the heck out of Sacramento
Posted at 06:04 PM on Thursday, Aug. 12, 2010
By Foon Rhee - frhee@sacbee.com

A delegation of Roseville leaders came calling this afternoon to trumpet the city's efforts toward economic recovery and prosperity.

In September, the City Council plans to appoint an advisory committee of builders, engineers and others to look at development standards -- softening the city's reputation as tough on developers and making sure it's not putting itself at a competitive disadvantage. In October, the council plans to create a community development corporation to focus on infill development in downtown and older commercial corridors. Roseville is continuing to work on recruiting clean energy, medical and professional jobs, plus a possible satellite campus of Sacramento State University.

The Placer County city is "open for business," declared its new city manager, Ray Kerridge.

He said he didn't want to dwell on his previous life as city manager in Sacramento. But with just a little goading from The Bee's editorial board, Kerridge also made clear how happy he is to be in Roseville -- and no longer in Sacramento. He resigned in February after a tumultuous four years, and started his new job June 17.

Kerridge said there's a different culture in Roseville, where the council and administrators have a good relationship and are all interested in moving forward. Of his leaving Sacramento, Kerridge said he decided "This isn't a good environment to be working in, and I need to get out."

He even made a joke -- with just a tinge of invective -- about the split vote by the Sacramento council last month on the last K Street redevelopment proposal where the four members of an ad hoc committee were outvoted by the council members not on the panel.

Kerridge's departure has remained somewhat murky. It was clear he was frustrated by the dysfunctional council, and that some council members were not happy with him. When he left, Kerridge talked about a private sector job, so it was something of a surprise when he landed nearby in Roseville.

He and Mayor Gina Garbolino provided much more of the back story today:

A headhunter hired by Roseville in November originally came up with 68 names. Kerridge was in a group of 13 that the consultant recommended for a closer look, then was one of four finalists who underwent intense vetting. He originally provided six references, but then was asked for more with both positive and negative views of him. He eventually offered 50 references, 36 of whom were contacted.

Kerridge wanted to leave after February budget work but before May, but eventually stuck it out until May when his hiring was announced. He is now the Sacramento region's highest paid city manager, with an annual salary of $237,700. But that's less than the $285,000 his predecessor was making.

Garbolino said she's heard little criticism of Kerridge's pay, even with the huge controversy started by the astronomical salaries in Bell. And she seemed confident that Kerridge is providing the vision, leadership and integrity the city wanted.

[Ghost of Econgrad]

SACRAMENTO (CBS13) — Public safety unions and a group of local business leaders are reportedly gearing up to campaign for a “strong mayor” system in Sacramento after Mayor Kevin Johnson’s push in the summer of 2010 failed.

The Sacramento Police Officer Association is planning to sponsor the push to grant Mayor Johnson broader powers, and says it has received promises of support from the Firefighters union, the Metro Chamber and the so-called “Gang of 60” business leaders in Sacramento.

SPOA vice president Mark Tyndale says he hopes the coalition will silence critics who say Mayor Johnson is behind the push for more power.

“We’ve been behind this from the very beginning,” Tyndale said. “We’re certainly going to do everything in our power to get it on the ballot. We want the city council on board.”

The proposal would give Mayor Johnson and his successors the power to hire and fire department heads and to create city budgets. City council members voted down placing the measure on the ballot this past summer, a move that “shocked” Johnson.

Tyndale expects heavy spending by supporters and opponents of the new campaign in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Critics say the SPOA is spearheading the effort to gain favor at the bargaining table, but union representatives say they simply support the idea.

Johnson’s office said the mayor does not have any comment to the announcement.

[Ghost of Econgrad]

Brown's Countdown, Day 1: Plan takes on powerful redevelopment forces
dkasler@sacbee.com
Published Monday, Jan. 10, 2011

Old Sacramento was revived with the help of public redevelopment money, back in the 1960s. The city's new downtown nightlife venue, the "mermaid bar" complex on K Street, got millions of redevelopment dollars, too.

