The Victorious Opposition

When I started the California’s Gold threads a year ago, I never envisioned a nanny state move so blatant that the story almost writes itself. Pay up, schmuck. Los Angeles has Unions to feed.

The City Council voted Tuesday to have two departments share information in order to track down people who haven’t licensed their pets.

Council President Eric Garcetti estimates two-thirds of the city’s dogs are unlicensed. Licenses cost $15 for a sterilized dog and $100 for an unaltered pet.

Getting all dogs licensed would mean at least an additional $3.6 million in fees to the city.

The Department of Animal Services has eight full-time people whose job is to find and license dogs. The Department of Water and Power keeps a meter-reader database of homes with dogs. The council ordered the departments to coordinate to find the pooches.

If you ever wanted a good reason to not trust or be forthcoming to any arm of the government (please see my post about also never talking to the police) here’s your example. Two departments of government (one you gave information to in good faith, to actually help them) will now turn that good faith into your detriment. I wouldn’t really give two shits about this development otherwise, if the government here wasn’t running around like the Gambinos, whipping our asses and abusing everything conceivable in order to pay the ransoms they demand to keep power. When you really think about it, if all parties agreed, this is money owed, and you should pay it.

However, the coordinated effort mandated, and the blatant reasoning behind it has pretty much validated anything I’ve ever written about such things as ticketing. Here, we see that the government can actually pick and choose to enforce things, and for no other reason than to cover money gaps. I don’t expect to hear much about ticketing anytime in the future, it’s pretty much set in stone with this story that the government can and does coordinate to enforce bullshit laws for no other reason than to fleece you the taxpayer on the way home from work.

Los Angeles has declared war on its residents, denying school for children, hitting you up on the way home from a hard day’s work, and now for your pooch. I don’t own a dog, and I hate to tell you that the reasons I do not chime with this decision. A dog is a pretty litigious item in these parts, and dog owners do piss me off. There are also a lot of laws already written about them (mandated leashes, doggy bags for the poop (all for the environment, etc.) that I just said “fuck it.” I’d love a dog, but I just can’t keep up. It’s a daunting task.

It doesn’t really pain me to see that people’s balls will be put in a vice over this. Dog owners here suck for the most part, thinking they control all area outside of their apartment, and not shy on just letting the verminous hairy rat run at will under the premise that they are the ultimate authority this thing could never harm anyone else in a city of 10 million. As a runner and bike rider, I’ve had my share of altercations with people’s dogs. This doesn’t change my opinion that this is pretty fucked up.

If you boil it down, who the LA shitty council is really after is probably homeowners, of which I will keep my eye on how this plays out. Apartments and condos (most of what LA is) might have the meters in a centralized location. But if you own a home in LA, you’ve got some scrilla. Let’s see how people respond to this, and in addition, I’d like to see how this plays out with our city’s coveted illegals. Almost assuredly they have bypassed this process, like they bypassed a proper visa to this country. They are Tony’s “protected class” after all, but they do influence the one’s that are here.

It’s a good lesson in not saying shit to anything that could be construed as involved with the government. At this point, I’m not even giving The Gas Company information. How long until getting Gas could land you with some inadvertent “fuck you, pay me” bill in the mail. Fuck ‘Em, really. Let the dog bite them, and say it isn’t yours. Call the fire department, and ask them how to broil salmon. It clearly doesn’t matter what you do, because you are being recorded, and under investigation in your own home.

For anyone out of state, wondering what lengths this Mexican standoff can go to, I proudly put the California’s Gold tag on.

A call for help, even if it’s not for you, will now cost 300 bucks, break out the torches and pitchforks.

Yes, it has come to this.

Some of you might ask, “Gees Louise, where are all of my taxes going if not to get a little help in case I have an emergency?”. Property taxes, city taxes, county taxes, business taxes, sales taxes, fees for every conceivable service rendered by my local municipality, is all this going down a rat hole?

How does this sit with you guys? The local councilman is crying me a river over their budget deficit (how much is that fire chief, police chief, or city manager making? just wondering) but is sticking it to people that really need help the best way to approach this?

Tracy is about halfway between where I live and where my elderly mom lives. A few years ago I got her one of those medical alert medallions you wear around your neck in case you need help, you just press the button. Mom is on social security and the only way I could get her to wear it was to assure her that if pressed the ambulance does not respond first (having to pay for that service) but the fire dept. comes first and if you just need help getting up or getting back inside, they will do it for free. So much for that advice.

They talked about the possibility of this new fee being a detriment to the indigent calling for help, I don’t think this can be over blown. 300 bucks is what some people live on each month, the poor will think long and hard about availing themselves of this very basic service, which I believe will cause unnecessary deaths and a boatload of litigation for the city. As a tax payer, I am willing to pay my fair share so that those that are less well off can still get help.

The other fly in the ointment is that many people use 911 for things other then medical emergencies, mostly involving traffic related emergencies, where does this new law fit in?

  Residents will pay $300 for every fire department response to a medical emergency. Non-residents can expect to pay $400. There is no set cost for a fire department visit to a car accident.

  The city is working out an option so that households can pay an annual membership fee of $48, which would cover the cost of any emergency aid given during the course of a year, said David Bramell, who is acting as fire chief while Chief Chris Bosch is on administrative leave.

OK, traffic accidents, no charge, good for them.  But how about some of these:

1) You call 911 to report your neighbors fighting loudly with threats being made (yes the fire dept. has to respond)
2) You call 911 to report some guys fighting in an alley adjacent to the eatery you just left
3)You call 911 to report a car stalled in the #1 lane of the freeway
4)You call 911 to report a vehicle driving by you with a 2 year old infant strapped atop the hood on the luggage rack
5)You call 911 because you smell gas coming from your neighbor’s house
6) You call 911 because you hear someone yelling for help in an adjacent building.

And so on and so on.

All cities will charge residents a fee if they abuse the 911 process, how about Tracy give all residence one free 911 response for medical assistance, then charge there after? That would be better.

I am ornery enough that if I lived in Tracy, I would sign up for the 48 dollar special, then call them once a week for absolutely bullshit reasons like, “Do I cook this meatloaf at 350 degrees for 30 minutes, or 400 degrees for 20 minutes?” or ,“OK guys, in case of an earthquake, it is duck and cover,  or cover and duck? I always get them confused”.

Two can play at that game.

It is truly blessed to be victorious.

The Los Angeles City Council today approved a motion to “expedite the elimination of 4,000 positions by any means necessary, including layoffs.”

The council instructed all city departments and offices to identify within 45 days positions to be cut July 1.

The council’s 9-3 vote comes a day after major credit rating agency Moody’s Investor Service put the city on its negative watch list.

