SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
September 3, 2010· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

September 3, 2010 – Daily Brief

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

This will be a very brief Brief, in honor of Labor Day:

  • Suspected drunk driver runs into back of Santa Clarita Transit bus as it picks up passenger WRB
  • Antonio Rodriguez, the man convicted of beating, raping and killing his own 5 year old daughter in a Castaic bathroom in 2004, gets the death penalty KHTS, SIGNAL
  • US economy loses 54,000 jobs and unemployment rises to 9.6% in August LA TIMES
  • LA County food pantries struggling to keep up with demand TIMES
  • CLWA and the Chamber want a well-connected SCVer to apply for the open spots on the Regional Water Quality Control Board, but, BJ Atkins notes, it’s not likely unless Meg gets elected SIGNAL
  • Did you know the old Piru mansion is for sale? That’s right the 11,500 sq. ft., 6 bed, 7.5 bath Piru mansion that was once home to the Newhalls, burnt down in the 1980s and was rebuilt, can be your’s for a cool $3.4 million. I’m starting a fund to make this the future SCVTalk HQ KELLAR-DAVIS LISTING, HISTORY
  • LA City Councilman wants MTA to massively expand light rail and subway lines in LA County, including the Red Line, which he’d like to expand up Highway 170 and the 5 all the way to Santa Clarita. Don’t hold your breath on that one DAILY NEWS
  • Awesome story about how a boxing instructor at the Newhall Community Center twice chased down a burglar who had ransacked and stole items from his church SIGNAL
  • There’s a new communications/community liaison person for the Hart District. SIGNAL
  • Traffic is expected to be very bad today, and the 5 Freeway at Templin Highway is closed down to 1 lane
  • Signal columnist doing four part series on library takeover. He says “clearly something was amiss to get voters this agitated.” The origin of the library takeover didn’t come from Santa Clarita voters, who were largely opposed or apathetic, it was conceived and hatched from within City Hall for reasons that are still opaque SIGNAL

Have a great weekend! The Daily Brief will return Tuesday.

Comments (51)

  1. navigatorSeptember 3, 2010 at 7:56 am
    The Piru Mansion has been on the market a few times. The last time I heard it was going for around $2.2MM. With everyone’s property values going in the toilet it’s good to see that somebody can raise their price.
  2. Tim MyersSeptember 3, 2010 at 8:58 am
    Remember when Ruth Newhall was still alive and they “sold” the mansion to a weather lady and her golf pro husband? It turned out to be a lease option and Ruth clawed it back when one of the many members of extensive Newhall clan reportedly saw the house used as a set for a softcore Cinemax porn film!
  3. navigatorSeptember 3, 2010 at 9:03 am
    Yep, that couple thought they were going to make a killling renting the place out but it never really panned out. I always thought they “lost their shirts” on the deal but I guess they were taking them off voluntarily.
  4. Tim MyersSeptember 3, 2010 at 9:01 am
    I was wondering when you were going to give props to George Lara for acting as a one man vigilante committee and rescuing not only our Lutheran laptops but also our extra special Lutheran ice cream sandwiches. There is also a story going around the congregation that when George chased down the miscreant a second time he was knocking on someone’s door in the Singing Hills neighborhood begging them to call the police because someone was after him.
  5. Tim MyersSeptember 3, 2010 at 9:06 am
    On the Library Column: I know Andy. He is extremely active with the homeless shelter, but it looks like he is acting as an instrument for the City in this series, based on his assertion of “service problems based on public testimony.” I don’t know when those occurred.
  6. Coastal SageSeptember 3, 2010 at 8:48 pm
    Exactly my view Tim.
  7. Saugus SplasherSeptember 3, 2010 at 9:13 am
    Huh? The LA County Library ranks 68th out of 75 comparable library systems?? HAH!! Rather than folks saying “Save our LA County Libraries” they should have said “Save us from our LA County Libraries!” I’m surprised (actually, really, honestly, I’m not at all surprised) that Tim Myers, with his self proclaimed (and self congratulatory) reliance on “numerical analysis” (his way of saying, at every opportunity, that he’s the “smartest guy on the blog”), didn’t reference this scoring earlier, particularly since it’s based on 15 (15!!) objective metrics of service and usage (at least 14 metrics more than Tim uses to update his frequently changing, and rarely accurate, daily predictions on who will win elections and recounts). Apparently Tim’s reliance on “numerical analysis” was subordinated on this issue, just as was his “Midwestern stoicism.” Not to worry, though, even when gripped by emotion Tim still has his sarcasm.