Even the midtown loft building that Gov. Jerry Brown calls home was partially funded with redevelopment money.

Now California's multibillion-dollar redevelopment industry is fighting for its life – with Brown as its would-be executioner. In the budget proposal he will release today, the governor is expected to call for the elimination of every local redevelopment agency in the state, according to a source familiar with the proposal.

Eliminating the agencies, all 425 of them, would free up considerable sums of money to help plug a $20 billion deficit. The amount saved isn't immediately clear.

The proposal is already drawing fire from redevelopment interests. John Shirey of the California Redevelopment Association, which lobbies on behalf of local agencies, acknowledged that his industry makes a lucrative target for budget cutters.

"It does have to do with the same reason robbers rob banks," he said.

Redevelopment has longtime critics at the Capitol, however, who contend that some of the hundreds of local agencies siphon off local property tax money for questionable projects.

It's not clear if Brown's plan would fly in the Legislature or survive the inevitable legal challenges. One likely source of litigation is Proposition 22, a ballot initiative approved by voters in November, which prohibits the Legislature from raiding the redevelopment agencies for money.

Shirey and other advocates for redevelopment say Brown is trying to destroy a business that's vital to California's economic recovery. Redevelopment money has been poured into such diverse projects as the high-profile Bay Street retail complex off Interstate 80 in Emeryville, the Sheraton Grand and Esquire Plaza in downtown Sacramento, and the first grocery store to hit Oak Park in 25 years.

"Construction – it's a growth engine for the economy," said Bob Balgenorth, president of the State Building & Construction Trades Council. "We know everybody has to take a haircut, but to do away with growth at this time … is disheartening."

The Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, with 290 employees and a $250 million annual budget, is a huge player in the region's construction market. SHRA money is helping with the massive face-lift of the downtown railyard. Redevelopment dollars would likely play a role in a new arena for the Kings.

Wendy Hoyt, a veteran consultant to developers in Sacramento, said the public dollars are crucial to remaking blighted areas of the urban core.

"You're just putting downtown at an incredible disadvantage if you eliminate this," Hoyt said. "I think everybody in the community is wondering, is this really going to happen?"

But around the Capitol, redevelopment is seen by some as a hefty tax subsidy the state can't afford.

In 2009, the Legislature took $1.7 billion from the local agencies to help balance the budget, or about one-third of their state funding. Redevelopment people sued, unsuccessfully. Proposition 22 was passed to prevent the Legislature from doing that again.

The state supports redevelopment in this way: Redevelopment agencies issue bonds to pay for projects. As the projects take shape, they generate higher property tax revenue. Instead of going to schools and municipalities, the additional tax revenue is kept by the redevelopment agencies to pay off those bonds.

That creates a burden for the state. Because of the school-funding formulas mandated by Proposition 98, the state has to ship money to schools to backfill, or compensate, for the revenue kept by the redevelopment agencies. Some years – when the Legislature doesn't take some of that money back – the drain on the state treasury has hit $2.7 billion.

"The schools can't lose, so the state has to backfill," said Peter Detwiler, staff director of the Senate Committee on Local Government. "It's certainly a topic that many legislators are concerned about."

Dismantling the redevelopment machine would create enormous complications. Some sort of mechanism to pay off the local agencies' $20 billion bond debt would have to be preserved. That would likely reduce the savings to the state treasury, at least early on.

Still, Brown's proposal is winning praise from redevelopment critics like Assemblyman Chris Norby, R-Fullerton, who says the industry is rife with taxpayer-funded boondoggles.

In a recent column for the consevative website FlashReport, Norby applauded Brown for taking on "a playground for bureaucrats, planners and politically connected developers who prefer profits from the public trough rather than the free market."

Some redevelopment proposals have become notorious. A decade ago, the courts blocked a plan by the mountain town of Mammoth Lakes to declare much of its land blighted so it could expand its ski resorts.

