California’s redevelopment agencies have received a death blow…for now…thanks to the California Supreme Court’s December 29 ruling. But government’s appetite for your money and private property remains insatiable. A 66-year habit is hard to break.

After World War II ended in 1945, the Legislature permitted cities and counties to establish special agencies to revitalize their blighted areas. Since that time, roughly 425 community redevelopment agencies (RDAs) have been dedicated to spending your property tax dollars on government-subsided housing, commercial development, eminent domain acquisitions and other land use and construction projects—as they deem necessary in the name of urban renewal.

But in January 2011, Governor Jerry Brown decided that the $1.7 billion in property taxes going to the agencies this year, about 12% of total statewide property taxes, would be better spent on helping to close California’s projected two-year, $25 billion budget shortfall. Besides, he concluded, the redevelopment agencies had developed the bad habit of misusing the funds! Monies supposed to be used to build affordable housing and, he’d hoped, to go to schools and public safety, were sometimes spent on private developers, golf course upgrades, extravagant dinners and apparel, and even lobbyist fees.

So in June, Brown and the Legislature decided on a compromise: the RDAs  would be dissolved (Assembly Bill 1X26) and municipalities would be permitted to join a voluntary redevelopment program by making payments annually to the state, to be used for schools and other services (AB 1X27). One month later, a petition was filed with the California Supreme Court by the California Redevelopment Association, the League of California Cities and the Northern California cities of San Jose and Union City, asking the Court to declare the elimination of redevelopment agencies unconstitutional.

Meanwhile, some municipalities made plans to go along with the compromise, though they weren’t happy about it. In Ventura County’s City of Thousand Oaks, some council members who voted to make the payment of $5.9 million to the state in the current fiscal year and an annual $1.4 million thereafter, to be part of the voluntary program, called the payments “ransom money” and “extortion.” They were angry that the state would take the city’s funds and redirect them to programs the state chose, rather than leave them to local discretion. Yet Thousand Oaks had its own issues with what many have called a misuse of redevelopment dollars: a private developer had received a lucrative deal from the city to develop an upscale shopping center, which included the RDA purchasing the land, paving sidewalks, paying developer fees and charging $1 per year for the land lease.

Other cities and counties were disgruntled with the governor’s legislation as well. They perceived a major source of their power being taken away, as RDAs provided them with funds (“property tax increments”) and authority to build low-income housing complexes, establish and renovate so-called “blighted” properties (a designation typically influenced by special interests), award loans and grants to businesses, establish public works projects and acquire property (via eminent domain), all purportedly to “create jobs” and “rebuild communities.”

The Supreme Court ruling alas came in on December 29, 2011. Accordingly, the State of California is on sound legal footing to eliminate redevelopment agencies. It may not, however, require payments be made to the state as part of a voluntary redevelopment program (where the state would redirect the funds to local services) because such a mandate would not be voluntary.

Some California taxpayers and private property rights groups are applauding the Supreme Court’s ruling as a triumph. Municipalities across the state are displeased, of course. They want the control of your tax dollars and property rights in their hands, not the state’s. For now, the 425 RDAs appear to be pushing up daisies; however, the root of the problem still exists. By its own hubris, your local government considers itself the authority on how to spend your money, utilize your land, rejuvenate your community, create jobs and grow the economy.

But you know those are not the proper, or even feasible, roles of government. You know that only you and your neighbors, individuals and businesses, operating in a private and free-choice marketplace can make the decisions that will truly safeguard your prosperity and quality of life. You know that when government taxes and spends according to its own priorities, the result is crony capitalism.

Right now our local officials are working on a “solution” to regain their power. Their central planning scheme has only been derailed temporarily. The message we must send them is NO to redevelopment agencies, NO to tax-and-spend economics and YES to stepping out of the way to allow private decisions to be made by individuals and businesses on how to grow their personal and commercial economies.

It’s time to overhaul our local governments. And it can’t be left up to the tried-and-untrue left and right wings of the Big Government Party. Real and lasting change must come from those who understand LIBERTY and are willing to fight for it. Libertarians are ready to do just that. With your help, the CALIFORNIA LIBERTARIAN PARTY will take the critical steps to revive our State as a place of freedom and prosperity. We urge you to come forward and JOIN US today!

