Saturday, March 10, 2018

The City Council Will Discuss the Possible Death of Sierra Madre Tuesday Evening

Things always get exciting here when the topic of utility taxes come up. And with each and every election real burning emotions, deeply wound within any community discussion of Sierra Madre's UUT, seem to ramp up just a little bit more.

And since this form of taxation has been a main topic of discourse for practically every election over the last decade and a half, we have now reached levels that just might make your nose bleed. That is, if you choose to participate. Not everybody does, and perhaps that is best. Certainly that would be easier on the heart.

There were three distinct episodes in the Great Sierra Madre UUT Debate this week, and I'll line them up so you can better appreciate just how bizarre things could become here very soon. This as discussion of Measure D, the ballot measure to get rid of utility taxes altogether in Sierra Madre, draws closer to its April election date with destiny.

The first came our way from the California Tax Limitation Committee, which is more familiarly known to most as the Tea Party. In this case mostly out of Pasadena.


They go on to cite a lot of the facts and figures that you might (or might not) think have some validity here. I personally thought that Sierra Madre would do just fine with a 6% UUT, but apparently a $45,000 dollar blizzard of post cards, funded mostly by people who are paid handsomely out of those utility taxes, convinced residents to abandon all previous opposition to utility tax increases.

You can link to all of that rather draconian Tea Party stuff by clicking here.

The second UUT related event of the week is pretty much the thinnest slice of ham in today's sandwich, but I'll post it anyway. Some guy was pretty upset by what the Tea Party guys sent out, and left a couple of comments here on The Tattler saying so. Plus a link to what he claims violates state campaign law. Here is what the angry dude said.


That certainly is some colorful language. I really hope it isn't true about Earl Richey. I have always found Earl to be a fairly stand up guy. He does occasionally shoot his many causes in their feet by his too easy acceptance of reactionary propaganda from questionable sources, but I would miss his near daily emails to this blog nevertheless.

All the best, big guy. Hopefully it's just baloney.

The last thing to come my way during this week of rapidly building UUT hysteria is from an agenda report included in the City of Sierra Madre's noticing for this coming Tuesday's City Council meeting. It is from the forever a-hovering law firm of Colantuono, Highsmith and Whatley, and it deals with the possible Death of Sierra Madre.

Here is some of their crazy rhythm.


If that wasn't enough to deep chill your heart and drag you through the tattered thin veil separating us all from a world of the no longer living, you can bravely link to the rest of all that CHW rhetoric here.

One more thought, if I may. If the City of Sierra Madre does lose its UUT financial wherewithal and is forced to disincorporate and pass into that dark night, there is one bright side. We would finally, and at long last, be rid of Colantuono, Highsmith and Whatley.

That might be the only thing making a YES vote on Measure D acceptable.

sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

78 comments:

  1. Does the "D" in Measure D stand for disincorporation, or death?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mr Mod-
    assuming Earl Richey posts anonymously to this blog, then how can you state “but I would miss his near daily emails to this blog nevertheless.”
    I don’t recall seeing his name on a post, so how do you know it’s him ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sorry, guess I wasn't clear. These are emails sent to The Tattler email box, which is sierramadretattler@gmail.com. I get lots of email from people hoping that I will post about things that they are concerned about. You'd be surprised how many posts found here originally came from emails sent to me by folks with an idea. Trust me, I appreciate them a lot. Those are almost always signed.

      Delete
  3. What’s the reichstag fire

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hitler and his goons burned down Germany's equivalent of the Capitol building and blamed it on the left. This gave them what they thought was a justification to arrest tens of thousands of their political opponents and lock them away in prisons and concentration camps.

      Delete
    2. So David McMonigle is trying to bankrupt our town and harm home values because of his "principles". Maybe he should just leave town if he doesn't like it. Or maybe he and his wife should be run out of town on a rail.

      Delete
    3. You'll find out what it means when Mueller indicts Kushner and Dimwit Don Jr.

      Delete
  4. How is the city of San Bernardino doing after it fought CalPERS and unincorporated?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did the City of San Bernardino unincorporate? I've never heard that. Do you have a cite?

      Delete
  5. The Underrecognized, Undervalued, Underpaid, Unfunded Pension Liabilities
    https://californiapolicycenter.org/underrecognized-undervalued-underpaid-unfunded-pension-liabilities/#!#.WqC_Zwqy46Y.facebook

    ReplyDelete
  6. So let me get this straight. If the UUT went away, and Sierra Madre became no more, the county would make sure the people still living on this unincorporated dirt would pay the pensions of those who worked for a city government that no longer exists?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Maybe Earl and Atty Highsmith can have a duel at high noon on Sierra Madre Boulevard? I'm sure the Chamber of Commerce could sell some booth space and open the beer garden.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Why did this council remove the Sunset Clause?
    With the Sunset Clause, the council could have increased or decreased the UUT as needed.
    This council put themselves in this "dual at high noon", now the voters will make some sense of all this UUT nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi,

    I live in Sierra Madre. Tea Party kook David McMonigle is trying to bankrupt Sierra Madre be repealing the source of city revenue. He should just leave town if he does not like paying for city services.

    That's why I created a petition to David McMonigle, which says:

    "Since David McMonigle wants to make Sierra Madre insolvent, he and his wife should leave town."

    Will you sign this petition? Click here:

    Click here for the McMonigle Petition to go to the petition.


    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. McMonigle is right. His solution might be a problem for some, but his message about the city's stupidly acquired debt is spot on. Instead of stupid smear attacks, why don't you come up with something rational and useful?

      Delete
    2. No. McMonigle isn't right. He's a selfish jackass who even during the drought kept his swimming pool nice and full.

      Delete
    3. Looks like David is going to need to take out a restraining order.

      Delete
  10. 2.08.130 - Designation and protection of city copyrighted images.
    A. The city council designates the following as the official city logo:
    Click logo


    B. The city manager shall be the official keeper of all city copyrighted images and enforce any copyright, trademark or patens the city has. C. It is unlawful for any person, corporation, partnership or other entity to use city copyrighted images or to reproduce, copy or create any similar facsimile of such images without having first obtained the express written consent of the city council. D. Any violation of this section shall be processed as a violation of this code.
    (Ord. 1267 § 1, 2007: Ord. 1185 § 2 (part), 2000; Ord. 1176, 1999

    ReplyDelete
  11. Whether the UUT stays or doesn’t, the problem is not solved. Something must be done about CalPers. The city cannot continue with that kind of debt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Overbearing pension obligations are not specific to Sierra Madre. They plague the whole state. Gov Brown's pension reform was much too timid.

      Delete
    2. Really too bad that we don't have a functional, reasonable opposition party in CA. This is an issue that the pre-Tea Party/Trump GOP could have helped.

      Delete
  12. I kinda like the way my property has been appreciating over the last few years. The Sierra Madre Tea Party Is my enemy I guess. Bankruptcy can't be good for property values and a high standard of living.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Loyalton, Northern California opted out of CalPERS.
    CalPERS retiree's are leaving California for Las Vegas Nevada.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 8:34am. Annal Retentive?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As in some kind of journal of retention?

      Delete
    2. Maybe a box filled with old National Geographic magazines.

      Delete
  15. 8:29 am Get a grip. The city has been a seive when it comes to spending UUT tax.
    The blame falls to the old management that grabbed their CalPERS and ran.
    The City Council did not keep them in check.
    A well managed and planned city should not have to rely on additional out of pocket funding to run the city.
    By planned city, does NOT mean SPECIFIC PLAN, that was Dirt Doyle and his gang that continue to plan and push for additional stupid spending. Time to put the brakes on spending.
    Iam voting to do away with the UUT, as are all my friends.
    Restructure City Hall.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Three votes YES to repeal the UUT from our house.

      Delete
  16. UUT is not additional out of pocket funding. It is funding that became necessary when Prop 13 reduced future property tax revenue. A huge percentage of Sierra Madre is enjoying artificially low property taxes (like David McMonigle and Earl Richey)..and only 20% of property taxes go to Sierra Madre anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is funding that became necessary when circus clowns like Doyle, Hayes and Buchanan gave away the farm. We are now paying for their stupidity.

      Delete
    2. Right, 9:58.
      We went from a simply-run, small city, to a much bigger municipal government constantly threatened by bankruptcy on their watch.

      Delete
    3. Their big scheme was they were going to grow the population of the town through things like the DSP. Except the residents didn't want it and shut them down. But the bills are still coming due.

      Delete
    4. Always blaming Prop 13 that saved our homes. Try blaming CalPers and the liberal that love to spend and create more unfounded programs.

      Delete
    5. The City had plenty of time to get its act together between the time Prop. 13 passed and the UUT came into existence. It isn't a Prop. 13 problem, it is a history of poor management. The current council is stuck with a giant mess.

      Delete
    6. Prop 13 isn't the reason why the DSP crowd stuck us with millions in water bond debt. Stop the scapegoating. You idiots did it all by yourselves. You owe this town an apology. Look ashamed already.

      Delete
  17. 9:35m why are you attacking Seniors? Do you support child labor as well?
    YOU are the selfish self centered loser that needs to leave Sierra Madre.
    The older generation in town; the Prop 13 crowd, are the individuals that built this town, you are reaping the benefits.
    Get off your butt, get a job and contribute, just as we all did when we were in our prime.
    Dont historically blame Prop. 13.
    What is your current excuse for where the city is at this time?
    You have none? You must be a Council member or City orState employee receiving CalPERS.
    YOU have no solutions, just spend, spend, spend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It’s the old timers, asleep at the wheel, that got us into untenable debt. Y’all blew it.

      Delete
    2. Seniors use just as much services as others, perhaps even more. Why should the young subsidize seniors? Seniors should have planned for the fact that costs increase over time. Everyone knows about inflation. Why reward poor planning?

      And since seniors who buy now don't get a taxed as though they bought during their prime when homes cost less, its not really about seniors, is it? No, its about you not wanting to pay your fair share and wanting to be subsidized by others.

      Delete
    3. Bet your parents and grandparent are proud of you. So if you inherited your parents property, you would go running down to the assessor office to get a current value appraisal?. You are so full of it.

      Delete
    4. So now you’ve conceded to being a mooche, and admitted that you're unethical.

      Way to go.

      Delete
    5. Nice trying to distract with a hypothetical. But it doesn't take away from the FACT that a subsidy, is a subsidy, is a subsidy.

      The so-called "greatest" and "boomer" generations have been the biggest polluters of the world, are the primary cause of CO2 induced climate change and sea level rise, and have created ginormous national debt--all foisted on the young.

      And you're participating by not even paying your local fair share and foisting it on the young. How does it feel not carrying your own weight?

      I'll bet you rail against welfare queens, but not when you look in the mirror.

      Delete
    6. Typical dirt nonsense. Blame the seniors because they can't make any money off them. Go sell some houses and shut up.

      Delete
    7. Let's make it really, really, really easy for you to understand.

      Let's say there's a city that we'll call Subsidy City. Subsidy City has only two houses that are identical: one owned by Longtime Homeowner, the other by New Homeowner. Each homeowner uses the services provided by Subsidy City equally. The annual cost of those city services is $100.

      Longtime Homeowner pays only $10 in property taxes due to Prop 13 and New Homeowner pays $90 in property taxes. In Subsidy City, who is subsidizing whom? Get it now?

      Delete
    8. Why are you still whining about this?

      Delete
    9. Since it bothers you, 1:05, don't read this post or thread. Whoops, you already did.

      Delete
    10. Yes, about three times. You're like a broken record with this crap.

      Delete
    11. 12:52 - that's sorta true.

      and when you get old you'll read the same benefits, and future newcomers will then become the 90% while you inherit the 10% status.

      it all balances it if you play the game long enough.

      Delete
    12. There's no guarantee that it balances out. And why should previous generations get a lower cost ride?

      You'd freak out if an old person got to pay $10,000 for a car that you have to pay $50,000 to buy, or even if it was just a proportional differential in sales tax on a car; i.e. you pay $5,000 and geezer pays $1,000. So why are property taxes different? Why should the young subsidize poor financial planning of the old?

      Delete
    13. Because the ‘old person’ bought their car 40 years before you did. He is taxed perpetually on his purchase price, as are you. 49 years from now you’ll be sitting pretty while your kids are whining like you are now.

      And if you don’t buy a house at all you don’t have to ‘subsidize’ anyone.

      Delete
    14. So you're saying that people who rent don't pay property taxes through their rental payments?

      Face it. The young subsidize the old, particularly through Prop 13.

      The claim that it balances is out is preposterous on so many levels.

      Delete
    15. You're obsessed.

      Delete
    16. And you can't stop reading it!

      Delete
    17. It's like having dog crap on your shoe.

      Delete
  18. 9:35 am. Blame Sacramento, Jerry Brown, Democrats for the raid on city property tax leaving cities.
    Hows that working for you? GOT POT HOLES that need filling?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your hole needs fixing.

      Delete
    2. So true. The Dems raided all the cities and their redevelopment agencies to fund their giveaway schemes.

      Delete
    3. Too bad the GOP in California is a political corpse. Next week idiots like Trump and Donnelly will be picking out wall designs at the border, and the whole world will be laughing.

      Delete
    4. 100% correct, everything that's wrong in California can all be blamed on the Democrats...GOP died years ago.

      Delete
  19. Maybe we need a 25% tariff on all products not manufactured within the city limits.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good idea. We can put up gates so out of towners will have to pay the tariff.

      Delete
  20. The fix is in: not only will the city of Arcadia get the city of Sierra Madre in the future bankruptcy hearings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I disagree. LA County will keep control of the city formerly known as Sierra Madre all to itself so it can sell the pieces off to the highest bidders. Good luck preserving anything when those corrupt scumbuckets are calling the shots.

      Delete
    2. You want to see the future, look at the County area south of Colorado..McMansion net to a shack.

      Delete
  21. Replies
    1. The only reason Trump is coming to CA is so can get in a little race baiting in a blue state. That will play well with his racist red state base.

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

      Delete
  22. Trolls get trumped again!

    their so-called non-politician messiah following following the same so-called deep-state playbook:

    President Donald Trump summoned a former impeachment defense attorney for an Oval Office meeting last week, The New York Times reported Saturday. Emmet Flood represented President Bill Clinton during the impeachment process and discussed a day-to-day role helping Trump navigate his investigations.
    Flood also represented Vice President Dick Cheney in the civil lawsuit brought by former CIA agent Valerie Plame and spent two years in the White House Counsel’s office during the George W. Bush administration.

    ReplyDelete
  23. 12:52pm. Home owner property 13, would have opted for the morning after pill if homeowner II was their child.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shows how much you know. It is called Proposition 13, not property 13. YDA

      Delete
    2. Reread that and unwrap it just for its lack of logic. Then consider its inherent misanthropy.

      I'll bet 2:00 secretly hopes for a crash when a kid drives a little too fast past his house.

      Delete
  24. 1:59m. Wasn't Valerie Plame and her hubby ball room party crashers of the Clintons?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tell us when you get back from the past.

      Delete
    2. Sorry chump, that joke tanked like the trump shuttle.

      Delete
    3. Why did you think it was a joke?

      Delete
    4. Because you’re so wrong so often no one takes you seriously

      Delete

  25. Trump Talks With Clinton Impeachment Lawyer About Aiding in Mueller Response

    President Trump is in discussions with a veteran Washington lawyer who represented Bill Clinton during the impeachment process about joining the White House to help deal with the special counsel inquiry, according to four people familiar with the matter.

    The lawyer, Emmet T. Flood, met with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office this past week to discuss the possibility, according to the people. No final decision has been made, according to two of the people.

    Should Mr. Flood come on board, the two people said, his main duties would be a day-to-day role helping the president navigate his dealings with the Justice Department.

    Two people close to the president said that the overture to Mr. Flood did not indicate any new concerns about the inquiry. Still, it appears, at the least, to be an acknowledgment that the investigation is unlikely to end anytime soon.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/us/politics/trump-mueller-flood.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

    ReplyDelete
  26. I still feel if Sierra Madre revers back to L.A. County Land zoning then any a joining city can petition to annex all or part of the former City of Sierra Madre, California.

    ReplyDelete

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