And controversy arose in October when the Legislature passed a law just before it adjourned that lets a San Diego redevelopment agency triple its borrowing capacity – to $9 billion – to finance a new football stadium, among other things. The increased borrowing would divert more property tax dollars away from schools and put further strain on the state treasury.

Still, private developers say the vast majority of projects are legitimate uses of public money.

Sacramento developer Mark Friedman says about $50 million in redevelopment funds have been pledged toward the Bridges project, an ambitious plan to turn West Sacramento's industrial riverfront into an urban village.

"To reverse that would be tantamount to killing the project," he said.

Friedman used redevelopment dollars to restore the historic Elliott Building on J Street in midtown Sacramento. The building, once a dilapidated auto dealership, now houses restaurants, Friedman's office and more.

The third floor consists of 18 loft apartments. The newest tenants: Brown and his wife, Anne Gust Brown.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response from Ghost of Econgrad:

Prop 98:

Proposition 98 guarantees that at least 40 percent of state spending goes to K-12 and community colleges. The funding level is tied to state revenue, and arcane formulas with factors including student population, cost of living and per capita income.

Under most scenarios, if the Legislature doesn’t fully fund the Prop 98 obligation, it must gradually repay what it owes in future years. But not in this particular case. The governor is saying that the state overpaid its Prop 98 obligation by $2.3 billion in 2008-09, when revenues came in far below what the governor and the Legislature had predicted. Therefore, the administration says, the IOU from that year should be wiped out.

PROP 98 = TEACHERS UNION.

"Today, the education funding guarantee is as popular as the teachers union has long wished -- a true third rail of California government that zaps politicians who dare to suggest altering it. So they rarely dare. Although Proposition 98 has much to do with the state's current $15-billion-plus shortfall, it is not talked about much in the public debate over hiking sales taxes and borrowing against the lottery and finding other ways to boost the state's revenues." -- http://newamerica.net/node/8903


More Proof on how Unions harm Sacramento's development and redevelopment. Or is Jerry Brown a right-wing conspiracy nut too?? Is someone getting mad and reporting me to an Admin yet?

[rampant_jwalker]

Do most redevelopment funds come from local taxes or state taxes? Maybe I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that Prop. 22 protects funds raised from local sales taxes from being appropriated by the state government, which includes redevelopment money. So at least some funds for redevelopment should be protected, right?

[wburg]

Redevelopment funds come from property taxes generated by properties in the redevelopment area. This means that those funds are not available to city general funds and schools, and the state has to back-fill those lost taxes to the schools. One upcoming issue will be whether this counts as a state grab of special-fund resources like the raids of transit funding that Prop. 22 was intended to prevent.

Econgrad's argument is based on his misinterpretation of the article (he seems to think this takes money from schools, it actually takes money from redevelopment agencies to maintain the same funding levels for schools) and false association (the statement that "PROP 98 = TEACHERS UNION") which assumes that any action against the intent of Prop. 98 (which isn't the case here) means that Brown has somehow sided against unions in general. This is false. He isn't talking about doing away with Prop. 98.

Now, Econgrad also misinterprets the fact that these are state laws, not something local to Sacramento. Maybe he considers growth in Los Angeles and the Bay Area equally stunted by California regulation, but whenever he talks about this stuff he always specifies "Sacramento" as though it was strictly a local problem--as though other cities in California don't have to follow the same state laws.

If Econgrad had not misinterpreted the article, and instead understood it, he would probably be cheering about Brown's real intent, namely doing away with redevelopment zones (and thus redevelopment-fund projects like K Street etcetera) in California.

[Ghost of Econgrad]

Redevelopment funds come from property taxes generated by properties in the redevelopment area. This means that those funds are not available to city general funds and schools, and the state has to back-fill those lost taxes to the schools. One upcoming issue will be whether this counts as a state grab of special-fund resources like the raids of transit funding that Prop. 22 was intended to prevent.

Econgrad's argument is based on his misinterpretation of the article (he seems to think this takes money from schools, it actually takes money from redevelopment agencies to maintain the same funding levels for schools) and false association (the statement that "PROP 98 = TEACHERS UNION") which assumes that any action against the intent of Prop. 98 (which isn't the case here) means that Brown has somehow sided against unions in general. This is false. He isn't talking about doing away with Prop. 98.

Putting words in my mouth again because you have no arguement or you are not intelligent enough to understand what I am posting. I never said anything contrary to the above.
- Ghost of Econgrad


Now, Econgrad also misinterprets the fact that these are state laws, not something local to Sacramento. Maybe he considers growth in Los Angeles and the Bay Area equally stunted by California regulation, but whenever he talks about this stuff he always specifies "Sacramento" as though it was strictly a local problem--as though other cities in California don't have to follow the same state laws.
I have to highlight Sacramento or else someone lame will report me to the admins. Yes, this effects all developments in California. I am showing you what we are up against in developing our city. Once again you do not understand what I am posting. - GoE


If Econgrad had not misinterpreted the article, and instead understood it, he would probably be cheering about Brown's real intent, namely doing away with redevelopment zones (and thus redevelopment-fund projects like K Street etcetera) in California.

I am niether cheering nor upset. I am pointing out how unions and Gov. policies affect urban development here in Sacramento. Just because something affects urban development in other cities as well, does not negate its importance for our city.
- GOE


REpost for those who missed the main article.:

Brown's Countdown, Day 1: Plan takes on powerful redevelopment forces
dkasler@sacbee.com
Published Monday, Jan. 10, 2011

Old Sacramento was revived with the help of public redevelopment money, back in the 1960s. The city's new downtown nightlife venue, the "mermaid bar" complex on K Street, got millions of redevelopment dollars, too.

Even the midtown loft building that Gov. Jerry Brown calls home was partially funded with redevelopment money.

Now California's multibillion-dollar redevelopment industry is fighting for its life – with Brown as its would-be executioner. In the budget proposal he will release today, the governor is expected to call for the elimination of every local redevelopment agency in the state, according to a source familiar with the proposal.

Eliminating the agencies, all 425 of them, would free up considerable sums of money to help plug a $20 billion deficit. The amount saved isn't immediately clear.

The proposal is already drawing fire from redevelopment interests. John Shirey of the California Redevelopment Association, which lobbies on behalf of local agencies, acknowledged that his industry makes a lucrative target for budget cutters.

"It does have to do with the same reason robbers rob banks," he said.

Redevelopment has longtime critics at the Capitol, however, who contend that some of the hundreds of local agencies siphon off local property tax money for questionable projects.

It's not clear if Brown's plan would fly in the Legislature or survive the inevitable legal challenges. One likely source of litigation is Proposition 22, a ballot initiative approved by voters in November, which prohibits the Legislature from raiding the redevelopment agencies for money.

Shirey and other advocates for redevelopment say Brown is trying to destroy a business that's vital to California's economic recovery. Redevelopment money has been poured into such diverse projects as the high-profile Bay Street retail complex off Interstate 80 in Emeryville, the Sheraton Grand and Esquire Plaza in downtown Sacramento, and the first grocery store to hit Oak Park in 25 years.

"Construction – it's a growth engine for the economy," said Bob Balgenorth, president of the State Building & Construction Trades Council. "We know everybody has to take a haircut, but to do away with growth at this time … is disheartening."

The Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, with 290 employees and a $250 million annual budget, is a huge player in the region's construction market. SHRA money is helping with the massive face-lift of the downtown railyard. Redevelopment dollars would likely play a role in a new arena for the Kings.

Wendy Hoyt, a veteran consultant to developers in Sacramento, said the public dollars are crucial to remaking blighted areas of the urban core.

"You're just putting downtown at an incredible disadvantage if you eliminate this," Hoyt said. "I think everybody in the community is wondering, is this really going to happen?"

But around the Capitol, redevelopment is seen by some as a hefty tax subsidy the state can't afford.

In 2009, the Legislature took $1.7 billion from the local agencies to help balance the budget, or about one-third of their state funding. Redevelopment people sued, unsuccessfully. Proposition 22 was passed to prevent the Legislature from doing that again.

The state supports redevelopment in this way: Redevelopment agencies issue bonds to pay for projects. As the projects take shape, they generate higher property tax revenue. Instead of going to schools and municipalities, the additional tax revenue is kept by the redevelopment agencies to pay off those bonds.

That creates a burden for the state. Because of the school-funding formulas mandated by Proposition 98, the state has to ship money to schools to backfill, or compensate, for the revenue kept by the redevelopment agencies. Some years – when the Legislature doesn't take some of that money back – the drain on the state treasury has hit $2.7 billion.

"The schools can't lose, so the state has to backfill," said Peter Detwiler, staff director of the Senate Committee on Local Government. "It's certainly a topic that many legislators are concerned about."

Dismantling the redevelopment machine would create enormous complications. Some sort of mechanism to pay off the local agencies' $20 billion bond debt would have to be preserved. That would likely reduce the savings to the state treasury, at least early on.

Still, Brown's proposal is winning praise from redevelopment critics like Assemblyman Chris Norby, R-Fullerton, who says the industry is rife with taxpayer-funded boondoggles.

In a recent column for the consevative website FlashReport, Norby applauded Brown for taking on "a playground for bureaucrats, planners and politically connected developers who prefer profits from the public trough rather than the free market."

Some redevelopment proposals have become notorious. A decade ago, the courts blocked a plan by the mountain town of Mammoth Lakes to declare much of its land blighted so it could expand its ski resorts.

And controversy arose in October when the Legislature passed a law just before it adjourned that lets a San Diego redevelopment agency triple its borrowing capacity – to $9 billion – to finance a new football stadium, among other things. The increased borrowing would divert more property tax dollars away from schools and put further strain on the state treasury.

Still, private developers say the vast majority of projects are legitimate uses of public money.

Sacramento developer Mark Friedman says about $50 million in redevelopment funds have been pledged toward the Bridges project, an ambitious plan to turn West Sacramento's industrial riverfront into an urban village.

"To reverse that would be tantamount to killing the project," he said.

Friedman used redevelopment dollars to restore the historic Elliott Building on J Street in midtown Sacramento. The building, once a dilapidated auto dealership, now houses restaurants, Friedman's office and more.

The third floor consists of 18 loft apartments. The newest tenants: Brown and his wife, Anne Gust Brown.

[Ghost of Econgrad]

Redevelopment agencies brace for battle with Sacramento

By Carol Ferguson, Eyewitness News January 19, 2011

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. -- Redevelopment agencies in Kern County hope their funding can be saved, but some California cities are already taking action to protect these tax dollars.

Governor Jerry Brown wants to scrap the agencies, and use their funds to help the state budget. Bakersfield officials are already launching a defense.

The City Council approved a resolution opposing the end of redevelopment agencies, and fired off a letter dated January 13 to Sacramento.

Economic Development Director Donna Kunz ticked off a long list of projects the redevelopment agency has brought to life.

One of the latest is the Mill Creek Linear Park.

"It's a $15 million project that basically turned an old dirt canal into a new, meandering walking path," Kunz told Eyewitness News Wednesday.

More redevelopment projects include the renovated Kress Building downtown, and two big projects on Truxtun.

"One of the largest would be the Rabobank Arena and Convention Center and the Marriott Hotel," Kunz noted. "You'll remember it was an iron mess for many years."

She takes a dim view of the state proposal to yank redevelopment tax funds. Kunz says its more sleight of hand, grabbing local money for Sacramento.

"It's like, we don't shift money, we'll just eliminate you. It wouldn't be a shift, if you (the agency) are dead."

Governor Brown wants to take money from redevelopment agencies and re-direct it to school districts and county general funds. Across the state, redevelopment agencies take in about $5 billion a year.