  8. Tim MyersSeptember 3, 2010 at 9:38 am
    SS: Yes, the County library system sucked so hard which is why the Valencia patrons checked out 5 to 10 thousand items PER MONTH from the broader system. Also, Andy says he does not have the “time” to use the County library so I guess he has not figured out this newfangled invention called the internet that people can use 24 hours a day. Perhaps Darren Hernandez at his next job (he WILL be thrown under the bus in the next 6 to 12 months as this moves forward) will tell co-workers it is a mistake to manufacture an issue for the specific purpose of moving money to a pet project. I won’t back down from that prediction.
  9. Coastal SageSeptember 3, 2010 at 10:36 pm
    Always follow the money.
  10. IHeartSCVSeptember 3, 2010 at 10:38 am
    Saugus Splasher, the “Hennen’s American Public Library Ratings Index” is, in a word, crap. 1. One guy (Thomas Hennen, who specializes in rural libraries) made up the rating system and runs the numbers. That’s it–one guy. 2. Many of his “15 objective metrics” are so highly correlated that his statistics don’t mean much. For example, circulation per hour, visits per hour, and circulations per visit are all closely, linearly correlated based on his numbers. That means he’s not measuring three independent metrics of quality. Rather, he’s measuring the same basic quantity (“hourly activity”) three different ways. He’s a librarian trying to do the work of a statistician–he should have consulted with one. 3. He doesn’t provide any measurements about access to materials from other libraries, the main perk of the LA County Library System. Nor does he quantify how many computers are available, how many DVDs, the expertise of staff, or many other things that matter to Claritans. The HAPLR Index is just some guy’s idea posted on the internet. And worse yet, the rating for the LA County system is based on information from only one branch–Downey. So I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that it was even consulted for the opinion piece.
  11. Tim MyersSeptember 3, 2010 at 10:52 am
    SS (and all other blind apologists for the City): When IHeart and I agree on something it is time to raise the white flag of surrender.
  12. MikeSeptember 3, 2010 at 11:46 am
    Saugus Splasher is one of the sharpest posters in SCVtalk land, who also happens to be right a good 85% of the time, if not more. To see him get pwnd so epically, I can only compare it to Ali-Liston.
  13. John AdamsSeptember 4, 2010 at 9:39 am
    From the SS response. Looks like he just pwned you like Tyson over M. Spinks (that one too was over before it started) I always love the liberal argument. Hey! that’s not what I believe so you are WRONG! LOL
  14. Tim MyersSeptember 3, 2010 at 12:51 pm
    SS: I mourn Darren Hernandez’s pending dismissal because he has done a competent job in managing the City’s finances. (He will be snapped up by another municipality quickly.) I hold the elected officials accountable since they have set him up to be the scapegoat when this goes south. Also, I think you need to look up the word “stoic.”
  15. Saugus SplasherSeptember 3, 2010 at 12:37 pm
    1. A respected member of our community, who to this point has remained silent on this issue, shares his personal experiences and objective observations; immediately he is dismissed as “acting as an instrument for the City.” How sad it is for someone to be vilified in such a manner for simply expressing an opinion different than some of yours. Then again, maybe everyone writing on the other side of the issue is “acting as an instrument for the County Library….” 2. Tim, perhaps you should also predict/wish Darren Hernandez gets cancer within the next 6 to 12 months. You are limiting yourself by simply predicting/dreaming he will be rendered unemployed even before the City takes over the libraries. So much for Midwestern stoicism…. 3. It’s a lame arguement to say 15 metrics is insufficient and there should have been 16 or 17 or 18. And, you are wrong when you say HAPLR doesn’t measure access to materials from other libraries, the main (only?) perk of the LA County Library System. Four of the metrics deal with expenditures or holdings related to materials, volumes and periodicals. The data crunched in HAPLR includes the systemwide statistics for each library system analyzed, not just a single branch of those large systems. 4. Yes, Thomas Hennen is just “one guy” posting his research and rankings on the Internet. And you know what? Each one of us posting on SCVTalk is just “one guy/gal.” One of these days one of us might actually post something of value! 5. It’s wrong to say the LA County Library data used in HAPLR includes only the info for their branch in Downey. Why? Because the LA County Library DOESN’T have a branch in Downey! The City of Downey pulled out of the LA County Library system many years ago and has a independent City public library, even though Downey is where the LA County Library is headquartered!! Have a great weekend everyone! Use sunscreen!