The council is also considering a proposal to privatize the operation of the Los Angeles Convention Center and restrict funding for Neighborhood Councils as further ways to help close a $212 million deficit this fiscal year that is projected to grow to $484 million next fiscal year and $1 billion by 2012-13.

This was a pretty simple one to call, and I was a little surprised that anyone said that we should simply accept raising taxes to cover this blatant government bloating. The reasoning behind this decision is very simple and can be traced to how a company operates. In a company, if they are losing money, and have too much overhead, they will cut the overhead to cover the loss. Now, in government, the state employees can do a lot of fancy things like sign onto a Union and make every little decision litigious. It makes the idea of security in one’s job solid if you can get everything codified. However, the simple fact of the matter is that all of these little luxuries come down to the willingness to pay for them. This is true of government as it is true of private companies.

What’s a little different about the government is that they can play a couple of more games in the process, but that’s of no real concern because the driving factor in both (and what is of the utmost importance) is the money. The state workers have played a game of need (by boosting need with illegals for legitimacy), and hijacking services to create angst (see closing of DMV, parks, etc.). None of this worked, because the people who actually pay our taxes don’t ever really reap these rewards. We don’t really give two shits about the DMV being closed on Friday, or if Mexicans might be impacted by the closing of a state park here or there. Even more to the point is that the state workers have really robbed themselves of the services they thought could make the actual tax payers consider bending over even further and saying as ryan eloquently puts it as “just the tip”.

It wouldn’t be Manwhore-iffic if I didn’t at least try to address the side that will be impacted by this. The state worker that goes to work, tries to make a difference and really revels in the idea of helping people. If you’re one of those reading this, fear not, I have something to say about you. You’re in the wrong business. You shouldn’t be in a business where your performance has been shrouded by a Union, your effort has been dwarfed by waste outside of that effort, and your job is now in turmoil.

You were unfortunately sold a lie, and that lie was that Unions provide protection, and another in that any job can last forever if you just sign onto a dotted line. A third, in that money might not be the bottom line. Money is the bottom line, and even with all of the protections built into contracts, all of the legalities associated, and any of the mumbo-jumbo sold to you, nothing will erase the idea that when there is no money to pay for you….You’re out. The government job, like any company, is subject to checks and balances. And while the state can tax and spend with impunity, they are not allowed to do so without consent (as of yet).

As we can see, Southern California’s liberality is clearly dictated by how much we have to spend. Of which, the government has not been mindful of. Take heed of this, it might help you where you land next. And remember, the government is a business, and it answers to the voters, no matter how much yo despise them. In the private world we struggle to better understand our market. Their needs, their concerns, and most importantly how much they are willing to spend for our service. Much like a focus groups, your market has said that they resoundingly don’t need this much of you service, don’t like it, and don’t need the nanny-ing that California life has become.

Take that furlough and IOU to the bank and ask them to cash it.

Republicans here have finally grabbed their wits here in Los Angeles and are now beginning to murder the problem.

Reporting from Sacramento - Lawmakers admonished state administrators Wednesday for expenditures such as furnishings costing up to $7,000 per employee, an airplane for Caltrans inspectors valued at nearly $1 million, a $429,000 boat and 1,300 cars, motorcycles and trucks costing $34 million.

“I find these expenditures to be an insult and very disrespectful to every furloughed state employee, to every taxpayer who has been working very hard to make ends meet, who is driving an old car on its last legs when this state chooses not to do the same,” said Assemblywoman Audra Strickland (R- Thousand Oaks), vice chairwoman of the committee investigating the spending.

Department managers said they had tried to reduce expenses, but legislators challenged more than $75 million spent on new vehicles, furniture and hotel meeting rooms last year despite the budget crisis.

A parade of bureaucrats was summoned Wednesday before the Assembly Committee on Accountability and Administrative Review to be grilled about such spending.

Dennis Clear, a legislative coordinator for the Department of Motor Vehicles, said the $3.6 million spent by his agency on furniture and cubicles helped save money because the agency took over work done by a private contractor in one case and consolidated three telephone call centers into one in another case.

However, lawmakers questioned the $1.4 million the DMV reportedly spent on modular furnishings for the Fresno call center, where 205 people are employed, noting that the sum breaks down to $7,000 per work station.

“I just don’t think it passes the smell test with everything we are going through right now,” said Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher (R- San Diego).

While it’s well established that government is not run like a business, being able to tax and spend with impunity, and granted the ability to spend the taxpayer dollar six feet into the ground and asking the corpse for more, this sure sounds like “private business” is running the debate. What has happened here in LA County is a little bit of a California conundrum. Sac-Town holds the right to pull budget from solvent counties (as much as I understand) to make ends meet. In the melee, LA now has to come up with Sac Town money, and at the same time keep us “open wallets” somewhat happy enough to re-elect them. What this means is, is the investors aren’t happy, they need to get themselves somewhat profitable…Real quick.

A couple of things that are really glaring to me here, are the ideas that people, democratically speaking, are telling our company that we’re not an open paycheck. The other thing that us pleebs are saying is that hijacking services in order to demand more resources doesn’t really bode well when we’re facing 12 percent unemployment, and a population (mostly liberal and retirement focused) are opting out of the “California tax them to tomorrow” initiative for more arid climates. This is, quite literally, the tipping point for legal California citizens.

Imagine my existence, if you will. I already pay the most taxes one could possibly imagine here, have to basically watch my speedometer on the way to work and back, and live with the understanding that I will be issed an IOU for my state taxes, and my wages garnished in addition to already paying more than anyone else. What a great life for the weather, right? I’m sure you’re loving it, and can’t wait to move here.

Los Angeles has now officially recognized the “Tea bagger” movement with this series of steps. The government employees are now engaging in slitting each others throats over the very thing I’ve hoped for since the creation of my “California’s Gold” theme. Now, they’re bitching about who spends what, and it’s amazing to see what’s bubbling to the surface. We are now seeing a ‘hand in hand’ effort to exploit tax payer (read T.E.A.) money and regulation to simply go bananas on spending. Couple this with Unions who just roll in and say “Nuh Uh!” to any attempts to curb the issue, we’ve got a problem.

I was listening to Savage on the way home one day recently, and he was talking to some Republican about the miserable shift in power from Republicans to Democrats in the recent elections. This guy’s answer was short and sweet. And riveting. He basically said “if you’re a true conservative, the goal is to destroy government to make it smaller.” I can dig it, and I can dig Arnold for his filibustering and obstruction here, and I do see it moving forward. In this way, the “Party of NO” is relevant. When you don’t want anymore of it, sometimes the answer is just “Nuh Uh!” California is playing this out by the day, to very desirable results (if you’re tired of government regulation and abuse).