"Once again, it's a state of California shell game," complained Shafter City Manager John Guinn. "They haven't ,lived within their means and revenue restraints."

Guinn points to the benefits from Shafter's redevelopment agency. The large "Airport Industrial Area" near Lerdo Highway and Highway 99 is a cluster of businesses.

He gestured at one facility. "It's a $40 million plant on what was a vacant field."

Redevelopment agencies take in tax funds. Guinn explained property is taxed at a base level, but when improvements are made in that area, that adds assessed value to the property.

The redevelopment agency takes that added layer of tax.

"The City of Shafter takes that tax, once again -- no one's paying any more tax," Guinn said. "Then that tax is used to build roads, and infrastructure, water and sewer."

Guinn says those improvements help bring in private development. He said in the Airport Industrial Area, that amounts to over $100 million in private investment and more than 5,000 jobs.

The Shafter city manager said taxes collected by the agency also go for needed community projects like a sewer system in a neighborhood.

He calls the agencies a win-win-win.

"We get jobs, we get new revenue, we get a diversified Kern County economy," Guinn said.

Kunz said if the state kills redevelopment agencies, Bakersfield's could lose $13 million the first year, and $6.6 million in later years.

And, she said projects underway could be "stopped in their tracks." Kunz pointed to one at California Avenue and "Q" Street.

"It's 36 town homes and 14 are under construction, and a 70-unit family apartment," Kunz said. "What would go away is the second half of these condos."

Some cities are already fighting back, or launching some end-around maneuvers.

"Around the state, agencies -- what they're doing it entering into official loans with the cities just to basically take over the responsibility in a loan format to complete the development that we have underway."

Kunz said it's a strategy Bakersfield may take a hard look at.

"We're meeting with the city manager this week, and it's something we probably will have to consider by Friday."

[Ghost of Econgrad]

Jerry Brown's redevelopment ironies
January 21, 2011 | Chase Davis

The fact isn't lost on many people, least of all the man himself, that Gov. Jerry Brown's controversial proposal to do away with local redevelopment agencies is rich with small ironies.

First, there's the governor's new loft: an award-winning example of infill development in downtown Sacramento that was funded in part by the same type of redevelopment agency Brown wants to eliminate. After meeting with Brown earlier this week to discuss the proposed cuts, Yuba City Mayor John Dukes wasn't shy about telling the Sacramento Bee that he found the choice of digs to be "a little hypocritical."

Then there are his eight years as mayor of Oakland – a time marked by arguably one of the most ambitious urban restorations in modern California history. A centerpiece of the restoration, the iconic Fox Theater, received millions in redevelopment funds and now houses one of Brown's prized charter schools.

And when Gov. Gray Davis threatened to scale back funding for redevelopment agencies in 2003, it was Brown who reportedly argued (according to the paid archives of the Alameda Times-Star) that such cuts would only compound the Oakland's financial problems.

But perhaps the most striking irony is that Brown, who has such a keen understanding of gestures and symbols that he once refused to mend a hole in the governor's office carpet so visiting officials would feel bad asking for money, is perceived as having such a symbolic disconnect between his public persona and his proposed policy.

Redevelopment funds provide much-needed fuel for exactly the kind of development Brown personally seems to prefer: industrial downtown lofts, restored historic buildings and urban infill. He has lived, at different points, in a restored firehouse, an urban commune and a loft in the old Sears Roebuck building in downtown Oakland.

Just last month, he was described (somewhat facetiously) in one blog post as a trend-setting urban hipster. The day of his inauguration, Michael Shaw of Sacramento Business Journal even mused about whether Brown's election would be good for infill development. At the time, the opinion of the California Infill Builders Association – which was formed, of all places, at the same loft complex that Brown now calls home – seemed to be "yes."

It hasn't taken development groups long to temper their enthusiasm.

