Sunday, December 20, 2015

Earl Richey's "No UUT" Petition Run Is Now Complete

-
Mod: I received the following e-mail from Earl late yesterday afternoon. Apparently the turnout at the very last No UUT signature gathering opportunity, held at Kersting Court, was pretty significant. Rain storm and all.

We would like to thank all Sierra Madre  residents for their continued support and signing the UUT TAX PETITION to REPEAL all city UUT Taxes. We had a huge turn out and support from the 80%+/-  of Sierra Madre residents that we talked to. The signed petitions will be delivered to City Hall early Monday morning and Hand Carried and delivered to the Los Angeles Registrars Office in Norwalk. It's 5:00 pm, standing in the rain, obtaining signatures at Kersting Court. God must be sending us a message for a job well done!

That 80% figure is interesting. Earl Richey has been claiming all along that the response he and those carrying No UUT petitions with him was consistently positive, and they had experienced only minor resistance to requests for a signature and an address. Something that was borne out by their ability to gather well over 400 signatures with only a handful of petitioners.

Can it be the easy assumption that a No UUT ballot initiative could never receive the votes needed to succeed here might not be correct? Out beyond City Hall's immediate message control there apparently is quite a lot of anger at how things have been going in this town, and previously unheard voices are just now beginning to get some notice.

The amount of signatures required to get on the ballot for this particular election is 191. Los Angeles County would have to throw out over 200 signatures to keep this particular "No UUT" measure off of next April's ballot.

As it appears today this election could have 3 ballot measures. One for a 10% UUT, another for No UUT whatsoever, and then something rather unexpected from the increasingly insecure Sierra Madre Police Department. That being a law that would prohibit the City Council from ever negotiating with any other law enforcement agency but them, including the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

As we've been saying, 2016 is going to be an interesting year.

Watch out for your mailbox

Here is something from the Pasadena Star News family of newspapers that should make anyone uncomfortable.


You can read the rest of the article here. The Los Angeles version of ABC News is also covering this story, and has an article up here. They claim the number of involved mailboxes is 90.

Not to question the forensic abilities of the Sierra Madre Police Department, but how many people leave mail in their mailboxes overnight? Is this a common practice for that part of town?

A possible solution to this crime wave might be to encourage people to retrieve their mail on a daily basis and not leave it out unprotected overnight.

If that is actually the case, of course.

sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

60 comments:

  1. Congratulations to the no more excessive taxation volunteers. You have fought for democracy!
    Thank you residents who signed petition. You have fought for democracy.We must do these things locally. We can, we have, we will make a difference.
    These taxation issues belong on the ballot so voters....not government decides.
    Thank you all who participated. ..you are PATRIOTS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fought for democracy? Patriots?

      The act of petitioning to lower taxes is not a "fight for democracy" any more than a petition for raising taxes is a "fight for democracy." They are both the exercise of democratic rights, not fights for those rights.

      "Patriots?" How do know they're lovers and defenders of their country and individual rights? Just because they signed a petition to lower taxes?

      So if instead they signed a petition to raise taxes to provide additional services to the people or maybe to increase our ability to defend against enemies they would somehow be unPatriotic?

      The petitioners simply want to lower taxes, likely for a variety of reasons such as a good faith belief the taxes are too high, or they can't afford the taxes, or they want something for nothing, or they're too cheap to pay, or they don't want the services that are paid for by the taxes, or they want to push the city into insolvency or bankruptcy, or they don't want to take on the SMPD/LACSD issue directly, etc.

      I think your use of the terms "fought for democracy" and "Patriots" is misplaced.

      Delete
    2. Yes. Once political agendas are included this all becomes something quite different.

      Delete
    3. What was it that caused the original "patriots" to rebel? Oh yea, high taxes.

      Delete
    4. Taxation without representation. Not sure King George allowed ballot measures.

      Delete
    5. I agree those words have nothing to do with anything , patriot is the most overused term

      Delete
    6. Just for clarification, I an not neutral about whether taxes should or should not be paid. Paying taxes is indeed a moral obligation. I just don't see attempts to lower taxes at the local level as patriotic or not, though it is quite immoral for people of means not to pay taxes for the infrastructure and services that are available and that they use.

      Actually PAYING one's fair share of taxes, especially at the federal level, actually can be a Patriotic act.

      That is why the attempts of the 1% and particularly the 0.1% to reduce their historically low taxes even further, whether deceptively couched as a flat tax or lower taxes on capital gains, are deeply UN-Patriotic.