  16. IHeartSCVSeptember 3, 2010 at 12:57 pm
    Saugus Splasher, I was off on the Downey thing. But my other points still stand. His metrics and statistics are crap. Again, no measure of database availability; no measure of librarian eduction/expertise; no measure of DVD, book-on-tape, etc. availability; no measure of computer availability; no measure of hours open; and most importantly, no measure of community satisfaction. He basically just measures three things in redundant ways: how many books, how many people, how much money. That’s not all a library is.
  17. Berta González-HarperSeptember 3, 2010 at 1:23 pm
    @Saugus Splasher, I PREDICT that Tim Meyer’s predictions will once again prove to be incorrect. Both Darren Hernández and the City of Santa Clarita Library System will thrive in the coming years and provide added benefits for area residents. This crowd vilifies pretty much anyone who agrees with City Council, Staff, or policies. They usually cannot win an argument with the facts so resort to name calling and conspiracy theories. Those of us, who stray from the herd, are not very popular on this site. Sigh! In less than a year, we will all know which faction got it right… Have a safe and happy holiday weekend all!
  18. CCSeptember 3, 2010 at 10:13 am
    Get a Kindle.
  19. Mike MSeptember 3, 2010 at 10:04 pm
    I’m actually planning to, although it has more to do with my inability to return books on time than to any dissatisfaction with either the current or future library system. I loved the public library growing up, and am already introducing my children to the joys of hanging out in between stacks of books and reading for hours
  20. NielSeptember 3, 2010 at 11:13 am
    The 5 Freeway will be down BY one lane (to three), not down TO one lane. Big difference.
  21. David GaunySeptember 3, 2010 at 11:19 am
    Thanks for the plug on the Piru Mansion, Jeff. This is an amazing property with a storied past. The listing price increase reflects the inclusion of the “Warring House,” a separate parcel with a 3BR/3.5BA stone and slate guest cottage – another very beautiful home. The rich heritage of this property is well-known to many in Santa Clarita (I noticed you included it in the SCVTalk banner some time ago). Although we are actively marketing it to producers and studio types in the L.A. area, I would love to sell this to a local interest and would welcome a bidding war between SCVTalk, WRB, and SCV Mom’s blog. Clearly, this is a must-have for any member of the “40 Under 40″ club and its sized just right for your growing staff at SCVTalk! Information on this property can be found at the mansion website http://www.pirumansion.com or at the top of my agent page: http://www.davidgauny.com
  22. Berta González-HarperSeptember 3, 2010 at 11:40 am
    @Jeff, point of clarification: scumbag Antonio Rodríguez did not rape and murder HIS daughter. He raped, tortured, brutalized and murdered his girlfriend’s daughter. The child’s mother is also charged with murder and awaiting trial. This poor little girl never had a chance on this earth either way. I believe she is in a better place, dancing with the angels now.
  23. navigatorSeptember 3, 2010 at 11:48 am
    Sitting on death row for years or even enduring the death penalty is too good for these two. Turn em both over to the prison population and turn your back for a few minutes.
  24. Berta González-HarperSeptember 3, 2010 at 12:04 pm
    @Navigator, biblical justice would work. Turn these deviants over to the other members of the family for justice. The paternal grandmother who raised these kids until their “mother” and her boyfriend reclaimed them, no doubt for the welfare check, would be a good candidate to mete out justice. If someone treated my grandkids or great grand kids like that, mercy would not enter into the conversation. They would pray for a swift death.