During the initial salvos of the now ten year long war in Iraq, Americans witnessed on their television sets one of the most desperate and disgusting acts of Saddam Hussein’s regime: the use of human shields. Placed onto key bridges, the idea was for maximum casualties by placing unarmed civilians in harms way. Similarly today,  residents of Thousand Oaks will find themselves needlessly endangered by their local city government.

As reported in a recent Ventura County Star article entitled, “Thousand Oaks moves forward Avenida De Los Arboles lane reduction plan,” the city will be re-striping this arterial road and reducing the number of lanes for vehicles from a total of four to only two.  Bicycle lanes will also be added to Lynn road. Other changes will be made that include the removal of at least one stop sign.

At the center of this action is a relatively new concept  employed by “smart growth” planners, advocates of walkable cities, and extreme environmentalist called: traffic calming.  According to Wikipedia, such measures as adding bicycle lanes create “…a living street … in which the needs of car drivers are secondary to the needs of users of the street as a whole…”

Sounds safe.

Indeed, socialistic “traffic calming” measures are employed to outright discourage the use of vehicles all together according to public policy analyst, Randal O’toole.  Florida Urban planner, Dom Nozzi wrote a candid article in The Gainsville Sun that praises such anti-motorist stratgies. In his article entitled “Congestion is our Friend,” Nozzi lays out his argument for how traffic congestion discourages vehicle use and traffic calming is a method for creating that congestion. Thus we see advocates for “walkable cities” pushing suspiciously hard for bike lanes absolutely everywhere included where they don’t belong (like Lynn Road).

Nozzi suggests that congestion imposes a “time fee” on motorist and such a fee is easier to impose than monetary fees such as those based on mileage, vehicle size, or gas consumption. Bicycle lanes which are a staple form of such traffic calming measures also force drivers to reduce speeds for fear of hitting cyclists.  Lynn road is a perfect example where every week it seems, motorists careen off the road and knock out a block wall. How many more motorist swerve far less than that distance into what will become a bike lane along Lynn road? It is reasonably foreseeable that such tragic events will become more frequent as a result of the City’s actions. Despite this very fact being presented to the City of Thousand Oaks, they seem determined to create Saddam-style human shields out of cyclists in order to push an ideologically driven war on motorists.

It’s imperative we encourage our city leaders to accommodate cyclists without endangering them or reducing vehicle lanes on our streets.

Contact the City of Thousand Oaks at: 805-499-2100

References:

The Gainsville Sun: “Congestion Is Our Friend

Drop in on any political conversation between philosophical rivals and you’ll hear a debate over the value and role of the United States Constitution in modern-day governance. Conservative and libertarian types consider it “the law of the land,” which America’s Founding Fathers crafted with the objective of limiting the federal government to a few tasks necessary to protect people’s rights and the republic. Liberal and progressive types call it “a living document,” wherein the Founding Fathers couldn’t have imagined every potential issue to address and therefore intended it to be liberally interpreted in response to societal change.

One thing is certain—our founding document has taken a beating through the years as government, true to its nature, has always sought to stretch and expand its powers beyond Constitutional boundaries.

This time, however, the fight of the century is advancing from yet another direction: It’s coming from an outsider, a bully that cares nothing about our laws or our national self-governance. It has been positioning itself since 1945 as the benevolent dictator of the global community, proudly calling itself the preserver of worldwide peace and defender of human rights and freedoms. The interloper is, no surprise, the United Nations. The present power struggle is over control of the environment, our economy and our social institutions.

Near the close of the 20th century, in 1992, the UN held the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED—aka the Earth Summit). Out of this meeting came a grandiose plan for the 21st century, aptly named AGENDA 21, and thus the Sustainability movement was born:

“A major achievement of UNCED was Agenda 21, a thorough and broad-ranging programme of actions demanding new ways of  investing in our future to reach global sustainable development in the 21st century. Its recommendations ranged from new ways to educate, to new ways to care for natural resources, and new ways to participate in designing a sustainable economy.”

This does sound inspiring until one realizes that to accomplish these ambitious goals, there would have to be a central plan that would effect change on a worldwide scale, which would mean instituting a form of global governance. So what then happens to national sovereignty, the authority of a nation and its people over their own social, environmental and economic values, resources and endeavors? For the United Nations to achieve its objectives, national jurisdiction must give way to global control.