      Delete
    7. 11:09, give it a rest. We pay a BOATLOAD of RE Property Taxes that they get to increase every year.

      We as a village can save over $800,000 a year with better police protection through the LA Sheriff Dept.

      We can quit paying CalPERS' excessive pension assessments for police and any other department we contract out.

      In my experience, people like you who say we should pay higher taxes NEVER voluntairy pay more tax. You can do it, send the IRS a check payable to "Bureau of the Public Debt" and you can pay it.

      The truth is you want everyone else to pay it. Let me guess, you work or are retired from the public sector, right? I'm voting repeal the UUT. If the City Council doesn't have the, ahem, backbone to contract out to LASD, we the people sure can make them do it. And we will.

      Delete
    8. 11:53/11:58: FYI: Petitions and ballot measures are allowed here. References to original patriots and King George are thus nothing but non sequitur. (You may also want to consider that the sloganeering re taxation without representation was but one of the ways the continental ownership class, who grew tired of sharing with the British ownership class, got the rabble to spill its blood so they could take over. Kinda like how the poor spill their blood in oil/military supplier wars for the current ownership class.)

      11:35. I said that the 1% should pay their fair share of taxes. Apparently, you believe they should pay less than their fair share.

      Delete
    9. The use of nonsequitur is almost always a nonsequitur.

      Delete
    10. Oh, and please, please stop whining about paying a "boatload" of property taxes. Prop 13 ensured that you do not pay all that much.

      In fact, the property taxes of my east coast parents, who paid about $10k for their house 50+ years ago, is way higher than the property taxes on my house.

      You complain about your property taxes. I'll bet you also complain about the quality of the public schools, the infrastructure, municipal services, etc. You seem to forget that one pays for the other.

      Delete
    11. I see. One pays for the other. So how do you explain Sierra Madre's water infrastructure?

      Delete
    12. So you're saying, 12:41, that lowering taxes will somehow improve the water infrastructure?

      Delete
    13. Of course not, Mr. Sequitur. You said taxes pay for infrastructure. Sierra Madre has been paying some of the highest utility taxes in California for years. So if what you say is true, how do explain the disgraceful state of our water department? Try and deal with this question honestly.

      Delete
    14. Actually, I am dealing with it honestly--and as a result you're slowly getting to the real issue:

      Whether the taxes we pay toward municipal services and infrastructure are sufficient to maintain the level of services desired, or whether the service provider (city) is using those tax dollars inefficiently?

      If the former, lowering taxes only makes the problem worse, no? Since water is a big issue, I'll use an aqueous analogy: Would you help a person dying of thirst by withholding water? Of course not. (Yeah, yeah, if it's SM water you might. Ha ha.)

      If the latter, the answer is to gather your courage and take the harder affirmative steps to ferret out the inefficiencies and improve the services. Demand that elected officials do so, or throw them out. Reducing taxes only worsens the inefficiencies and results in even poorer service. Besides, it's a cowardly way of operating.

      Oh, and I just checked my electric bill. For light, A/C, TV, satellite, stereo, smart phone, computer, kitchen appliances--luxuries available to me and you and only this thinnest slice of human history that we live in, all whenever we want them--SM will be getting a latte from me. Big deal.

      Delete
    15. You continue to avoid answering the question. Please, put aside the snotty supercilious twaddle and get with the real world. Here it is again. You said taxes pay for infrastructure. Sierra Madre has been paying some of the highest utility taxes in California for years. Water rates have been raised continuously over the last several years. So if what you say is true, how do explain the disgraceful state of our water infrastructure? Rather than blaming the taxpayers, rate payers and residents, please explain how things got this bad. The people paid the taxes, the ratepayers paid the rates, why didn't they get what they paid for? And having been burned so many times before, how can you expect them to happily pay more now?

      Delete
    16. C'mon now 2:34. Stop side-stepping the real issue.

      Take another look at today's post. With the exception of the word "rain," there is no mention of water or water infrastructure. What next, are you going to ask me to solve issues related to the collection of library fines? Skateboarding in Kersting Court? And on and on and on ad infinitum. Your question posits a classic a straw man argument.

      The issue posted today involves the UUT tax petition.

      So put aside the Scarecrow argument and explain precisely and in detail how reducing UUT taxes to zero will help improve ANYTHING.

      Delete
    17. Hello 12:22 pm! Wake up and smell the yellow water and outrageous proposed UUT! Prop 13 applied to folks who bought their homes almost 40 years ago! Doesn't help anyone much who had the misfortune to buy in 1979 ... or subsequently. Doddering old curmudgeons abound on The Tattler.

      Delete
    18. Prop 13 helps everyone who owns/buys by locking in 1% and capping increases at 2% per year.

      Delete
    19. I responded 2:24, but for some reason it did not post.

      Let me put it this way. How can my personal knowledge or lack of knowledge about fixing the infrastructure militate for lowering the UUT to zero?

      If I do not know, is that an argument for zero UUT? No.
      If I do know, is that an argument for zero UUT where
      (a)it will cost taxpayers more than currently paid to fix it? No.
      (b) it will cost the taxpayers the same amount to fix it? No.
      (c) it will cost somewhat less than currently paid? No.

      So it's a straw man argument phrased as a question.

      The real question is: What arguments are there for reducing UUT to zero that improve services and infrastructure or at least maintain status quo? None.

      So what are you willing to cut? We already know bringing in the LACSD is one proposal. What other things are you willing to do without? If you are saying to just get rid of employees, show us how those departments will run without them. If you say get rid of CalPERS, show us where that has been done before and the key employees stayed. I'm sure you will say there's dead wood in every department and perhaps there is, but what about those you want to stay? Why should they if you take away a key component of their compensation?

      Delete
  2. Another Good Deed has been awarded to all those who enjoy democracy and who are willing to work for it, democracy always needs to be tended to and watch carefully as their certain elements in society that will try to subvert it to their own personal usage to benefit themselves ONLY and not for ALL to enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here is my question. What happens if both the NO UUT and 10% UUT measures pass? Or, what happens if they both fail? Does that mean we stay at the 6% the residents voted for in 2014?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the UUT is repealed, then how could it be 10% because it no longer exists.

      Delete
    2. OK. I get that. But wouldn't a 10% UUT exist because people voted for that as well? Do we call it a push and have a 5% UUT? This might be a unique situation.

      Delete
    3. I doubt the voters would vote to repeal & increase the tax on the same ballot. Give them a little credit, duh.

      Delete
    4. I think they are far more likely to vote No on both.

      Delete
    5. If both utility tax measures lose then the UUT stays at 6%.

      Delete
    6. No is an easier vote to make. No, no and no.

      Delete
  4. the SMPD's pathetic and whiny petition underscores why they need to go. They want to bully us once again and this time take away our right to choose and lock themselves into a cushy lifetime pension plan - they've sued us to kingdom come and provide substandard services.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please remember that the SMPD motto was never anything resembling "To Protect & Serve"
      More likely "To Sue & Screw" the tax-paying residents of Sierra Madre.
      I'll end with my usual naive plea - does anyone have a shining example of brilliant Police-work to share about SMPD? Oh, only the gleam on their Platinum Pensions(yes multiple pensions) ? I thought so.

      Delete
  5. The mailbox tampering was also covered on the 11 p.m. news. Jaque Pergola and the police chief were both interviewed. We are home when the mail is delivered and get out to the box, down a long driveway, immediately. We have not had mail stollen but neighbors have had and way before this event. This time it also appeared that someone was leaving flea control services (need pesticide license for this and the PD should follow up on this as the possible ruse) in the boxes, maybe looking inside to see what was there as they did their illegal "advertising." There has got to be finger prints all over this mess and these scoundrels could well be in the system.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. nobody should be leaving anything in their mailboxes overnight. goodness.

      Delete
    2. Since SMPD seem characteristically useless in offering useful advice -here is a simple remedy . Go to Harbor Freight and buy a "Driveway Alert" for around $13. Get a battery for it.Attach the sensor inside your mail box securely. When the mailbox lid is opened &/or a hand goes in, the beeper that you locate inside your home will chime.
      Security cameras mounted at face height are effective also.

      Delete
    3. That does sound like a solution. It will tell you when the mailman has come so you can go get your mail.

      Delete
    4. Does it say "You have mail?"

      Delete
  6. Here is the press release about mailbox theft on the City of Sierra Madre Facebook page:
    "Sierra Madre, CA. – December 19, 2015 – At 7:00 am, a Sierra Madre resident living in the 400 block of N. Canon went out for a morning walk and noticed that his mailbox had been tampered with and mail had possibly been stolen. Shortly thereafter, residents living in the north/east part of town found that their mailboxes had also been tampered with. At this point it appears that approximately 30 mailboxes were tampered with and the incident occurred overnight between Friday, December 18, 2015 and Saturday, December 19, 2015. If you have information on mailbox vandalism, call the Sierra Madre Police Department to report it. Your cooperation helps apprehend violators. The Sierra Madre Police Department will be working with the local Postal Inspector on this investigation. Director of Public Safety, Chief Larry Giannone, wants to remind the residents that identity theft is one of the fastest growing crimes in the United States. One of the prime ways in which these Identity Theft suspects obtain personal information is by stealing mail and your personal mail can be a gold mine to determined criminals. Homeowners should consider replacing old outdated mailboxes with ones that have a locking mechanism. Anyone who has information or saw any suspicious activity last evening in the north east portion of Sierra Madre should contact the Sierra Madre Police Department at (626) 355-1414."

    ReplyDelete
  7. We read last week's tattler about mayor sherriff Johns encounter with Sterling, the UUT tax gather. Rumours have it, that sherriff john had the pen in hand, did he sign the UUT petition?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everybody knows he didn't. Capoccia called the UUT opponents "nuts." Of course, he was once a UUT opponent himself, so he probably knows about that personally.

      Delete
    2. He is a recovering nut.

      Delete
  8. Think I will give Earl my vote. John doesn't get my vote.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Most recent post, we believe that the mayor did sign the petition, remember John cappochua stated prior to being elected as a city council member, John stated he was Against Taxes. Once the UUT petition signatures are turned in, all those signatures will be held with the registrars office, and city hall will never be able to verify how many times the mayor signed the UUT petion. I believe it is true that John signed the petition, because John is a Christian and stated to our community that he always tells the truth. So, since he stated he was not for taxes, he must have signed the petition, or he must have not told the city madres his truthfull intent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So a Christian would not lie , that is something new

      Delete
    2. I think 10:37 was being sarcastic.

      Delete
  10. If both the No UUT & the 10% UUT pass the one that gets the most Yes votes prevails.

    If both fail the UUT will be 6%.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's going to be a lot of confusion among the majority of our registered voters.
      Watch out for some aggressive and expensive spinning coming our way.

      Delete
    2. A lot of people will be watching Sierra Madre. And not just here. This promises to be quite a show.

      Delete
    3. Confused? Vote NO on all three and get the 6% UUT tax rate promised to you in 2008 by none other than John Buchanan. Such as deal.

      Delete
    4. Speaking of John Buchanan, does anyone know how the police ballot initiative petition is going? Name misspelling and all?

      Delete
    5. The majority of Sierra Madreans barely follow local politics. Just a few of us care enough to really pay attention to what is going on. And there are moneyed interests who will hire PR peeps and suchlike, to try and sway those who aren't really tracking. There's gonna be some fancy misinformation efforts, I'll bet ya.

      Delete
    6. Heads - and everything else - will be spinning.

      Delete
  11. Its been documented, city council and the city manager have shown that they do not have the foresight or wavouses to run this town, but in the toilet and every day getting closer to filing bk. How in the hell did the taxpayers get themselves in this mess. You can only blame the registered voters, now the registered voters need to get them.out!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lot of people in town were convinced a few years back that participating in their city's government in a meaningful and effective way is actually uncivil behavior. So they turned everything over to people who quickly ran the place into the ground. Which is where we are now.

      Delete
    2. As the registered voters can't seem to vote correctly the only remedy is to register new voters who will vote properly.

      Delete
    3. Maybe some of those will be the people who signed Earl's petition?

      Delete
    4. I hope they are already registered or their signatures are invalid!

      Delete
    5. I know, let's only let those who agree with us vote. That will solve all our problems.

      Delete
  12. U know its been alot of work for the few who made the UUT tax petition, which will be on the 2016 ballot possible. We want to thank you from our hearts. Now the registered voters need to do our part and vote to take the monies away from city hall. Until city hall budgets and manages or $24 million dollars correctly, nothing in this town will improve.

    ReplyDelete
  13. For what its worth, a no on all UUT funds will not let our city function, sheriff or no sheriff. This is not spin, this is truth. Sacramento takes most of our property taxes and other taxes, little trickles down to cities, plus, it gives unfunded mandates that cannot be funded unless monies are coming in to fun the city. If you have ever lived in a city that has gone bankrupt i.e. Stockton, you wouldn't espouse bankruptcy. I can see you now hands over your ears saying LALALALA I don't want to hear you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you, 4:44.

      Delete
  14. ...and we should let them keep raising taxes because they've taken such good care of us, right? Hahahahahahahahahahaha. I'm voting to repeal the UUT.

    ReplyDelete