"This budget proposal to eliminate redevelopment is more budget smoke and mirrors that will bring little financial gain for the state but will cause widespread and significant economic pain in communities throughout California," John Shirey, head of the California Redevelopment Association said in a statement.

Confronted with some of these questions earlier this week at a meeting with local government leaders, Brown's response was pragmatic. When he was mayor, Brown said, the state had money for redevelopment. It simply doesn't anymore.

"I like redevelopment," Brown said, according to the LA Times. "I didn't quite understand it, seemed kind of magical. I put a lot into the Fox Theater, got this beautiful theater. Tens of millions of dollars ... I'm sure glad I got it built before this damn budget came out."

Brown has made clear that he sees cutting redevelopment agencies as more a matter of fiscal prudence than a philosophical objection to redevelopment in general, but cities have still worried that the cuts will hamper exactly the type of smart-growth development that they, and Brown, have long supported.

What remains to be seen is how Brown's proposed cuts will eventually come together with his environmental platform, which places heavy emphasis on projects that would reduce sprawl and encourage people to live closer to their workplaces. In the words of his campaign:


5. Build Livable Communities.

California’s population is expected to increase to 60 million by 2050, which – in the absence of sound policies – will increase congestion, vehicle miles driven, and air pollution; it will also result in paving over more than a million acres of the State’s most productive farmland. Improving the quality of life in California communities requires that jobs be located closer to where people live, thereby allowing people to spend less time commuting and more time with their families and friends.

* Ensure that the Strategic Growth Council provides resources for more sustainable local development.

* Provide incentives for development near transportation and business hubs.

* Link state transportation funding to projects that avoid sprawl, reduce vehicle miles traveled and encourage livable communities.

* Encourage businesses to adopt programs that reduce dependency on solo automobile trips.

* Promote safe routes to school that encourage kids to walk and bike instead of being driven.


http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/jerry-browns-redevelopment-ironies-8168

[econgrad2.0]

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Sacramento Puts An End To Redevelopment Agencies


You couldn't have asked for a nicer present. Or at least I couldn't have asked for a nicer present. In a move that took me and a whole lot of other people completely by surprise, both Houses of the State Legislature in Sacramento passed their budget. And they actually managed to get it all done on time, which almost never happens in California.


But in what was the most astonishing gift of all, in the process of getting the budget done they also pounded a long wooden stake into the heart of 450 or so Community Redevelopment Agencies. Effectively bringing to an end decades of eminent domain abuse, predatory development (think: Downtown Specific Plan), and just plain out and out good old boy crony corruption.


Here is how those happening dudes at the California Eminent Domain Report describe the stake that slew the vampire:


... SB 14x/AB 26x would, immediately upon enactment, suspend most agency activities, including the issuance of new bonds, entering into new contracts, acquiring or disposing of properties, or taking other actions beyond the servicing of existing contractual obligations. Effective October 1, 2011, the bill would dissolve all redevelopment agencies and designate successor agencies. County auditors would be required to conduct an audit of each former redevelopment agency by March 1, 2012.

(MOST OF ARTICLE LEFT OUT. TO READ COMPLETE ARTICLE GO TO THE LINK BELOW)

Apparently passions ran high when the Redevelopment Vampire was succumbing to Jerry's mighty hammer and splintery wooden



And with that rapid diminishment of a now obsolete City government model happening, residents could find themselves having to take control of the City back and run it on their own.

Which, to tell you the truth, is not necessarily a bad thing.

http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com/2011/06/cra-is-dead.html

[econgrad2.0]

Sacramento Co. to
continue debate on
pot dispensaries


SACRAMENTO, CA - The Sacramento
County Board of Supervisors voted to
continue discussions on a medical
marijuana ordinance until July 27.

As of now, dispensaries and cultivation are
not allowed within county limits. The
emergency ordinance, if passed, would
allow dispensaries and the cultivation for
cannabis for medical purposes, but with
strict limitations.