Smartly, the UN realized this would require a network of willing and energetic participants. Enter the UN’s sister organization: ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, “an international association of local governments as well as national and regional local government organizations who have made a commitment to sustainable development.” But ICLEI’s strategy would go beyond governments to include broad participation by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), businesses, private associations and individuals to achieve Agenda 21’s local, national and global sustainability objectives, as colossal as they are.

A key cornerstone of Sustainable Development implementation is to remove barriers to the global regulation of resources. Since the greatest barriers exist in the private market, where property rights are exercised, this is the area under harshest attack. Published reports on Sustainability point to the need to control and limit the private market, which is presumed to forsake the “public good” and to act irresponsibly with its profits and investments at every turn. Because governments are also seen as potential impediments to Sustainability, ICLEI trains its members in executing “effective” local development initiatives.

In the United States, the enactment of Agenda 21 via ICLEI is proceeding at a rapid pace as city and county agencies join ICLEI’s membership roster. Yet the public is unlikely to hear government officials admit their knowledge of, or association with, Agenda 21 or ICLEI. Is this due to ignorance or dishonesty? In any case, their actions and nomenclature make the relationship apparent.

Throughout cities, suburbs and rural towns, community meetings are being held by representatives of government agencies, NGOs, non-profit groups and other private organizations who stand to gain government contracts, subsidies and grants through their cooperation. Using such feel-good terms as Sustainable Development, Green Initiatives and Smart Growth, the facilitators of these “visioning” meetings advance predetermined solutions for improving the environment, the economy and “social justice” through redevelopment projects. Computer-generated models of quaint urban centers are shown, depicting images of utopia-living where everything from home to work to school to entertainment to shopping is just a bicycle-ride away. They add for extra appeal that will all be for the “common good.”

What they don’t tell the public is that the methods used to achieve these goals involve the rezoning of private property, the designation of “blighted” areas for the purpose of declaring eminent domain, new restrictions on land use, controlling water and energy consumption by raising utilities costs, rebuilding urban areas high with stacked and mixed-use housing and business complexes, and restricting vehicles and parking.

None of these incursions into the lives and liberties of Americans is constitutional. Globalist intervention by the United Nations is unacceptable. As more Americans learn how their cities and neighborhoods are being targeted, they will surely have something to say about it.

In Ventura County, California, informed residents are spreading the word. All are urged to join them on Thursday, September 8, 2011, at 6:30 PM in Moorpark, CA for BEHIND THE GREEN MASK, a presentation by Rosa Koire, Director of the Post Sustainability Institute and expert on Smart Growth and Green Initiatives. Reservations are recommended. Attendance is free. Visit www.PeopleProtectingFreedom.com or RSVP directly via email.

Members of the Thousand Oaks City Council -

The Ventura County Taxpayers Association is concerned about the city’s lifetime health insurance benefit that is available to employees that have been employed for as little as 5 years. In our view, this is an overly generous benefit that is not offered to employees of other cities in the County or county employees, it is an unnecessary burden to taxpayers and it is puzzling why Thousand Oaks would think it is necessary.

Even more surprising is that the benefit is provided to city council members. Why should the taxpayers be on the hook for providing city council members and their spouses medical insurance for life with no dollar limit? Council members volunteer to run for the part time office because of a desire to serve their community and to make a difference. We recognize that some level of compensation can be appropriate but candidates certainly do not run for the benefits and especially not a lifetime benefit. This is way out of line with benefits available in the private sector.

In October 1997, the council approved Resolution 97-204 which became effective January 1, 1998. Whatever the perceived need was back then, it does not exist today. With thirteen candidates vying for 3 seats, Thousand Oaks residents face a difficult choice among many well qualified candidates. It hardly seems necessary to continue to offer this benefit which creates an open ended liability for the City and the taxpayers who will pay for it.

We urge you to repeal Resolution 97-204 and eliminate this unnecessary, open-ended expense.

Respectfully -

Charles McLaughlin
Chairman, Board of Directors

Dick Thomson
President
Ventura County Taxpayers Association

© 2010 Libertarian Party of Ventura County Ventura County Libertarian Party P.O. Box 2417 Camarillo, CA 93011 Phone: (805) 652-0290 Email: lpventura.co@gmail.com Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha