Saturday, September 14, 2013

Many Say: We Choose The Tattler Weekend News

-
(Mod: Once again we have scoured the vast reaches of the Internet to bring you what we feel are the most important stories of our times. It is not a job that we take lightly, nor do we feel that we have any ideological or other situational bias in the selection of these stories. It's just that we don't like a lot of things, and posting articles that put them into a bad light brings a measure of joy to our troubled hearts. I challenge you to come up with a better, or at least more realistic, reason for doing this. Here is the news.)

Four area water agencies sue El Monte firm (San Gabriel Valley Tribune link) The San Gabriel Valley Water Co. for many years has been extracting groundwater in San Bernardino County beyond its rights — and without paying for it — according to a lawsuit filed Thursday.

The complaint, filed in San Bernardino Superior Court, alleges that each year since 2005, the San Gabriel Valley Water Co. and its subsidiaries, Fontana Water Co. and Fontana Union Water Co., have extracted thousands of acre-feet more per year than a base amount established decades ago.

San Gabriel water company services communities that include Arcadia, Baldwin Park, Montebello, Monterey Park, Rosemead, San Gabriel, West Covina, Whittier and parts of unincorporated Los Angeles County.

Water has allegedly been removed from the Rialto-Colton Basin, where the draw-down may cause water users in the area to purchase more expensive water from other sources.

The four plaintiffs are the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, the city of Colton, the city of Rialto and the Rialto-based West Valley Water District.

The SBVMWD provides water from the State Water Project for direct use by 13 retail water agencies from Rialto to Yucaipa that serve more than 700,000 residential and business customers.

(Mod: So the same guys who put all kinds of deleterious chemicals into our soon to be drinking water are also now accused of being thieves? And if these guys haven't been paying for water, should we have to do so? The ethical dilemmas that face us are great.)

California county votes for secession from state, cites overregulation (Fox News.com link) Supervisors in a far Northern California county where residents are fed up with what they see as a lack of representation at the state capitol and overregulation have voted in favor of separating from the state.

The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 on Tuesday for a declaration of secession, the Record Searchlight of Redding reported.

The vote appears mostly symbolic since secession would require approval from the state Legislature and the U.S. Congress, but supporters say it would restore local control over decision making. They want other rural counties in Northern California and Southern Oregon to join them in the creation of a new state called the State of Jefferson.

"Many proposed laws are unconstitutional and deny us our God-given rights," Gabe Garrison of Happy Camp said at the meeting. "We need our own state so we can make laws that fit our way of life."

Garrison was among more than 100 people who attended the meeting, and most were in support of the declaration, according to the Record Searchlight. The declaration does not launch any type of formal process toward secession, but only reflects the county's support, said Tom Odom, the county's administrative officer.

The idea to create the separate state of Jefferson goes back decades. It gained momentum in 1941, when the mayor of a southern Oregon town called on counties in the region and their neighbors in California to form a new state. The goal was to raise attention to the region's poor roads. The movement became popular, especially in Siskiyou County, where residents have long felt that their concerns are overshadowed by more populated parts of California. It was shelved after the attack at Pearl Harbor, though its spirit lives on today.

Another proposal that came up two years ago in Riverside County called on more than a dozen mostly conservative counties to break off and form the state of South California.

(Mod: We posted an article a while back about South California. It would have bordered the eastern edge of the Angeles National Forest, which would have technically put us right near the border. Separating from Sacramento sounded like a pretty good idea, actually. Though there are some here in town we would have gladly left behind.)

Steinberg shelves main environmental measure to aid arena effort (Sacramento Bee link) Following last-minute negotiations with the governor, state Sen. President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg shelved his main environmental reform bill Wednesday night, and instead pushed forward with a bulked-up alternative bill – one that includes provisions to assist in development of Sacramento’s downtown arena.

Steinberg announced he was setting SB 731 – his major California Environmental Quality Act overhaul bill – aside after talking with the governor Wednesday night. In doing so, he added two key statewide CEQA changes to SB 743, a newer bill, which had been more focused on streamlining the Sacramento Kings arena project. The fine points of those amendments were still being negotiated after session Wednesday.