Sacramento County spokeswoman Chris
Andis said community planning advisory
councils (CPACs) throughout the county will
reach out to community members, business
owners and stake holders to flesh out their
concerns about the ordinance.

Sacramento County District 1 Supervisor
Phil Serna said the board directed county
staff to return in July with a fully vetted
proposal.

"The absence of medical cannabis
regulation in Sacramento County is
untenable and contributes to the
proliferation of illegal cultivation and
dispensing," Serna said in a statement.
"Some of the concerns I conveyed to staff
and members of the public include
dispensary over-concentration, public
safety and security, and how the County will
address the issue of non-conforming
cultivation activities."

Andis said one concern community
members brought up during the board
meeting Tuesday concerned a restriction
on selling and consuming edible marijuana.

Another restriction in the ordinance would
only allow growing marijuana in a home or
an accessory structure such as a garage or
shed.

Those structures must have setbacks,
meaning they must be located a set n
umber of feet from the property line. On
property less than 20 acres, the structure
must be set back 100 feet. For 20 to 60
acres, there is a 300-foot setback

MORE FROM ARTICLE:
http://www.news10.net/news/article/142699/2/Sacramento-Co-to-continue-debate-on-pot-dispensaries


Can we just legalize it already? :frog:

[202_Cyclist]

I don't know which thread to post this under but this week's NYT magazine has an article about the potential failure of the levees around Sacramento and the subsequent flooding it would cause.

California’s Next Nightmare

By ALEX PRUD’HOMME
July 1, 2011
NY Times

"People tend to underestimate the power of floods: six inches of fast-moving water can knock you down; two feet of water can float most cars away. Floods kill an average of 127 Americans a year — more than tornadoes or hurricanes — and cause more than $2 billion of property damage annually, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/magazine/sacramento-levees-pose-risk-to-california-and-the-country.html?_r=1&ref=magazine

[rampant_jwalker]

Excuse my nerdiness, but...

I was trying to find out which international cities have roughly the same "purchasing power" as Sacramento, and so far I have learned that:

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville GDP from 2008 (most recent data) was $93,652 million. (This must mean $93,652,000,000)
source: http://econpost.com/gdp/sacramento-arden-arcade-roseville-california-gdp

Berlin's GDP was $95 billion, about the same as Sacramento's.
Lisbon and Jakarta are also very close in economic size to Sacramento.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP

Per capita, the Sacramento region's economy is richer than any of those cities. Is that a fair comparison to make?

In my mind I wonder why cities with smaller economies and purchasing power are able to build stadiums, arenas, many museums, public parks, and extensive commuter rail systems, while large projects are generally not considered to be feasible here. Any thoughts?

[202_Cyclist]

In my mind I wonder why cities with smaller economies and purchasing power are able to build stadiums, arenas, many museums, public parks, and extensive commuter rail systems, while large projects are generally not considered to be feasible here.

First, I'd be shocked if the Sacramento metro region has the same GDP as Berlin. Doesn't the Sacramento region have 2M - 2.5M people, whereas Berlin is a large European city. Perhaps they were comparing the city of Berlin with the entire Sacramento region.

As for your second point, in other countries public investments such as you listed are seen as a way to make society both more productive and more enjoyable, whereas in the US, any spending on public infrastructure or other public facilities is generally considered a socialist plot to make us more French. Other countries realize the highest and best policy goal isn't always tax cuts for hedge-fund managers.

[NME22]

July 26, 2011
"City Hall wants to fix what some officials think is a hostile business environment in Sacramento.

The city is launching an effort aimed at speeding up development and doing away with regulations criticized for scaring businesses away from the city, officials announced today.

The process will begin over the next few weeks, when the city's Community Development Department will move toward placing permitting processes online, reducing fees associated with solar projects and creating "express lanes" for some projects.

"These are things that will help Sacramento because time is money," said Josh Wood, the vice president of Region Builders, a development and business advocacy group."


Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2011/07/city-hall-aims-to-improve-business-climate-in-sacramento.html#ixzz1TFr27YI3