Heads - You Lose!

After about an hour or so of listening to the residents of Sierra Madre who had come down to participate in the democratic process, making often impassioned speeches stating the reasons why they thought our next mayor should be Council Member Joe Mosca or Mayor Pro Tem Maryann MacGillivray, Council Member Don Watts ultimately decided that neither the opinions of the electorate nor the democratic process would have the final say in selecting the mayor. Watts, the self-acknowledged swing vote on the decision, told the people of Sierra Madre that he had made his choice based on the flip of a lucky nickel that he has had for 42 years, since he found it under the bed he slept on above a torpedo while serving in the Navy. The coin toss came up heads, and Watts said that in a previous conversation he had asked Mosca whether he wanted to be heads or tails. Mosca had replied tails. So Watts voted for MacGillivray as Mayor, along with MacGillivray and outgoing Mayor Kurt Zimmerman. Mayor MacGillivray then nominated the coin-tossing Councilman to be our Mayor Pro Tem, and the Council voted unanimously to make Watts the City's second in command elected official. No, this is not April fools. It's the current state of Sierra Madre politics.

Santa Anita Park to Host Chamber Breakfast Mixer, Facility Tour

The Sierra Madre Chamber of Commerce April Mixer will be held at Santa Anita Park in the Baldwin Conference room on Thursday, April 9th at 7:30am. The Baldwin Conference room includes views of morning workouts which will be taking place at the same time. Attendees will have a chance to observe some of the horses at the track being put through their paces as they enjoy the continental breakfast provided by Santa Anita Park.

Guests should enter off Baldwin Ave. at Gate 8, and follow the signs that will lead the way to the mixer. Gate 8 will be the only accessible entry into the park at that hour of the morning, so it is critical that guests use that entrance.

Sierra Madre’s 2007 Citizen of the Year Pete Siberell is the invited guest speaker. Siberell also sits on the Sierra Madre Library Board of Trustees, is Chairman of the Mt. Wilson Trail Race Committee, and serves as president of the Sierra Madre Little League. Outside Sierra Madre, Siberell is on the Board of Directors for the Arcadia Chamber of Commerce, and is involved with the Methodist Hospital Foundation and the Arcadia Chapter of the Red Cross.

In addition to Siberell, if work schedules allow, Santa Anita horsemen may also stop by. Following the breakfast, Santa Anita Special Event Coordinator Elizabeth Booth will lead interested mixer attendees on a tour of the facility that will last about half an hour. The mixer will end at 9pm, with the facility tour to begin at that time.

Cost to attend the mixer is $10 for Chamber members, $15 for non-members. A business card drawing will be held featuring prizes donated by Chamber members.

Public works open house and SIerra Madre Social going On at city yard right now through noon. Sent from field via cellular phone.

City Council Passes Amendment to Ordinance Prohibiting Smoking in Certain Places

After nearly three hours of discussion, most of it by proponents and opponents during the community comment portion of the decision making process, City Council added the following words to the City's ordinance that prohibits smoking in certain places: "No person shall smoke in any part of any restaurant, bar, cafe, deli or other public place where food or beverage is sold, served or offered for sale, or in any outdoor dining area or patios serving said establishment."

More than three dozen people stepped to the microphone to voice their opinion, the majority of them asking Council to pass the ordinance. In the end, the Council voted to pass the amendment, calling for a ninety-day education/outreach period during which no penalties will be imposed. At the end of the ninety-day period, staff will come back to Council with their recommendations as to whether they need more time for the outreach program, or changes to the amendment (i.e., is a buffer zone needed around the dining areas, etc.).

Interesting to note that not one of the owners of the restaurants that will be most affected by the amendment spoke on the issue, and from my vantage point in the Council Chambers, there appeared to be only one restaurant owner in attendance. There was an overflow crowd spilling into the foyer of the Chambers, much of which I could not see, so there may have been others in attendance.

Letter to the Editor

I received a letter to the editor today in regards to the smoking restriction on tonight's City Council Agenda. The letter writer is unable to access my blog for some reason, and asked that I post her letter on the blog for her while she tries to figure out what is stopping her from posting herself. Unfortunately, this means that unless she figures out what the issue is, she may not be able to respond to any comments you have, but who knows, maybe she'll figure it out. Here's her (rather provocative) letter:

Re: Proposed Sierra Madre Outdoor Patio Smoking Ban

The proposed outdoor patio smoking ban is not a grassroots effort by Sierra Madre stroller moms: it is part of a statewide step by step progressive ban program funded by taxpayer money disbursed by the California Tobacco Control Program and organized by the California Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing (www.center4tobaccopolicy.org), a political branch of the American Lung Association. Go to that website, click on "Community Organizing" and you will see how they manipulate your stroller moms, your community, and your city council.

Go to talc.phi.org, click on "Secondhand Smoke", click on "Comprehensive Secondhand Smoke Ordinance" and you will find your city's smoking ordinance already written and ready to stick under your councilmen's noses for their automatic signature. TALC is funded by taxpayer money disbursed by the California Tobacco Control Program.
If people are taught to hate a minority, any lie about that minority will be believed and any law can be enacted against that minority. In "California Tobacco Control Update 2006", the California Tobacco Control Program states that their goal is "A Tobacco Free California". It states that "California's strategy is to create a social milieu and legal climate in which tobacco use is regarded as unacceptable -- to denormalize smoking and other tobacco use." In plain speech this means that the California Tobacco Program proposes to teach the people of California to regard the smoker a threat to society and to make him a despised pariah. This was the strategy used by the German National Socialist Party against the Jews in the 1930's: it is the strategy the California Tobacco Control Program uses today against California citizens.

Their lies are too numerous for me to list and quote refuting experts here. Take only one "There is no safe level of second hand tobacco smoke".

Smoke is smoke. Tobacco isn't magic. It is just another organic material. All organic combustion, like that from cigarettes, campfires, charcoal braziers and fireplaces, generates over 4,000 chemicals, including toxic compounds and carcinogens. The smoke from your picnic area fireplaces contains carbon monoxide, methane, acrolein, benzene, tolulene, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, lead ... the whole scare mongering list you have been given for tobacco smoke. In addition, the EPA estimates that the lifetime cancer risk from wood smoke (I assume because wood is a dense solid) is twelve times greater than that from an equal volume of second hand tobacco smoke (www.burningissues.org).
If there is no safe level of second hand tobacco smoke, then there is likewise no safe level of smoke from your fireplaces, your campfires, your candles, your incense burners, because it is all organic smoke and contains the same array of toxic compounds and carcinogens. Do your little girls keel over dead from toasting marshmallows?
Why do you love the scent of smoke from a neighbor's fireplace in winter, yet complain that aromatic tobacco smoke stinks? Because you have been carefully taught. With tax funded propaganda, Californians could be taught to hate butterflies.

J. Sidney Sullivan
La Mesa, CA

Sierra Madre Can Handle This Smoking Issue Without Having to Legislate It

With a Little Consideration and Civility Toward Each Other and Respect for Each Other's Rights, Sierra Madre Can Handle This Smoking Issue Without Having to Legislate It
First, let me say that I’m writing this editorial as a 15-year resident of Sierra Madre and publisher of SierraMadreNews.Net. The opinions you will read here are my opinions, and they are not intended to be representative of the Chamber of Commerce, its Board of Directors, or its members. Obviously, as president of the Chamber, I am going to be in contact with Chamber members and the Board, and their comments and opinions and my discussions with them may shape my opinions. But what you are reading here is not written on behalf of the Chamber, nor does it represent a position being taken by the Chamber. The Chamber has not taken a position on this issue, despite what you may read elsewhere. The Chamber has polled downtown businesses that would be affected, and will present a report to the City with its findings. Let me also state here that I am a non-smoker, though a couple times a year on a special occasion I may enjoy a cigar in the evening, always outside.

When I first heard about the proposed smoking restrictions for outside dining areas in Sierra Madre, my first reaction was that as President of the Chamber, it is my job to bring customers into Sierra Madre businesses, not restrict them. I was flat out against it. However, I’m only one person in an organization with well over one hundred members, and I recognized that my opinion was my opinion only, and that more input was needed. I did, however, join the Facebook group “Stop the Sierra Madre Smoking Ban.”

I was contacted by City Manager Elaine Aguilar to see if the Chamber could help facilitate a meeting with restaurant owners that would be affected by the restrictions so that their input could be solicited and made a part of the staff report to the City Council. I contacted every restaurant business, most by e-mail, and some by phone, leaving messages for a couple of them that weren’t in when I called.

Over the next couple days, I did a little research, and discovered there are reports out there that state that some city’s that had enacted bans had not reflected a decrease in business due to the ban. There are, I believe, obvious health issues involved here, as well, though I’ll discuss that a little later. And I also was considering the possibility that businesses might see an increase in non-smoking customers that have stayed away when smoking was allowed, maybe enough to offset the smoking customers they might lose. So as I went into the meeting with the restaurant owners, I was definitely re-thinking my original reaction, and was not really sure as I entered the meeting whether I was for or against the restriction.

First of all, let’s agree on something, this is not a ban. It’s a restriction. It restricts the rights of smokers to enjoy a cigarette, pipe or cigar when they are in an outdoor dining area. Their right to smoke at indoor dining areas was taken away in the 1990s, I believe in 1994, by statewide legislation that left every restaurant business in the state on a level playing field. You couldn't go to any restaurant in the state and smoke indoors. This local ordinance, however, puts the Sierra Madre restaurant industry in a position where it could lose customers to other local cities that don't have similar restrictions. I have to wonder if the restaurant owners wouldn't be within their rights, if the ordinance is approved, to file a class action lawsuit on the basis of discrimination against their particular industry. They might find support from restaurant associations with deeper pockets, and then the City would find itself in the position of defending itself in an expensive lawsuit. Don't think the City can really afford that, so I'm not sure if Council members vote for this that they are truly considering what's in the best interests of the City.

The proposed city ordinance also, however, and I think this is somewhat overlooked, restricts the rights of a business/property owner to determine what he/she will and will not allow to happen on their own property, in their own business. And in some cases, that is done without representation. Some business/property owners that will be affected by this ordinance do not live in town, so they do not even have the option of voting for or against the Council representatives that are proposing to enact this law.

According to City Manager Aguilar, members of the City Council received about a dozen complaints during the holidays regarding smoking in the downtown dining areas. Most of the complaints were from parents that didn’t like exposing their children to the smoke in the dining areas. Mayor Zimmerman took the complaints to heart, and agendized the issue for the City Council to consider. It is my understanding that at that Council meeting, about a dozen people spoke on the issue, with a ratio of about three to one opposing the restriction. One thing that amazes me about this whole thing, is that it all started because of about a dozen letters. We are a town with a population of around eleven thousand people. We have thousands of people that visit our downtown district on a monthly basis. All of these thousands of people are going to have to have their behavior legislated because of a dozen complaints? And, the City possibly becoming involved in expensive litigation over a dozen complaints? And it’s quite possible that some of those complaints came from the same people complaining more than once.

Despite the public comment opposing the restrictions, Council voted 4 – 0 to continue the discussion, and requested a draft ordinance be brought back at the March 10th meeting (since postponed till the meeting of the 24th of March), with instructions to solicit input from the business owners that would be affected. Thus, the Chamber was contacted and the meeting with restaurant owners was arranged.

But the fact of the matter is that it is not just the restaurant owners that will be affected by the restrictions, all the downtown businesses will be. If smokers are prohibited from lighting up in the outside dining areas, it’s not going to stop them from smoking. It’s just going to change where they can do it. We’re not eliminating the health issue, just moving it next door. Dining areas that now have ashtrays will no longer have them. So a smoker will get up from the dining area, move next door or down the street, in front of a retail establishment, enjoy their cigarette, and then have no place to put it out, except the sidewalk or the street. So now, the non-restaurant businesses, particularly those closest to restaurants with outside dining, are going to find that their customers are going to have to walk through the smokers to get into their establishments (which already happens, to some extent, as business employees that smoke are required to go outside to light up). And if you figure that some smokers will go to the left of the dining area, and some will go the right, you now have two businesses with folks standing and smoking on the sidewalk that are being effected, not just the one dining establishment. And as I said, our sidewalks and streets will now be littered with all the cigarette butts that are now being put out in ashtrays. I have been told by City staff that the cost of cleaning up this litter can be quite prohibitive, so that’s another thing to consider. The City is broke, and now we are going to increase its maintenance expenses during an economic downturn?

Arcadia and Monrovia do not have smoking bans, despite, due to higher populations and busier business districts, far more smokers than Sierra Madre has. Is our business district, in this poor economy, healthy enough to take the financial hit it will almost undoubtedly take if a significant portion of its already limited customer base decides that we’ve legislated them to a point where they’d rather do business in other cities?

As to the health issue, when the state law was passed banning indoor smoking, it was done to protect folks (restaurant workers in particular) who worked indoors where a procession of people smoked and the workers were exposed to constant inhalation of carcinogens. I am not aware of any studies that state that people sitting at tables that are usually several feet from each other at occasional visits to places where smoking is allowed outdoors have suffered health-wise for having done so. Doesn’t mean they aren’t out there, just means I haven’t seen them. But the fact of the matter is, people smoke in front of other businesses, too, and that will happen even more so if a dining area restriction goes into effect. So what’s next, in a year, people unhappy about the increased smoking outside non-dining areas complain, and a new ordinance is proposed to ban smoking inside or out in the entire downtown area? And why stop there? Parents strolling their children through their neighborhood certainly pass neighbors in their yard enjoying a cigarette, or working in their garden, the smoke wafting onto the sidewalk, right at stroller level. I spoke a couple days ago with a woman who told me that her neighbor exits his house when he wants a smoke, and goes into his driveway. Very considerate of his family. Unfortunately, his driveway is right next to her bedroom window, and she is very sensitive to smoke. Will we ban smoking outdoors in residential neighborhoods? If we do, parents that currently go outside to smoke to protect their children’s lungs will be forced back inside to conform to the law.

I saw somewhere that 700 U.S. communities have enacted outdoor smoking bans or restrictions, most of them cities with much higher populations. How many tens of thousands of cities are there in this country? Seven hundred is a very small percentage. Why does Sierra Madre, a “friendly” little village, need to follow the path of the big cities? Do we want to be Pasadena? Aren’t we proud of our unique small-town status? Aren’t we “friendly” enough to be considerate of others without actually enacting a law to legislate this?

Who’s going to enforce this law? What if someone lights up downtown, and the police are called? They hurry on down to the place where it’s happening, but by then the cigarette has been put out. What if four people do it at the same time, in different establishments? Are our police going to be run ragged trying to enforce the smoking law, most times a futile effort?

While I am sensitive to the concerns of those with health issues, and parents who are trying to protect their children, I just can’t get behind the proposed restrictions. People complained about shock jocks and their crass behavior on the radio, and the argument was, well, change the station, or you have an on/off switch. Non-smokers can change the station or on/off switches (eat indoors, or go to restaurants that have non-smoking sections in their outdoor dining area). Most, though admittedly not all, smokers are considerate of non-smokers and will be happy to move away while smoking, or put it out until you’ve left, if they are asked politely.

Now that the issue has been raised, I think restaurant owners are more sensitive about it, and some will most likely, if their outdoor dining area is large enough, offer non-smoking sections. Some that have smaller outdoor dining areas may ban smoking voluntarily, though since their dining areas are often not on their property (they are on public right of way sidewalks) they can’t always enforce it. But I think that with a little voluntary effort on the part of restaurant owners, and some consideration and civility toward one another, by both smokers and non-smokers, of the other’s rights (they both have them, after all), it should be possible to live and let live, as has been Sierra Madre’s behavior for more than one hundred years, without legislating our neighbors’ and friends’ behavior.

Update on Officer Involved Shooting

I spoke this morning with the press department of the LA Sheriff's Dept. regarding the Officer Involved Shooting of Jan. 30th. They again read me the same press release that was issued the day of the shooting. I pointed out that this is five weeks later, and I'm still hearing the same thing I heard the day of the shooting. I was again told that maybe I could get more information from the investigating officers in the homicide division. For clarification, there was no homicide, nobody died, but apparently the homicide division is doing the investigation. The person that answered the phone told me that Det. Aguilera (one of the three officers whose name is listed on the press release as investigating the case) was in, and transferred me. I left a voice mail, about 8:30am. I think it was probably obvious I wasn't happy about having left four voice mail messages over the course of a month without a single return call.

I left a message for Chief Diaz, who I am sure is still not allowed to speak about it until the investigation is closed, but I asked her to please try and get the Sheriff's Dept. to return my call.

I also spoke with City Manager Elaine Aguilar, who told me that she understands the investigation is not complete, and she told me she would contact the Sheriff's Dept. herself to get, at the very least, an estimate of how long until the investigation is complete, and a report issued. I will say this: The day of the shooting, I spoke with a person who seemed to have some knowledge of the situation. This person told me the name of the officer involved. That name has not been released publicly, and I have no official confirmation on the officer's identity, so I'm not publishing it, but I do know that I saw that officer, in uniform, a couple days after the incident. He was walking on the sidewalk in front of the PD, so I have no way of knowing if he was on duty or not.

Also, for the reader who expressed concern about the City's financial status if the investigation reveals that the officer was in the wrong and the City loses a lawsuit with damages (in light of the City being self-insured). In discussing this with City Manager Aguilar, she said that the City is not self-insured, it's part of a pooled insurance program where Cities try to save money by working together. "The city gets their liability protection coverage through the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority... The equivalent of a deductible would be $30,000, so the City would pay the first $30,000 on a claim, and then everything above that amount, there's a combination of pooling the losses with other cities so the losses are spread out among everyone in the Insurance Authority, and then there's also insurance, but the City's total liability coverage for a claim, we have $50 million in coverage, so we don't have to worry about going bankrupt if we're hit with a large liability claim." Bear in mind that neither I nor the City Manager have any information that would indicate the Police Officer in question did anything wrong, we're just attempting to answer a reader's "what if" question.

UPDATE MARCH 6TH
Since posting the above, I have received a voice mail message from the Chief informing me that she has contacted the Sheriff''s Dept. and asked them to contact me, and she left me the name of an investigator that I can attempt to contact. Chief Diaz has also confirmed that "The officer involved is on administrative leave pending the outcome of the internal investigation."

Channel nine will broadcast live from vine at twelve thirty ish.

City Downgrades to Green Flag Alert

The City of Sierra Madre has downgraded to a Green Flag Mud Alert for Sierra Madre residences in potential mud flow areas. The County of Los Angeles Public Works Department has declared a no phase mudflow forecast from the Santa Anita Fire burn area.
The City would like to thank the residents for their continued preparation and due diligence during this rainstorm.
Additional information on how to protect your home can be found on the City’s website, www.cityofsierramadre.com. Mud incident updates can be found at www.sierramadrepio.blogspot.com.

Status Change Early Sunday Evening

LACDPW has issued a Phase II watch for Sierra Madre, and the City has upgraded to Red Flag Alert Status. Both notices are posted at www.SierraMudre.Info. The City's emergency blog address is http://sierramadrepio.blogspot.com

National Weather Service Predicts Storm Delay, Says We Could Receive Up To 7 Inches of Rain

2/13/09 10:45AM - Pulled from National Weather Service website, emphasis mine Latest models have slowed down the next significant storm system that was due to affect the forecast by Sunday. However...the progression has slowed nearly 8 to 12 hours. Therefore the  much stronger...storm system will begin to move across the area by Sunday  afternoon to the north and through Ventura and Los Angeles counties by Sunday night and persist through Monday night. The threat of precipitation will continue through Tuesday. At this time...rain should begin across San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties late Sunday afternoon...then spread into Ventura and Los Angeles counties  Sunday night and Monday. Periods of moderate to locally heavy rainfall can be expected Sunday night and Monday...with the rain turning to showers Monday night and Tuesday. Initial rainfall estimates for this system range from 1 to 3 inches for coast and valley locations...with between 2 and 5 inches in the foothills and mountains. Due to strong southerly flow ahead of the frontal system...south-facing slopes could receive locally higher amounts to 7 inches.

This is me here...didn't I read recently that we should expect La Nina conditions, i.e., a dry winter? How does up to 7 inches in one storm get defined as part of a dry winter?

National Weather Service Predicts Heavy Rain This Weekend

Pulled from the National Weather Service website, late Saturday and Sunday are of particular concern:

ON FRIDAY...The first storm will move into the area with rain tapering off Friday night. Forecast mdls have begun to trend up the precip amounts with this storm as the front is forecast to hold together fairly well as it moves across the area. Current rainfall forecasts call for a half inch to an inch across the coasts and valleys with 1 TO 2 INCHES IN THE MOUNTAINS. There is a little burst of south winds with the front and this could cause locally higher amounts over the Santa Ynez mtns and the western coastal slopes of Ventura County. Snow levels will be quite low between 4000 and 5000 feet.

SATURDAY will be a transition day with SCATTERED SHOWERS but little in the way of additional rain or snow.

A second and stronger storm is expected for LATE SATURDAY NIGHT AND SUNDAY. This storm has the potential to bring significant rain to the area, especially south of Pt. Conception. Early estimates call for 1 to 3 inches of rain coast and valleys and 2 TO 5 INCHES MOUNTAINS, WITH LOCALLY HIGHER AMOUNTS ON THE USUAL FAVORED SOUTH FACING SLOPES. Snow levels will range from 4000 to 5000 feet.

Beyond Sunday the models diverge quickly. Both show a chance of rain Monday and Tuesday but with not a great deal of rainfall. The gfs mdl continues to show another significant storm either Wed or Thursday...but the European mdl now is forecasting a dry high pressure system. Will have to take a wait and see attitude with this extended time period.

CELL PHONE UPDATE City extended yellow flag alert at nine this morning

Wistaria Festival Page Updated, Tickets Now Available Online

Sierra Madre News Net's Wistaria Festival page has now been updated with a video that features nearly 100 photos from the 2007 Festival (I was working in the park all day in 2008, so I have very few photos from last year. But that's okay, the vine was in better shape in 2007 than it was last year, so the pictures are better). The video soundtrack is audio I pulled from a video I shot of Horses on Astroturf performing "Love Me, Love Me, Not Fade Away/Magic Bus" in the park in 2008 (don't have many pictures, but since I was in the park by the bandshell, I shot more music videos than usual). Coincidentally, (okay, it was planned, not coincidental) the Sierra Madre Chamber of Commerce website has also been updated with an ordering system for shuttle tickets, using PayPal/Major Credit Cards.

This year's event is scheduled for March 15, 2009. This year's Wistaria Committee (yes, it's all volunteer, nobody hired except the bus drivers) encourages you to get your tickets early, because there's going to be a bunch of radio advertising starting up soon that will (hopefully) lead to beaucoup ticket sales to the targeted audience in the Inland Empire/San Gabriel Valley. KOLA 99 will be doing a remote broadcast from the Wistaria Festival for two hours that day, and nearly five dozen commercials will be broadcast beginning later this month.

So get your tickets while you can. There's a link to the Chamber's website and the ticket sales page on the News Net's Wistaria page, www.SierraMadreWistariaFestival.com. Be sure to watch the video, you never know - your picture might be in it!

LACDPW Issues Phase I Watch, City Goes on Yellow Alert

At 4:52pm, I received notice that LACDPW had issued a Phase 1 watch, and at 5:34pm, I was notified that the City has upgraded to a Yellow Flag Alert status. Both notices have now been posted at www.SierraMudre.Info.

City Upgrades to Green Flag Alert Status

Posted at SierraMudre.Info:
The National Weather Service has posted an 80% chance of rain for Wednesday, with enough precipitation to produce debris flows. Thus, the City of Sierra Madre has issued a Green Flag Alert. For more information please visit www.cityofsierramadre.com.

Reaction from local legislators re: State of the State

From Assemblyman Anthony Adams: Assemblyman Anthony Adams (R-Hesperia) offered the following comments in response to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's annual State of the State address, which he delivered to a joint session of the Legislature on January 15, 2009.
''There is no doubt the challenges before us are great. But great challenges provide the opportunity for great success. Now is the time for us to invoke the spirit of America's ''Greatest Generation'' and unite behind the call of individual sacrifice for the good of the whole,'' said Adams.
Adams said that he shared the Governor's commitment to working across party lines to craft honest and realistic solutions to avert California's looming cash crisis and get the state back on track. He said he agreed with the Governor that everyone - including the Legislature - should be prepared to make the sacrifices required to solving our growing budget crisis.

From State Senator Bob Huff: Senator Bob Huff (R - Diamond Bar) released the following statement after hearing Governor Schwarzenegger’s 2009 State of the State address which was delivered to a joint session of the Senate and Assembly earlier today.
“I applaud the Governor’s petition to the legislature to produce a sound and balanced budget before addressing the many other issues that plague California,” stated Senator Huff. “Vital infrastructure projects have already been brought to a halt, and people up and down the state are concerned about whether or not they will be paid. California’s finances must be brought under control or the consequences will be devastating.”
Senator Huff continued, “2008 was a tough year. A weakened economy, a decline in the housing market, and a lack of the Legislature’s will to rein in government spending has wreaked havoc on the hardworking taxpayers of California. As we look to 2009, I am encouraged that the Governor’s top priority will be to restore the foundation of our state’s fiscal house, for we are hamstrung by a budget crisis that dwarfs all other issues.”
“I remain committed to working with the Governor and my colleagues across the aisle to produce a fiscally responsible budget. We must strive to keep more money in the pockets of hard-working Californians and enact real budget reforms to keep this boom/bust cycle from happening again,” said Senator Huff.
“Looking beyond 2009, California lawmakers must prioritize spending and make each taxpayer dollar work to benefit California – that is how government continues to meet the needs of its citizens during an economic downturn. For this reason, I have authored Senate Bill 8, which requires state departments to utilize a performance-based budgeting program. California must institute long-term budget reform. We must ensure that every taxpayer dollar is being used resourcefully and efficiently,” concluded Senator Huff. “There is no alternative.”

From Supervisor Michael Antonovich: Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich issued the following response to Governor Schwarzenegger’s State of the State speech today:

“The crisis our state faces in Sacramento highlights the need for structural reform that includes a 2-year budget, a part-time legislature, an end to legislation that costs more to pass than the recipient receives – as well as an end to term limits.

A 2-year budget provides local government a consistent funding stream for it to prepare its own financial agenda for public safety, schools, libraries and parks. In addition, a part-time legislature would enable citizen lawmakers to bring valuable professional experience to the legislative process. Term limits have created instability to the process and an inexperienced legislature that is unable to govern effectively.

Also, it makes no sense for the State Legislature to spend $500,000 just to pass a bill allocating $100,000 for a library or municipal program when local government could use the entire $500,000 and pay directly for these types of services.”

DREAD ZEPPELIN to Perform to Raise Money for Sierra Madre School

Dread Zeppelin will appear at the Sierra Madre School Auditorium in the First Annual Family Concert on Friday, Feb. 6th at 7pm. There will also be special appearances by The Late Bloomers and DC3. Funds generated will benefit the Sierra Madre School Annual Fund. For more complete information, click here to view the flyer.

Thomas Friedman Suggests Educator Tax Cuts

In Sunday's NY Times, columnist Thomas Friedman discusses the need for America to use part of the economic stimulus to change the current education system. Unlike California, where the latest plan is to cut five days out of the school year to save money, Friedman argues that money should be invested in education, so that more Americans will be prepared to create the innovations that will lead to a re-birth of American leadership. He also suggests that we should try to keep some of the foreign born students here in America, rather than educating them and then sending them home with their creative ideas.

"Over the next couple of years, two very big countries, America and China, will give birth to something very important. They’re each going to give birth to close to $1 trillion worth of economic stimulus — in the form of tax cuts, infrastructure, highways, mass transit and new energy systems. But a lot is riding on these two babies. If China and America each give birth to a pig — a big, energy-devouring, climate-spoiling stimulus hog — our kids are done for. It will be the burden of their lifetimes. If they each give birth to a gazelle — a lean, energy-efficient and innovation-friendly stimulus — it will be the opportunity of their lifetimes.

So here’s hoping that our new administration and Congress will be guided in shaping the stimulus by reading John Maynard Keynes in one hand — to get as much money injected as quickly as possible — and by reading “Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future” with the other.

“Gathering Storm” was the outstanding 2005 report produced by our National Academies on how to keep America competitive by vastly improving math and science education, investing in long-term research, recruiting top students from abroad and making U.S. laws the most conducive in the world for innovation.

You see, even before the current financial crisis, we were already in a deep competitive hole — a long period in which too many people were making money from money, or money from flipping houses or hamburgers, and too few people were making money by making new stuff, with hard-earned science, math, biology and engineering skills.

Snip.

One of the smartest stimulus moves we could make would be to eliminate federal income taxes on all public schoolteachers so more talented people would choose these careers. I’d also double the salaries of all highly qualified math and science teachers, staple green cards to the diplomas of foreign students who graduate from any U.S. university in math or science — instead of subsidizing their educations and then sending them home — and offer full scholarships to needy students who want to go to a public university or community college for the next four years."

Right now I'm about halfway through Friedman's "Hot, Flat and Crowded." Frankly, I think the man has some darn good ideas....

Congratulations to SMRFA and Float Designer Charles Meier on Four Award Winning Years!!

The Sierra Madre Rose Float Association and float designer Charles Meier were again awarded the Lathrop K. Leishman Award for Most Beautiful Non-Commercial Float. This is the fourth year in a row that the Sierra Madre float has been a winner. In 2008, "Valentine's Day" won the Princess' Trophy. In 2007, "Our Wonderful Wistaria" also won the Lathrop K. Leishman Award. In 2006, "Wonder of Reading" took home the Founder's Banner Trophy. All four floats were designed by Charles Meier. I interviewed Meier last January shortly after the third award, you can read that interview here. In January 2008, we ran the image above left as the front page on the now deceased SGV Weekly newspaper. If you click on that picture, you'll see a much larger version, with lots more detail. It is a 4mb image though, so it will take a minute to download. The image on the right is this year's float during its stopover at Kersting Court, click on it for a larger view, also. I'm heading down to the parade route to get some photos of the float during the parade, but I have more photos of last night's stopover already posted at www.SierraMadreNews.Net with more still to come.

In the third comment, a reader made a suggestoin that I'm sorry I didn't think of to post earlier, so I'll correct that now. SMRFA is always in need of donations, and if you are proud of the work they've done, and enjoyed seeing the float in the parade, become a part of it. Here's their application form and an address where you can send your donation:

Sierra Madre Rose Float Association
P.O. Box 603
Sierra Madre, CA 91025
Download the application form, and become a member

Please feel free to post your congratulatory messages for the SMRFA by clicking on the number of comments below this post. You do not need to sign up or register to post a comment.... A very big THANK YOU to all the donors, sponsors and volunteers who made Bollywood Dreams Sierra Madre's fourth winner in a row. Congratulations SMRFA, you've made us all very proud!!!