SB 743 seeks to speed the judicial process for handling environmental lawsuits, limit the courts’ ability to stop construction and add mediation to the mix. Steinberg said he would add a provision at the governor’s request that gives the governor’s Office of Planning and Research the go-ahead to develop a new way of measuring traffic impacts of major projects, based on total “vehicle miles traveled” rather than intersection congestion. He also said he’s adding a section that reduced the need to do environmental studies for certain commercial mixed-use projects near transit, if those projects are part of a “specific plan area.”

(Mod: It is refreshing to see the author of such Sacramento so-called environmental action laws as SB 375 and SB 1 ditching almost everything he's claimed to stand for in order to help a couple of his billionaire pals build a downtown basketball arena.)

DiFi attacks New Media journalists (Cal Watchdog link) A year ago California voters gave Sen. Dianne Feinstein another landslide victory even though she refused to debate her opponent, Elizabeth Emken, who for once was a decent GOP candidate. DiFi must believe she’s in the House of Lords.

Now Baroness DiFi wants to define as a “journalist” only those in MainStream Media. New media would be considered peons with no First Amendment protections. Matt Drudge, the most famous and influential of the New Media Journalists, tweeted that she was a “Fascist.”

What’s so great about the MainStream Media anyway? In 2003, Judith Miller of the august New York Times, the most prestigious newspaper ever, stovepiped lies about Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction” from the Republican Bush administration into the pages of her newspaper.

Then there was the infamous Pulitzer Prize that went to the MSM’s second most influential paper, the Washington Post, for a manufactured story by Janet Cooke, “Jimmy’s World,” about a supposed 8-year-old heroin addict.

Baroness DiFi’s position is especially embarrassing for Silicon Valley, whose billionaire investors mostly backed her. They’ve built the infrastructure of alternative media that, finally, take us outside the government-MainStream Media axis, and their own senator stabs them in the back! Baroness DiFi still wants to live in the Dark Ages of 1993, the year before the Web Awakening of 1994.

(Mod: Calling Dianne Feinstein a "fascist" just because she wants to outlaw Internet alternative news reporting might be a little harsh. Well, OK, maybe not.)

Citrus College board of trustees sends residency questions to state attorney general (San Gabriel Valley Tribune link) Despite warnings that they would continue to waste taxpayer money on a “witch hunt,” the Citrus College Board of Trustees voted to let the state attorney general decide whether or not Trustee Gary Woods is holding office illegally by not being a resident of the district he represents.

The board at its Tuesday meeting heard a presentation from Christopher Keeler of Fagen Friedman & Fulfrost, the attorney hired to advise the board on the allegations against Woods, and voted 3-2 to authorize an application for leave to sue in quo warranto, with Woods and Trustee Edward Ortell dissenting.

Quo warranto, as defined by the attorney general’s website, is an action filed to remove a public official from office. Applications to sue an officeholder are reviewed by the state’s Opinion Unit, which approves or denies the action. Lawsuits are maintained by the attorney general, the website states.

The report, Keeler summarized, included information from Citrus College Faculty Association’s past president John Fincher, who presented the initial allegations in March that Woods lives, not in the one-bedroom senior apartment in Azusa, but a home in Sierra Madre that he co-owns.

It also included a report of limited surveillance by a licensed private investigator held Sept. 5-7 last week, where Woods was witnessed leaving the Sierra Madre residence early in the morning and returning to the home late at night on at least two of the days the surveillance was conducted, as well as traveling to the Azusa apartment complex at 7 a.m. Saturday and leaving less than an hour later. The committee also visited Woods’ Azusa apartment on Sept. 5, witnessing the trustee’s living quarters and noting that the phone line and answering machine were in working order.

(Mod: Well, there you go. Who would have ever thought that living in Sierra Madre would be grounds for termination?)

Scathing obituary tells of abuse, highlights fight against child abuse (Christian Science Monitor link) Anyone expecting a sweet remembrance of the life and times of Marianne Theresa Johnson-Reddick was in for a surprise if they opened the obituary pages this week in the local newspaper.

Johnson-Reddick died at a Reno nursing home Aug. 30 at the age of 79, according to her daughter, Katherine Reddick, 58, now a psychology consultant for a school district outside Austin, Texas.

Katherine Reddick said she decided to share the story of their painful physical and mental abuse after consulting with her brother, Patrick Reddick, 58, who lives in Minden south of Carson City. They said they grew up with four siblings in a Carson City orphanage after they were removed from their mother's home and had been estranged from her for more than 30 years.

"Our greatest wish now is to stimulate a national movement that mandates a purposeful and dedicated war against child abuse in the United States of America," the obit said.

Six of Johnson-Reddick's eight children were admitted to the Nevada Children's Home from 1963 to 1964 after they endured regular beatings, sometimes with a metal-tipped belt, and other abuse at the hands of their mother, Patrick Reddick said. He said he's had phone calls from "all over the world" about the obituary.

"Everything in there was completely true," he told The Associated Press on Thursday, describing her as a "wicked, wicked witch."

He said they wanted to "shame her a little bit" but that the "main purpose for putting it in there was to bring awareness to child abuse ... shame child abuse overall."

"People doing that right now, they can read that obit and think," said Patrick Reddick, who last saw his mother more than three decades ago.

(Mod: Below is that obituary.)

Marianne Theresa Johnson- Reddick born Jan 4, 1935 and died alone on Sept. 30, 2013. She is survived by her 6 of 8 children whom she spent her lifetime torturing in every way possible. While she neglected and abused her small children, she refused to allow anyone else to care or show compassion towards them. When they became adults she stalked and tortured anyone they dared to love. Everyone she met, adult or child was tortured by her cruelty and exposure to violence, criminal activity, vulgarity, and hatred of the gentle or kind human spirit.

On behalf of her children whom she so abrasively exposed to her evil and violent life, we celebrate her passing from this earth and hope she lives in the afterlife reliving each gesture of violence, cruelty, and shame that she delivered on her children. Her surviving children will now live the rest of their lives with the peace of knowing their nightmare finally has some form of closure.

Most of us have found peace in helping those who have been exposed to child abuse and hope this message of her final passing can revive our message that abusing children is unforgivable, shameless, and should not be tolerated in a “humane society”. Our greatest wish now, is to stimulate a national movement that mandates a purposeful and dedicated war against child abuse in the United States of America.

(Mod: There has to be a movie in that somewhere.)

This concludes our Senator Dianne Feinstein proscribed Internet activities for today.

http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

45 comments:

  1. Dianne Feinstein is now the oldest member of the United States Senate. Maybe she is just cranky.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a hypocrite. She wants to take away our guns but she still has her own conceal carry permit.

      Delete
    2. Nancy is the oldest member of the City Council and she is very cranky!

      Delete
    3. I wonder what Nancy's stance is on internet news sites and blogs?

      Delete
    4. Don't know if Nasty Nancy has a gun, but she sure likes to shoot her mouth off. Sometimes she even shoots herself in the foot.

      Delete
    5. Explains the limp

      Delete
  2. No doubt Jefferson and South California would promptly join those states, (primarily red states full of self proclaimed rugged individualists who hate the welfare state and don't need no feds telling 'em how to live) that receive more federal money than they pay in federal taxes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Steven Greenhut has a good article about this on Reason.com:

      Why a Secessionist Movement Is Brewing in California - Most Californians treat with bemusement the news that the board of supervisors in far-north Siskiyou County voted 4-1 early this month to seek secession from California and revive efforts to create a new state of Jefferson.

      But while U.S. flags are unlikely to soon add another star, this rural separatist movement has long been brewing and is based on serious grievances that state and federal officials would be wise to ponder.

      Two years ago, I attended the Defend Rural America event at the Siskiyou County fairgrounds in Yreka, where some attendees proudly flew the Jefferson flag. The proposed state’s boundaries have varied, but the movement was started in 1941 to combine counties in southern Oregon with some in northern California. The flag features two “Xs” — to signify being double-crossed by Sacramento and Salem.

      http://reason.com/archives/2013/09/13/why-a-secessionist-movement-is-brewing-i

      Delete
    2. Oh hell, you people, we'll probably be taken over and become part of Mexico.
      California was theirs to begin with.

      Delete
    3. The first governor of South California? Tim Donnelly.

      Delete
    4. We HAVE to keep Jerry Brown as Gov!

      Jerry saved our local schools with Prop 30 and all the $$ he's sent to PUSD.

      Oh, wait...I guess he hasn't sent a penny of Prop 30 $$ out to us.

      Aren't you glad you voted for Prop 30? duh.

      Delete
    5. At least some state employees will be allowed to retire comfortably. The kids will just have to make due I guess.

      Delete
    6. There is no doubt that Prop 13 destroyed public schools in CA. So if you benefit from Prop 13, then have the backbone to admit that you're part of the problem.

      Delete
    7. The only thing I am willing to confess to now is that I am not getting any housework done because I am reading the Tattler.

      Delete
    8. 9:57 The unions (school and state), bureaucrats, and illegals have ruined the schools.
      Prop 13 saved the ability to own homes.
      It also allowed renters to pay less for rent because the increased property taxes would have been passed along to them.
      So unless you live in a tent on government land, you too have benefited.
      Some businesses have also benefited, but like land lords businesses would have passed the tax increases to their customers which would have resulted in higher prices.

      Delete
    9. RE 9:57 Prop 13 prevented millions of homeowners being taxed out of their homes. How many widows/widowers can afford to pay thousands of dollars on a Social Security income? These people supported the schools their entire life.

      It's a spending problem not a taxing problem. Cut the retirement benefits for state and gov't workers and direct that money to schools. Break the unions and save billions.

      Delete
    10. With most of the money in this country going to the top 3 or 4%, we're all just squabbling over the crumbs. Squeeze the middle class, squeeze blue collar union workers, ignore where all the real money is going.

      Delete
    11. Sorry 10:15, but the media is complicit with entrenched wealth in brainwashing the public into blaming unions, which are composed of your friends and family, for society's ills.

      Perhaps Prop 13 helped some keep their homes. But how? By enacting a form of socialism for the homeowner class. Prop 13 acts a transfer of wealth from new purchasers to longer term purchasers, the former paying way more for basic governmental services than entrenched homeowners. One needn't be an ardent compete-or-die capitalist to recognize that newer, typically younger homeowners are forced to subsidize entrenched homeowners. Hardly a market-based system the union haters always claim to want but eschew in practice.

      Delete
    12. Prop 13 also artificially raises home prices, which is why so many 30-something children are still living at home.

      Delete
    13. The goal is cheap American labor. Both blue and white collar.

      Delete
    14. Who do you think Sacramento wants to build all that cheap high density housing for? You, sucker!

      Delete
    15. 10:59 artificially low interest rates causes home prices to inflate. also supply and demand.
      when someone buys a home they know what their taxes will be. if they choose to buy the house they know what they are getting into. California housing prices are nuts. people can always choose to move to another state. again it's all a matter of personal choice.

      Delete
  3. To bad Johnson-Reddick has passed. Sounds like she would have been a great Mayor of Sierra Madre....would have fit right in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Woe to the poor resident who would dare to speak over 3 minutes then!

      Delete
  4. That would be fine with me. Tim would protect our 2nd Amendment rights!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Reason.com? Please.

    The Libertarian theory of isolationism has worked so well for the US in the past...UK would have fallen to Hitler if the US hadn't entered WWII.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank God we went into Iraq!

      Delete
    2. I agree with the poster at 9:30 - it's a case by case basis. Yes we needed to fight and die in WWII, but we should not have done the same in VietNam. Also, going to war in the middle east is pure crazy.