California government is shitting itself about what to do next. I really would hate to have their jobs, because this house of cards is coming down in either this fiscal year or the next. The “Party of NO!!” is demonstrating successful results, in so much as saying that letting this privileged state population fall apart at the seams with responsibility is just what the doctor ordered. Arnie leaves it in a shambles (like Bush) and then lets a democrat tell us their big government plans on how to fix it to predictable outrage.

It’s been a little over a year in the making, and will probably take another year to complete but here it is:

Despite a chorus of complaints from community activists, a City Council committee advanced a plan Monday to lay off up to 1,500 workers and slash spending across the board - including the previously untouched Los Angeles fire and police departments.

The aim of the plan is to make $400 million in cuts to help close a massive budget deficit. While Los Angeles officials say some layoffs can be averted if unions agree to concessions, they say they must plan for the worst.

With that in mind, Councilman Bernard Parks moved to include police and fire departments on the list of agencies facing cuts.

“We are asking you to give us a plan with no restrictions,” Councilman Bernard Parks, chair of the Budget and Finance committee, told City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana at a committee hearing.

“You cannot balance the budget when 70 percent is tied up in police and fire services. It is the elephant in the room that no one is talking about.”

I’d say that is a pretty skewed budget, wouldn’t you? And it is more than high time that it was talked about. Of course I’m a pariah for not immediately agreeing to the simpleton’s theory that more police/fire = more protection. When I was a young boy in Miami this same logic was being applied to deal with the cocaine wars. The city hired anyone and everyone they could strap a gun to, and wouldn’t you know that it didn’t work out. And while there’s plenty more instances of police misconduct I can point to for a case, the simple fact of the matter is that our security is simply unsustainable.

Tony Villar disagrees with most of the public and the council:

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has resisted efforts to cut police below the current level of 9,963 officers, saying public safety has to be the city’s top priority.

What a swell guy he is, with his (one and only) 24/7 police security detail. Please let that number of 9,000+ scare you, the goal has been 10,000. In addition we also have the LA County Sheriff’s department ballooning at about 20,000 employees. Of course, to hear people like Tony VIllar tell it, some of the largest employers in the state (larger than almost any private company by measure) is in a constant state of need.

Both of these departments (police and fire) now represent 70 percent of our budget. Yes, we will continue to lose services for this “luxury” I suppose. However, this will probably be the last year that Villar can get away with this, and the Council already has sent this cholo a little bitch slap. It makes for a good story to save a pooch from a river, but forgive me if I’m balking at it for seventy percent of the city budget.

I’m going to apologize to rich from the get, I originally said that I would only target state workers in California making more than 100,000 annually. However, I have found such an exceptionally profoundly disgusting, repulsive, and defended by the state case for overhaul that I cannot refuse to shine a spotlight on it. Witness: Exhibit A

L.A. Unified pays teachers not to teach

About 160 instructors and others get salaries for doing nothing while their job fitness is reviewed. They collect roughly $10 million a year, even as layoffs are considered because of a budget gap.

For seven years, the Los Angeles Unified School District has paid Matthew Kim a teaching salary of up to $68,000 per year, plus benefits.

His job is to do nothing.

Every school day, Kim’s shift begins at 7:50 a.m., with 30 minutes for lunch, and ends when the bell at his old campus rings at 3:20 p.m. He is to take off all breaks, school vacations and holidays, per a district agreement with the teacher’s union. At no time is he to be given any work by the district or show up at school.

He has never missed a paycheck.

In the jargon of the school district, Kim is being “housed” while his fitness to teach is under review. A special education teacher, he was removed from Grant High School in Van Nuys and assigned to a district office in 2002 after the school board voted to fire him for allegedly harassing teenage students and colleagues. In the meantime, the district has spent more than $2 million on him in salary and legal costs.

Last week, Kim was ordered to continue this daily routine at home. District officials said the offices for “housed” employees were becoming too crowded.

About 160 teachers and other staff sit idly in buildings scattered around the sprawling district, waiting for allegations of misconduct to be resolved.

The housed are accused, among other things, of sexual contact with students, harassment, theft or drug possession. Nearly all are being paid. All told, they collect about $10 million in salaries per year—even as the district is contemplating widespread layoffs of teachers because of a financial shortfall.

Most cases take months to adjudicate, but some take years.

Kim, 41, has persisted the longest.

He argued unsuccessfully in a lawsuit that he was the victim of disability discrimination. Born with severe cerebral palsy, he has limited use of his limbs, must use a wheelchair and requires a full-time personal aide (who is paid about $14 an hour by the district). He declined repeatedly to be interviewed, as did his attorney, Lawrence Trygstad.

Kim’s long-term stay in paid professional limbo highlights how long it can take to move through the thicket of legal protections afforded educators in the Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation’s second-largest.

“It’s a glaring example of how hard it is to remove someone from the classroom and how the process is tilted toward teachers,” said school board member Marlene Canter, who recently proposed—unsuccessfully—to revamp the disciplinary process.

One of these days, someone here will agree with me that if this were the private sector….this wouldn’t be an issue. Of course, the California state worker (putting pants on one leg at a time, unlike the baroque private citizen) can land any job in California at 70,000 annually with the most plush retirement perks…all with the caveat of never being fired. It’s so much a staple here that it’s finally, and justifiably trickled down to the LA Unified, and how dare we judge.

Bankruptcy can’t come a moment too soon.

Yunno, I give Cali cops a hard time about waste, but how about this story of brazen waste of taxpayer money?

LOS ANGELES (AP) ― A firefighter rescued a dog stranded on a flooded ledge in the Los Angeles River.

Los Angeles fire officials say a German shepherd hoisted to safety after being stranded in a storm-swollen river is fine, but the fireman who splashed down in a harness to rescue the dog has been hospitalized.

Officials say Joe St. Georges was bitten by the male German shepherd, and suffered severe hand and arm injuries.

Officials say at least 50 firefighters responded to a report of a dog in the Los Angeles River at about 11:20 a.m. Friday.

After crews dangled life vests and a float ring from above, St. Georges was deployed from the helicopter. He wrestled with the frightened canine, wrapped a rope around it and lifted it to safety.

Los Angeles Fire Capt. Steve Ruda says the dog is being checked for rabies. The dog had a collar but its owner is unknown.

Ok, folks who read this blog. This is a serious question. Am I really a callous fuck, or is a state in 20 billion dollars in debt, in danger of losing public services for the elderly, releasing prisoners from jail early, and firing teachers and eliminating pre-kindergarten school in any position to send FIFTY firefighters with engines and a helicopter to rescue a fucking dog?!

Someone rescue me from the ledge, because at this point, I am going Brown and voting against anyone in this state who even mutters the words “raise”, “taxes”. “state worker”, “public good.” I don’t know if there is something wrong with me, but this story makes my blood boil. Is it me? I am more of an advocate of the 50 percent state reduction theory as we speak.

Update:
Aside from blatantly saying that this story is the epitome of reason to eliminate the state workers, top manager down, let me add an analogy to the story. “Munce frog assembles cast of thousands to swim scorpion across river..Frog lands in hospital, scorpion reported safe. Taxpayers lose millions (cost of moving engines, helicopter, and undoubtedly every eligible overtime state worker to useless emergency….in the name of?)

I don’t even remember how many times over the course of our California’s Gold conversations I’ve said that this was going on, but finally there’s some substantiating evidence.

Hundreds of L.A. County sheriff’s deputies racked up massive amounts of overtime, according to a new audit that said some of the extra work violated county rules and may have hindered the deputies’ performance.

L.A. County Auditor-Controller Wendy L. Watanabe’s office found that 348 deputies between March 2007 and February 2008 worked more than 900 hours of overtime—the equivalent of an extra six months of full-time work.

County auditors found that the agency lacks overtime policies and rules that limit cumulative overtime and that even in non-emergency situations, overtime is often not pre-approved by managers.

“Employees who work significant amounts of overtime may not be physically/mentally capable of performing their jobs,” Watanabe wrote

The audit report completed Friday was made public over the weekend by County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky. The Sheriff’s Department exceeded its overtime budget 104% on average in each of the last five fiscal years, the report said. The department needs to reevaluate its overtime budget that on average was $82.5 million more than planned in each of those years sheriff’s managers flouted work schedule rules, the report said.

Fourteen of the top 20 overtime earners in the department repeatedly violated rules prohibiting excessive double shifts and six strung together more than 12 consecutive days of work, the audit found.

Sheriff’s Department timekeepers, who are supposed to note such violations, rarely flagged them, according to auditors. Overtime was not the department’s only problem, the report found. A small sampling of employees on sick leave found that nearly a third were overpaid, and a review of 15 industrial accident cases found that overpayments were made in nine cases because of department actions.

This would be my Christmas Lebron to rich’s Kobe, but after reading through some of the comments (in particular, some comments from self identified police officers) I’ve split my opinion on the matter. First of all, if this measure was in response to less new hires, it might acutally be a cost saving measure. $82,000,000 might be small potatos compared to the lavish state benefits of adding head count. Second of all, this is the bed that Los Angeles made, we surely must sleep in it. We ask for quite a lot from the Po-Pos, demanding crack downs on gangs, contracting with cities that most don’t want to deal with (like South LA) and then getting up in arms if some gang banger stubbed his toe getting in the squad car. Third, our prisons are a mess, filled with petty crime offenders and illegal aliens we as a society are ambivalent about. We care about our illegal aliens, we just need someone to whine to when Paco’s gas can hits our windshield on the freeway.

Some of the comments from readers actually were pretty convincing. I’ll just point out a couple from the self identified government employees:

So many of the complaints seem to be retaliatory because someone got a ticket or didn’t get coddled for being stupid. Be responsible, be an adult and lead by example. You are not a victim, although you’d obviously like to be. Deputies take law violators to jail, bottom line. Even though department polices and laws are more restrictive upon them than ever before. Hell, if a deputy tries to stop you in traffic, don’t stop! They’ll face departmental discipline if they pursue you for just “failing to yield.” A suspect’s financial status, race, religion matter in no way. It’s up to the district attorney or city attorney to file the case. Misdemeanor laws (though not all) require observation as opposed to reasonable cause. Deputies working overtime are not just assigned for the fun of it but fulfill a purpose such as contract obligation, Title 15, etc . In addition, the departments union agreed to extend our current contract for another 2 years without negotiation and the state government has levied an additional 10% tax on us. And one last thing, many deputies stay well after their shift, on their own time to finish their reports. Reports to cover the same complainers who have “lost” their cell phone or want to make a report against their child’s school mate for “sexual harassment” or a “threat” because some extended family member keeps prank calling them. If you really want to save money, quit being petty!

On this I would agree with this Officer (if that’s true), the pettiness of using the police as personal authority dictators has peaked in this city, and if everyone’s up in arms about the money now, listen to the cop and quit being petty. This is the part that we little pansies own, peeping out of our window with the Sherrifs on speed dial. We want these people as a service to us, an audit like this only goes to show us that all this pettiness adds up. Running society on the broken window theory comes with a pretty hefty price, and one of the largest police departments in the country is showing us the price of our demands.

There’s another aspect of this development too, one that I’ve been harping on since I saw seven or so sherrifs lounging at a bus terminal, running a “sting” on people travelling without a 1.50 bus pass. As Peter Griffin would say, this really grinds my gears, and in a recession and double digit unemployment the last thing you want to hear is that we need to pay more taxes so that this kind of crap can go on. This overtime scam I’ve heard from somewhere, so I also agree with this person:

As an LA County employee, at a downtown LA Superior Court, I can say that there is way too much waste in our government. It used to bother me when people said that government workers were lazy rude, but I can now say that I completely understand why that is the perception.

I work in a courtroom where my LA County Sheriff Department deputy (bailiff) works about 4 hours a day and as soon as proceedings are concluded, he is off to watch TV or horse around with the other deputies that have nothing to do. They are all paid for the entire day, by the way at a great salary. The waste continues when the court reporter leaves after working for 4 hours max but getting paid for 8. The interpreters follow suit leaving to go home, go shopping or run errands (all while on the clock) after only 1-4 hours of work. Walk into a courthouse in the afternoons sometime and see empty courtrooms yet be aware that an entire staff is still being paid until 5pm. I see it every single day.

I don’t want to bash the good, hard-working and honest deputies or government workers, there are plenty of them too and they deserve to be recognized. But the waste, the money we pay to people that are not working, that contributes greatly to the budget crisis, needs to stop.

My sentiments exactly, but the problem with this is the Unions. Sure, I’d love to sing the praises of the 95th percentile of people who probably are out there crapping us private guys Tiffany Eggs, but the very idea of joining a union means that you will not distinguish yourself, individuals who display candor will be swallowed by the collective effort. Much like the case with teachers, it would be much easier to say things like “you can’t say this about everyone doing this”. No, you actually can when you are speaking about a Unionized job. That’s why they joined it in the first place, on the premise that multiple unified voices are better than one.

So, while there’s probably much bigger fish to fry, and I’m sure the “County Kings” are releasing this at a time when they’re lighting cigars with our tax dollar, but this is what the people see. That’s what I saw that triggered this very topic of discussion, and here we are about a half a year after I started talking about it seeing it first hand. So instead of getting more cops, allowing for more overtime, getting results on crime we’re going to get a sum total reduction of effort. Less overtime (as the article states), less focus (inevitable) on serious investigations, and a weakening bond of trust from the public.

It’s been registration time for me again, a time every Californian dreads. In addition to our registration doubling, there’s also getting your car smogged, something that has become somewhat of a scam (like impound yards). Most people know I own a Mustang, and it’s old. Not old enough to not need to be smogged, but old enough to need work. In order to get my registration done I was told when I went to the DMV that I would need to update my smog information. This means a little 50 dollar nest egg to some scummy mechanic here in the Valley.

I poked around for a little bit on the internet, looking for some places here in the Valley (because it’s close, and I have to take time off to do it), and finally found one reasonably close to where I am. I made my appointement, and off I went. I get to the place, and thought to myself “okay, this place is pretty nicely maintained.” I poked around and met the owner to start asking some questions. Many of them were about price. He seemed pretty cool, so I bit and let him test the car.

What happened after that, was something of legend…

Get your Kleenexes out, this one is a real tear jerker.

Los Angeles Unified schools chief Ramon Cortines told unions Friday that they must accept a combination of furloughs and pay cuts this year and next or the district will be forced to lay off up to 8,500 employees.

Saying the district needed to bridge a $480 million budget gap for the 2010-11 school year, Cortines asked all employees to accept four furlough days this year and a 12 percent pay cut next year.

SEIU Local 99, representing service workers, and the Associated Administrators of Los Angeles said they were open to discuss the concessions. A United Teachers Los Angeles representative was not available for comment.

In a letter sent to all employee union leaders Friday, Cortines described the district’s financial picture as “the worst budget crisis in years” and he urged all bargaining units to cooperate.

Unlike last year, he said, the district was not in any position to offer any early retirement incentives - like those recently approved by the Los Angeles City Council for city workers.

“Almost every department will be affected,” he added. “We are being forced to function in a different way than in the past. ... It is to our students’ benefit to work together now more than ever.”

Cortines said the concessions would be necessary to maintain current staffing levels and service. He added that if no concessions are agreed to, the district would have to lay off from 7,500 to 8,500 employees — requiring some 14,000 reduction-in-force notices to go out in March — up from about 8,000 notices that went out last March. The district has to put out more notices than expected layoffs because of formulas that lead to uncertainty over which employees will be subject to layoffs.

“We are looking at one in five employees who will be informed that they may lose their jobs,” Cortines wrote in the two-page letter.

At least the SEIU is now starting to sober up and smell the Folger’s crystals. So, in the year that the government employees have known about this budgetary shortfall (meaning the teat to suckle off of, the private sector, has become a little tough), what has been the response to the people who are footing the bill for all of this?

But what the district really needs is concessions from UTLA - something the union has fought for decades. UTLA president A.J. Duffy was unavailable for comment Friday.

The news of more cuts comes just months after LAUSD eliminated more than 5,000 jobs - 2,000 teachers, 400 counselors and an estimated 2,800 nonteaching school workers to cover a $596 million deficit.

Still, many of those workers were later rehired as other employees took an early retirement incentive package. Last year, no employee unions came forward with any concessions.

However, last year the district had federal stimulus funding to ease the pain of the budget squeeze. This year, Cortines said, the district will not have the same funding.

I just wanted to put a little highlighter on the fact that no union came to the table last year to cut back anywhere. Surely the good people working behind the scenes aren’t to blame for any of this stonewalling, it says right in the digital ink that this is the Unions causing the problem. Fair enough, I can’t think of a better reason to divorce myself from the Unions in general. At the very least, they should start receiving some letters that they are no longer representing the people in a positive light.

The district projected it would need to eliminate full-day kindergarten and all arts and music programs to close a projected budget deficit of $1.1 billion through 2012. Officials also included concessions that they hoped to get from employee unions, including 27 furlough days for out-of-classroom teachers and a 5 percent salary reduction for all district staff.

They sent that in a budget to the county Office of Education, which rejected it because the concessions had not been agreed to by the unions. Now the county wants union approval in writing before it signs off on LAUSD’s budget.

The four furlough days that officials are asking for this year would cover an existing deficit of between $50 million and $60 million this year, district officials said.

The 12 percent pay cut would cover the $480 million deficit projected for next year - one that Cortines and other officials said could grow even bigger.

Man, 480,000,000 dollars over the next year, and that’s just a 12 percent pay cut. I couldn’t even imagine what this number looks like across the board, but I do have some information I can share with you about the salaries of some of these beleaguered civil servants. Take a look. Since I now have richtaylor’s permission to go after “only those who make 100,000 and above” I did the work for you. There’s also a healthy amount of people in the 110,000-120,000 range etcetera, etcetera. I also wanted to point out that those searches each return 10 “pages” worth of matches. Each. And that’s just in the Los Angeles area. Boy, ensuring that kids don’t have PE classes, current books, full class days in kindergarten, etc. sure is costly.

This is just one little microcosm, and we’re really going to have some fun when we get to out prison system. Stay tuned!

Update:
Using the search engine provided, I thought I would expand a little bit more on just how prevalent the salary explosion has been in just this little microcosm. There are 77,281 as of 2008-2009 in the LAUSD. I’m an artist, so forgive me if my math is incorrect, but the way I have it counted is that 772.81 would be one percent of that number. Assuming that this is true, I looked up, bracket by bracket what I think is excessive at a time of record unemployment, not seen since… Well, who knows, yet.

Look them up all yourself, I don’t have the energy to link to them all. But here’s my count. There are 10,000 employees in the LAUSD making 60,000-70,000 dollars with all state benefits. There are 12,900 employees in the LAUSD that make 70,000-80,000 dollars in the LAUSD, all with state benefits. There are 3,889 employees making 80,000-90,000 dollars in the LAUSD, all with state benefits, and there are 3,478 people making between 100,000-300,000 dollars in the LAUSD, all with all with state benefits. That brings us to a grand total of 30,277 people employed by the LAUSD, above 60,000 dollars, all on the tax payer dime.

According to the United Way, even in 2006 (when things were much better) the median “family” income in Los Angeles is $64,563, meaning “double incomes” and it accounts for the disparity between the richest and the poorest areas identified as 69 communities here in the Greater Los Angeles area. Ultimately, what all of this really means is that roughly a little more than forty percent of “individuals” working for the LAUSD make better money individually than 50 percent of Los Angeles family households do.

Couple this with the idea that the LAUSD is one of the poorest performing entities the state has ever born witness to, and holds the prestigious banner high of being the second largest school entity in the country, next only to New York, and we might all be able to agree that this monster is out of control. It needs to be checked.

I’ve got to say, I strongly approve of our current governor. He’s little known or talked about in the Republican Party, surprisingly little talked about in the moderate circle, but for anyone who has been keeping a score card has shown up for conservatives in spades. Think about it, has supported gay marriage, supports fiscal conservatism (almost to a flaw) and is not backing down on opposition. In effect, he terminates it.

The governor’s decision was intended to increase the state’s chances of receiving high-speed rail money, officials said. California is competing with more than 40 applicants from 23 other states.

But the action has sparked debate among rail advocates about whether too high a priority is being placed on the high-speed train project at the expense of the second-busiest rail corridor in the nation, where budget-strapped commuter services have been trying to improve safety, add track and cut travel times from San Diego to Santa Barbara.

Eliminated from the state application for federal funds was almost $170 million for positive train control—computer-guided braking systems designed to prevent collisions and allow conventional trains to safely travel at 110 mph. Such automated systems, which the federal government wants installed by 2015, would have prevented the Metrolink crash in Chatsworth last year that killed 25 people in the worst rail accident in modern California history.

This is change, right in front of your very eyes. Instead of bolstering a system of Union thugs, and State Worker dead beats, he’s in favor of scrapping it all for a new system of travel. This is good for California, and I’m actually going to link to Hal to make my case. The air monopoly over travel has to go, and a bullet train is a very interesting option to travel. Yes, a two hour train ride doesn’t beat an hour in the air, but if the ticket is priced right, we’re talking.

Also removed was $969 million in railroad crossing improvements, track additions, overpasses and a variety of maintenance projects designed to benefit the busy corridor between San Diego and Los Angeles as well as the main rail line through Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. The routes are used by Amtrak, the Coaster, Metrolink and major freight lines such as Union Pacific and Burlington Northern Santa Fe.

One major goal of commuter rail services has been to reduce the travel time between San Diego and Los Angeles from about three hours to two hours.

“I am not happy about it,” said Art Brown, chairman of the government authority that oversees the Los Angeles-San Diego corridor. “There were lots of projects in the application to improve intracity rail service. The system will remain a slow-speed service, and safety has been one of our big concerns.”

He means safety of Union protection, not safety of the people of California. I think many of our safety woes could’ve been healed if only there was a rule that one can’t allegedly text teenager friends while on the job. A two hour trip from LA to SD is a foregone conclusion in a car, and cabs don’t get you anywhere, expeditiously. What’s needed is to get into the 21st century proper with a real alternative to travel by air.

The California Department of Transportation’s rail division, which had worked with transportation agencies in Southern California to prepare the application, was ready to submit the paperwork to Washington by the Oct. 2 deadline.

But Schwarzenegger quashed the request and told state officials to only seek $4.7 billion in federal rail stimulus funds for the high-speed train project to bolster its chances of getting funding.

For all those State Workers out there railing on Arnie, and using terms like “GAS” to describe him, talk about shooting yourself in the foot. This is a major initiative, and a huge boon to the state economy.  I know it doesn’t protect Union nest eggs, but it does provide some hope for a brighter tomorrow.

Under the federal economic stimulus plan, about $8 billion is available for high-speed train projects, which can include conventional rail improvements to increase train speeds. The federal Department of Transportation is expected to decide which projects to fund by January.

Planners say the high-speed network would ultimately cost at least $45 billion and stretch nearly 800 miles from San Diego to San Francisco, with a branch running to Sacramento. Trains would exceed 200 mph on some stretches, prompting officials to say that a trip between Los Angeles and San Francisco could take as little as two hours and 38 minutes.

In the days after learning that Caltrans was pressing ahead with its request to seek money for local projects, members of the California High Speed Rail Authority pushed the governor to keep the focus on winning funding for the bullet train.

Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, chairman of the authority’s board, talked with the governor by phone. The effort was aided by David Crane, a gubernatorial advisor who also is a high-speed rail board member.

Pringle said that state applications for federal money already ask for more than $1 billion for conventional rail projects—money that would come from a different pool of economic stimulus funds. About a third of the request—$390 million—is for rail corridors in Southern California, state records show.

“California is in the lead position to receive high-speed rail funding,” Pringle said in a recent interview. “We should not be competing with ourselves.”

But we all need back pay for the furlough. How can one ever shift away form the idea of protecting State Unions, and State Jobs? This is crazy talk.

The governor “took shovel-ready projects and put them aside, ” said Rich Tolmach, president of the California Rail Foundation. “Hundreds of millions of dollars were thrown away. Now these rail projects will not get their fair share of federal stimulus money.”

Tolmach and other critics said the Caltrans rail division and other transportation agencies would try to seek alternate funding, but those sources are not as large as the federal funds allocated for high-speed rail, and the state has little money because of an unprecedented and ongoing budget shortfall.

“We may never get this money now,” said Jim Mills, a former state senator who helped to create commuter rail service between San Diego and Los Angeles. “The lives of rail travelers will be jeopardized by this. One of the major items requested was positive train control, which can prevent the kind of accidents that have occurred on Metrolink.”

All five of them, let me tell you from personal experience. The freeways are packed in California, but the rail system is a ghost town. To build on this arcane system in such a way as to bolster what is already unprofitable, is insane. There’s little reason to do so, and Arnie gets my support. As for what this will cost us, sure, it looks like more (on paper) but I am betting that a huge Unions shake up would even it all out.

The Pacific Union crash stands to cost me a fair share of tens of millions of dollars in the short term. The legal wrangling will surely bring about more regulation, more red tape, and yet more Unions bullshit (which caused this in the first place). This dude was a Union guy through and through, and no case against not advancing ourselves as a society. Unless advancement means we need to protect against people texting (allegedly) from the driver seat of trains at train crossings.

John Oritz over at the Sacbee has written an internet knuckle sandwich like no other:

The State Worker column in today’s fiber and cyber Bee notes that we’ve entered a 12-week stretch of four-day work weeks for state employees because of holidays and “Furlough Fridays.” Our sense is that, for several reasons outlined in the column, the public may not notice.

But it’s clear that this will intensify the pressure some state workers have felt in the Schwarzenegger furlough era to do the same or more work in less time.

You could argue that we’ve arrived at this point because the economic recession has exposed the many poor decisions made over many years by lawmakers and the public (via ballot initiatives) about state revenues and resources. Many (Most? All?) state workers would argue that Schwarzenegger’s furloughs are bad policy that unjustly punishes state workers for matters over which they have no control.

A state worker friend put it this way: “Give them more and they’ll always take more, especially when they don’t deserve it.”

So if that policy is trying to get 40 hours of worth of work from state employees but paying for 32 hours, what’s the appropriate response? How much harder should state workers be expected to work? And as the new performance level becomes expected, does that mask the consequences of bad decisions that might be altered if the pain of furloughs was more acutely felt by elected officials and the public?

If you’re a state worker and you’re killing yourself to get your work done, are you enabling bad government? Or are you exercising a laudable work ethic?

Well the only thing that he could’ve added to that to put any more sting on it is to have ended it with “F*ck you, state worker”. It’s the kind of blog post that I love to read, because he draws them in like flies. I was chuckling just reading the post.

I read through some of the comments, and the usual suspects (state workers-during the work week) pile on and make their case about working. Most say they are still working on Fridays, they’ve had to take pay cuts, and they’re stressed out. It’s an interesting dynamic, because that’s exactly the way it is in the private industry. I’m starting to get the opinion that with all of the labor union contracts, the bennies, and the holidays, that there’s a sense of entitlement here.

My impression of the furloughs has been exactly as stated, a budgetary cutback. Time will tell if this was legal, if Arnie used extraordinary power not granted to him to pull this move, and if the State Workers will receive back pay. One thing is for sure, a part of what the government was trying to say with the furloughs is that they’re paying for more government than they can afford. They’re really mini-layoffs, and it’s just the beginning. We’re still over-budget.

I recently had to go to the DMV to get my car registered, and I was lucky to have gone on the one Friday that they were open. I started up a chat with one of the people at the counter who said that we might even lose the one Friday we have. While that makes it a little more inconvenient to get an appointment, I’ll cope and go on a Monday. These are what are called “sacrifices” and something that some of the commenters could learn from. I completely understand they have sacrificed, and on the other end we sacrifice by losing the service.

The California state nest egg is over, and it’s going to have to be addressed as part of our broad overhaul. It’s obvious with the flight of taxpayers, an influx of illegals who are probably most of the demand for the services, and a myriad of unrealistic labor contracts that there will be change. It’s going to be the decision of the people employed by the state how attractive the state job is. That’s the point. First, you rise to the extraordinary situation. Then that extraordinary situation becomes the norm. At least that’s the way it is in the private industry.

Mike Duvall, a “family values” Republican has resigned for poking his member into the lobbyist(s), for no other reason than to preserve his pension (he will still receive it by resigning according to state rules). Now it remains to be seen if he was actually selling votes for romps.

Former Assemblyman Mike Duvall will not have to testify to the Assembly Ethics Committee about spanking a mistress or cheating on his wife � but the FBI is all ears.

The Orange County Republican continues to rock the Capitol despite his resignation last month after a videotape surfaced of him boasting of two simultaneous affairs, reportedly involving at least one lobbyist.

The FBI confirmed Friday that it had contacted two Duvall aides about his conduct, while Assembly Speaker Karen Bass pulled the plug on an ethics probe after state lawyers concluded that his resignation had ended the Assembly’s jurisdiction.

FBI spokesman Steve Dupre characterized the agency’s contacts as preliminary.

Carolyn Ginno, Duvall’s chief of staff, was one of two Assembly employees reached by the FBI within days of Duvall’s abrupt Sept. 9 resignation, two Capitol sources said.

Ginno did not return phone calls Friday from The Bee for comment.

Political attorney Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles, opined that the FBI is studying whether Duvall received sex in return for a vote or action. Though it’s no crime to have sex, Stern said, “it is if you’re exchanging favors � but, boy, is it hard to prove.”

This is an exercise in futility, first of all. I just want to make that clear. There’s no reason to scrutinize Duvall because he already got away with the crime. What all of this is about, is for the house democrats to run around and say “Prop 8”, “Republican” and “Ethics Committee”. My prediction is that there will be some back and forth with the FBI, and they will conclude that there wasn’t enough evidence to say Duvall actually did anything wrong.

What’s really appalling to me is the link to Sempra, and one which even I mistook a little bit. I found a pretty good write up on the topic (excuse the lefty parts of it, and focus on the digging) about Sempra, the connection to the Public Utilities Committee and the “green” factor.

Where I disagree with Bouffant is the with the legitimacy of the “green” movement here in California. Had this whole steaming pile not stunk so bad, I am firmly convinced that Sempra would have been re-packaged as some “renewable energy” company, dedicated to charging the people more for power at the end of the sword, all the while delivering the same old pollutants at a premium. It’s a pretty hot mess (the green compost pile, as I like to call it) and one that’s got a few more casualties to answer for. Like this guy. Nahai is another one of those “green” guys, loved by environmentalists, and completely corrupt.

H. David Nahai, the often embattled head of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, resigned Friday to join the Clinton Climate Initiative as a senior adviser.

Nahai, who was paid $310,000 a year, had faced a range of controversies since he was hired in November 2007, including unpopular rate increases and water conservation plans and, most recently, a series of high-profile water main breaks.

He also ran into conflicts with neighborhood activists and some of his own agency’s commissioners.

But in his resignation letter, Nahai touted a series of accomplishments that included increasing the DWP’s renewable energy portfolio, improving water conservation and creating jobs.

I’ll have another post coming for this guy, a repudiated scum bag, and now “Clinton” green crony, green lighted after bilking the city, and loosening the belt on government employees. However, what I really wanted to highlight here, is the speed with which these guys are dropping like flies, the circumstances (green/renewable) surrounding, and just how empty and hollow the entire “green” movement is here in the states. The religion of “green” allows all of the leftists here in this state to loose their collective minds so that they can sell the souls of everyone to the same greedy and corrupt corporations they say they repudiate. It’s delicious irony, if it weren’t going to sadly affect my reality, and in fact, already does.

Look, I’m not anti-green in the slightest. I do believe that we should be advancing our awareness, and conserving for the future. I’m one of those conservative=conservation type of people. However, unless I see something like this, which if true is a legitimate step in the right direction, i consider all of the rest of this bullshit to be snake oil. In fact, all that most of this shit does is remind me that P.T. Barnum was a prophet.

I say “so long Duvall”, and thanks for everything. I couldn’t care less about his infidelity, freakiness, or hypocritical moral stances. I thank him for actually exposing the “green heist” by default, and I’ll look forward to exposing Nahai real soon. The Global Warming Alarmists have such charming allies, and I am warmed by the fact that all they care about is the earth and trees.

I don’t get many comments on these threads, but I pull executive order to bring this fight to the public. LA is what happens when liberalism spins out of control, and the fallout from it is a delicious revenge. Bear witness.

Still failing to reach a deal with city unions in contract talks Wednesday, the City Council asked officials to start drafting plans to lay off 926 workers and furlough thousands of others, while continuing to consider an early retirement program.

But the action sets up a possible veto from Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who said he believes he has no choice but to block the Early Retirement Incentive Program.

“We are in a rapidly deteriorating financial circumstance,” Villaraigosa said at a late afternoon news conference. “The reality is we cannot continue as we have. Originally, the plan would have saved $111 million. Now it will save only $12 million.”

Villaraigosa said he originally supported the plan because of his strong ties to labor but believes he can no longer do so because of the financial jeopardy it would create for the city.

The 13-0 action by the council came at the end of a three-hour closed-door session on the second day of lengthy negotiations between the city and unions to try to find savings in the city’s $7 billion budget to cover a projected $405 million shortfall.

Now, you’ve heard me rail on the cops, and there’s a very good god damned reason for that. There are simply too many, and even the cops are agreeing with me that enough is enough. Take a look:

City officials said they are feeling pressure to resolve the issue because the city is spending $1 million more a day than it is bringing in.

“It remains a moving target,” said Smith, who has been one of the council members questioning if the city can afford the ERIP proposal and has called for increasing the amounts that workers contribute to the plan.

“I think we are going to have to ask all workers to face furloughs, even if we do balance the budget and approve ERIP.”

Smith said he agreed with Villaraigosa on the importance of public safety but disagreed with him on the scheduled expansion of the Police Department this year.

“It makes no sense to me to hire new cops when we are putting existing ones on furlough,” Smith said. “I depart from the mayor on that.”

Villaraigosa has said he will veto any effort to reduce the police hiring plan - but there appeared to be little support among council members for his stance. Even the Los Angeles Police Protective League has said new hiring should be delayed if it means the furlough of police officers.

There you have it. Where can you consistently expand government in America, other than the idea of “safety”? Even the police don’t think that expansion is what will make their lives easier, but Tony Villar will not relent on his desire to have a cop for every house in Los Angeles. One has to ask the question. Why? Why put a line in the dirt here? It’s so politically unpopular that even the cops are speaking up about it.

Where he is cutting, is a little clue.

Firefighters already have seen a reduction with the rotating “brownout” service plan that takes 87 firefighters off duty each day on a rotating basis around the city.

Villaraigosa has said he also will veto the ERIP program unless there are the savings needed to balance the budget. Such a veto could not come for at least 30 days from when the City Council gives final approval to ERIP.

Fire, to me, is hands down the largest threat to Los Angeles that I can think of. They put these poor bastards on furlough right at the most politically expedient time, fire season. Fire is such a problem here in La, one would wonder why this would be the choice for furlough, if you’re hiring cops at the same time. The answer is simple. To the state, who is now a business, the firefighters are a money pit. They don’t bill or pass out tickets, so they are useless to the state. To you and I, they are the ideal government service, they just help out. But not to LA. LA politicians feel the need to hire cops, even when cops say that this isn’t necessary.

So, leave it to the comments section to get to the heart of the matter that these dickhead reporters won’t do. Commenter “Gwennie” gets right to the private sector sentiment, in his/her comment:

The way the citizenry are helped by layoffs and furloughs, you imbecile, is that the city does not continue to pile on debt that is unsustainable and will be borne by taxpayers.

Those 250,000 laid off private sector workers cannot dig deeper into their depleted pockets to continue to overpay a work force in terms of salaries and benefts with an inflated sense of entitlement to boot.

And I’ll just bet that you are on the city clock even while you have been posting on this blog!

Please take the time to read all of this person’s rebuttals to the puny minded state workers in the thread. This person has talked more sense than I have seen from politicians than I have seen in a decade of living here. Unfortunately, California’s problem is that they are stuffed on the excesses of the 90s to today, and now they just can’t bring themselves to the idea that there’s no more money to ride this attraction. California will lay of thousands, they have to. They are bound to legal contracts for the workers they have, via unions, and now there’s really nowhere to go. The money is gone, and there’s nothing on the horizon. Gee, it’s almost like the government is a business, and a self serving one at that.

I don’t care if anyone comments on this, I’m happy if people just read it and see the circus that government has become here. Fuck them all. (PS>We might have seen “gwennie” before, here at the VO. You guys are smart, and I bet you can deduce where.

Another fine day here in California. The skies are gray with soot, fires burning as if to ominously warn us of California’s future, and I peruse the Sacbee to find this composte heap.

The lowest-profile major conflict is over legislation that would not only increase California’s commitment to non-polluting energy sources such as solar, geothermal and wind, but require that the vast majority of those “renewables” be generated inside the state.

The state’s private utilities are already committed, on paper, to 20 percent renewables by 2010, but they won’t – and say they can’t – make it. Senate Bill 14 by Sen. Joseph Simitian, D-Palo Alto, would delay the 20 percent goal to 2012, but require not only private utilities but municipal power suppliers to reach 33 percent by 2020.

The biggest conflict, however, is not so much over that goal but whether, as a powerful coalition of labor unions and consumer groups is demanding, only a small portion of that power can come from out-of-state sources.

The buy-California provision would require spending tens of billions of dollars on new solar, geothermal and windmill generation – which is why labor wants it.

However, it also would make meeting the 33 percent standard problematic because it would require licensing more in-state power plants and transmission lines to bring power from rural generators to urban users, both of which are locally contentious.

Everyone also agrees that the provision would push consumers’ bills, already due to rise sharply from shifting to more expensive renewable supplies, even higher, although by how much is unknown.

That tradeoff is why the political coalition forged by The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, and the Coalition of California Utility Employees is somewhat unusual, since the former usually champions lower costs. It appears to date from the election of Carl Wood, a former utility union official and California Public Utilities Commission member, as TURN chairman, and it makes for a potent combination in their battle with utility lobbyists over details.

Here’s your standard fare liberalism-combined with Union thuggery in action. It’s called “going green” and all that it means is that you will be transferring your green to Unions and Environmental boondoggles. The argument here appears to be that if you demand people to pay for more for power, and write legislature to ensure that you can’t competitively shop for power on the open market, magically this will work itself out.

Sounds like a plan, right? Now, let’s forget some of the standard fare partisan cock punches available (for example, the left champions the downtrodden, right?), there’s just too much available for it to be the low dangling fruit I’m after here. I’m more interested in the fact that what’s taking shape here is that California politicians are now legislating economics. Look at the principle justification for the Bill.

Proponents say the in-state generation mandate would keep utility consumers’ dollars circulating in the California economy and help create a new “green economy,” even though in-state power is bound to be more expensive.

This is ‘yes’, and mostly ‘no’ to me, and I’ll explain why I feel this way. The only jobs that this bill is really going to create are either Unionized government jobs, or joint government/green mergers. How will that help the California economy one shred? Our problem is burgeoning government entitlements, high taxes, and a flight of people from the state (leaving us with a smaller pool of taxpayers).

This logic is exactly why California is in the dumps, and will continue to do a tailspin. If passed, all this bill really does is increase the footprint of government, unions, and environmental hate groups. There’s really nothing else to be gained from it. Oh, higher utilities, a weaker grid, and less business friendly environment. I have a feeling if things keep going this way, there won’t be anyone left in this state, except State Workers and illegal immigrants.

California politicians truly believe that people are just open wallets, and what’s more this liberal agenda cares not one iota for “green” or “poor” or even California. All these bottom feeders care about is protecting union thugs and sweetheart deals. Legislating economics has to be about the worst idea I’ve ever seen as an economic policy. It makes sense that Darell Steinberg is a UCLA grad.

I can think of no better topic to illustrate “California’s Gold. It’s green.