      Delete
    3. Any president who takes us to war should be required to accept the honor of leading our troops into battle. This way he might give the matter some additional thought.

      Delete
    4. 9:42 I know most of the troops aren't too excited having the current POTUS as Commander-In-Chief. They'd probably be even less excited if he were the battlefield commander.

      Delete
    5. Maybe if the president dressed up as a Roman Emperor? Worked for Claudius.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    7. You need to take a deep breathe and then think over what it is you just said.

      Delete
    8. 9:49, and how do you know this? You would have had interviewed 50.01% of our Armed Forces to legitimately make a statement like that, are you current active duty? Are you a veteran? Don't play loose with unsubstantiated claims, you look like a fool.

      Delete
  6. IF USE OF GAS / RESULTING IN DEATH IS ACCEPTABLE...

    THEN NUKES SHOULD BE AN ACCEPTABLE PRACTICE ALSO - WHICH RESULTS IN DEATH!

    ReplyDelete
  7. If you are against prop 13 you obviously don't own a home or understand the situation. It's uninformed people that don't understand prop 13 and are most likely the same people who voted in the uneducated council members in Sierra Madre. There should be an IQ test before a person is allowed to vote or drive a car. You anti prop 13 people need to get an education or just continue paying more taxes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I totally agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hey 3:42 You have to realize that most homeowners these days are not under Prop 13. My god you probably think the whole world is Sierra Madre too. I don't have an opinion on Prop 13 I guess it would be nice if I fell into that and had to only pay less than a 1000 for prop tax. But to think everyone knows what it is especially owners that are under 40 is ridiculous. My 85 year old mother is under 13. whatever nuff said

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Steve, your ignorance is showing. All residential & commercial property in CA is under Prop 13. Your assessed value cannot increase more than 2% a year. Then the 1% tax rate is applied.

      Then the local assessments are applied, such as PCC & PUSD and the like.

      The assessment goes to the price sold when the property is sold.

      You're confusing "under Prop 13" with your mothers house base assessment being set at 1978 when Prop13 passed. It's been increased about 2% each year after that.

      Doh!

      Delete
    2. Oh, that Steve.

      Delete
  10. I suppose 3:42 was responding to me, 10:59. Actually, I'm fairly well educated and both own and rent, supporting 2 households. Other than disagreeing on a personal level, you offered no reasoned rebuttal or analysis. Prop 13, like it or not, has redistributive effects.

    ReplyDelete
  11. That's Mr. Steve to yallSeptember 14, 2013 at 9:30 PM

    my ignorance. I guess I learned something. All I know is my mother refused to sell because she said her property taxes were so low. I think she pays about $1000 a year for her home in West Pasadena valued at $750K. 2500 sf

    ReplyDelete
  12. The discipline of the market that so many on the right subscribe to vocally (but of course avoid in practice) suggests that mother did not properly plan for increases in costs of services and therefore chose to live above her means and be subsidized (welfare) by others. $1k per house certainly doesn't cover sidewalk maintenance, street cleaning, signage, parks, library, senior services, or any of the other services and infrastructure we take for granted. Why does the discipline of the markets only apply to those that have yet to break into the market?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Other states sensibly offer you a homeowner's exemption on your taxes. For instance, you get 5% off your taxes per year you live in the home, up to 50% off if you've lived there longer than 10 years (5% discount per year you live in the home). If you are retired and over the age of 65, they will offer an additional senior citizen discount.

    Prop 13, however, offers a way to keep and hold a property and pay reduced property tax, even if your purpose is to rent it out or it's your 100th property. Generally what happens is you have slumlords who don't contribute to the cost of running the community, but enjoy the outsized profits that prop 13 affords them.

    Most people who love prop 13, love it because it offers the ability of families to grow old in their homes without being priced out. Homeowner's exemptions do that. States with better fiscal policy have enacted these laws, and they work.

    ReplyDelete

The Tattler is a moderated blog. Annoying delays when posting comments can happen. Thank you for your patience and understanding.