  25. GangFangSeptember 6, 2010 at 7:20 am
    Wow, Berta is a chest puffy bad ass. At least on blogs, deep in the internet, and far from the bad guys.
  26. Berta González-HarperSeptember 6, 2010 at 9:11 am
    @GangFang, “…Berta is … and far from the bad guys.” YOU FOUND ME. I am still waiting to “hand you” what you have earned.
  27. GangFangSeptember 6, 2010 at 1:06 pm
    YAY! Will it be gift wrapped in fear scented paper?
  28. Berta González-HarperSeptember 6, 2010 at 1:15 pm
    @GangFang, nope it will be “just desserts”.
  29. GangFangSeptember 6, 2010 at 10:19 pm
    You missed your chance last week as we stood in line together! PS – I’m gonna start charging you for giving you a purpose while on your computer.
  30. Berta González-HarperSeptember 7, 2010 at 10:35 am
    @GangFang, well I guess that is the advantage of being a coward and posting anonymously. You know who I am since I do not slither out from under a rock.
  31. GangFangSeptember 7, 2010 at 7:31 pm
    I don’t need a beotch like you in my orbit, thanks.I’ll keep slitherin away from you and yer run on boredom.
  32. SFC PerezSeptember 3, 2010 at 2:19 pm
    The reality of receiving a death sentence in California means you are put in prison cell by yourself with a TV and many other amenities for the rest of your life. As opposed to receiving a life sentence where you have to survive in general population and share a cell and toilet. Put the child rapist/murderer in general population for a few days and see how long he survives.
  33. navigatorSeptember 3, 2010 at 2:24 pm
    REST MY CASE!
  34. David GaunySeptember 3, 2010 at 2:17 pm
    Thanks for the plug on the Piru Mansion, Jeff. This is an amazing property with a storied past. The listing price increase reflects the inclusion of the “Warring House,” a separate parcel with a 3BR/3.5BA stone and slate guest cottage – another very beautiful home. The rich heritage of this property is well-known to many in Santa Clarita (I noticed you included it in the SCVTalk banner some time ago) but we are also actively marketing it to producers and studio types in the L.A. area. I would love to sell this to a local interest and would welcome a bidding war between SCVTalk, WRB, and the SCV Mom’s blog. This is a must-have for any member of the “40 Under 40″ club and it’s sized just right for the growing team at SCVTalk! Information on this property can be found at the mansion website http://www.pirumansion.com or at the top of my agent page: http://www.davidgauny.com .
  35. Bill ReynoldsSeptember 3, 2010 at 3:18 pm
    Good luck selling it to scvtalk… they can barely afford their measley little rundown hi-density apartment on the wrong side of Newhall’s train tracks. Hahahahaha!
  36. Street KnowledgeSeptember 3, 2010 at 4:01 pm
    The way you afford a house is to sue your employer for a boatload, retire early and make shit videos for youtube.
  37. scvtruthsquadSeptember 7, 2010 at 6:10 am
    I always wondered how he was able to afford that big house in the Summit and that big car … tell us more
  38. navigatorSeptember 3, 2010 at 3:18 pm
    I have always loved that house and the grounds right down to Scotty’s project basement. Ruth had some wonderful furniture in that house. If I had 3 mil I’d buy it. Unfortunately I didn’t have 2 mil when the price was lower either.
  39. JustPassingThroughSeptember 3, 2010 at 4:02 pm
    Even if you take the HAPLR scores as fully authoritative, LSSI’s marks are nothing to brag about. And they don’t have a single entry in the 500K+ population category. LA County serves 3,673,313 while Riverside County, their biggest client, serves only 291,398. You can do a head-to-head comparison: LA County spends 10.3% of its budget on materials; Riverside (LSSI) spends only 5.9% (hellooooo profits!!!) LA County also offers more periodicals per capita and more volumes available per capita. Moving on to LSSI’s other libraries (most of which are in the 10K-50K population range), they are primarily ranked in the BOTTOM HALF of their population group. Even their two highest-ranked libraries score a 62.3% (Millington Public in TN) and 65.7% (Lucius E. and Elsie C. Burch Jr. Library in Collierville TN.) My gradebook says a score in the 60s equals a nice fat “D.” They also have several libraries in the BOTTOM 20% of their population groups so let’s not go patting the Council on the back juuuuuuust yet.
  40. Bill ReynoldsSeptember 3, 2010 at 9:12 pm
    StreetKnowledge has no knowledge… makin’ up shit – what an asshole!
  41. Mike MSeptember 3, 2010 at 10:08 pm
    because lord knows showing up to talk shit on somebody else’s blog makes you the smart one, right?
  42. Bill ReynoldsSeptember 4, 2010 at 4:17 am
    Mike M, I had no idea you were so religious. Wow…
  43. Coastal SageSeptember 3, 2010 at 10:12 pm
    A little history on the City of Santa Clarita’s “right” to withdraw from the County Library System extracted from the California Legislative Counsel’s website: In 1996, the California Legislature passed and the Governor signed Senate Bill 1998, which established the first version of Education Code Section 19116 (link below), ultimately creating a seemingly fair economic basis for Los Angeles County cities to leave the Los Angeles County Library System. The law did not apply to any other county. The law was amended in 1997, to allow cities in Riverside County to leave the Riverside County Library System, which the legislative history of Section 19116 says was at that time run by “a private contractor”. The Legislative History doesn’t say WHO that private contractor was, but here’s the bill’s final “Senate Bill Analysis” written by the 1997 California Senate staff: “For the past few years, participants in the Riverside County free library system have been concerned about a lack of resources, facilities, and local control over nearby libraries. In 1996, several cities tried to withdraw from the free library system, but the County did not want to transfer any of the system’s property tax revenues. In response to participants’ concerns, the County contracted with a private firm to run the library system. The new contract takes effect in July. Despite the new contract, some cities want to withdraw from the Riverside County Free Library system under the same conditions that the Legislature provided for Los Angeles. This bill allows cities and library districts in Riverside County to withdraw from the County free library system under the existing statutory procedures applicable to Los Angeles County.” That little tidbit, that Riverside County could not make its local cities happy by canning the old County employee library administration, and hiring the private contractor, is interesting in light of Santa Clarita’s decision to hire a private library contractor. The Riverside cities were apparently so unhappy, they had to go to the Legislature for help, ostensibly because on a cost benefit basis, it was profitable for Riverside County to run its libraries with a private contractor, and Riverside County did not want to give up its net library related tax revenues to its cities. As to the prior year’s legislation, to allow cities to break free of the L.A. County Library System, the final Assembly Floor Report, written by the Assembly staff in 1996, summarizing the economics of the “new” Education Code Section 19116, enacted in 1996 as SB 19116, gives today’s Santa Claritans a puzzling set of money proportions to consider: “BACKGROUND: Before Proposition 13, a county could levy a separate property tax rate to support its library system. A city could join the county library system by notifying the county board of supervisors, and the county would extend the property tax rate to that city. If a city wanted to withdraw from the county library system, it would notify the county and cease to levy the property tax rate for the library within the city. Proposition 13 eliminated these separate property tax rates and limited the property tax to 1%. AB 8 (Greene), Chapter 282, Statutes of 1979, established a method for allocating the 1% property tax revenues to local agencies based on their historical shares. Although they were not separate institutions, county free libraries were treated as if they were special districts because they had their own property tax rates before Proposition 13. The county free libraries received shares of the property tax revenues and they could receive money from the Special District Augmentation Fund. At this time, a city or library district can withdraw from a county free library system by negotiating with the county over the amount of revenues, if any, it will receive from the county library system. If an agreement is not reached, the withdrawal cannot occur. The Los Angeles County library system has $28 million of property tax revenues to support a system that is estimated to cost approximately $55 million to operate in the coming year. That budget supports 88 outlets, which include three bookmobiles, to serve 52 cities. Hours of operation vary from a minimum of four days/ 28 hours to a maximum of seven days/ 69 hours of service. The City of Claremont wants to withdraw from the county’s library system and use the estimated $253,000 generated by property within its city boundaries to provide its own library services. To withdraw from the county system with property tax revenues, the city needs the county’s approval. Though the city has never made a formal request to negotiate with the county, the county has a longstanding policy against transferring any property tax revenues to withdrawing city libraries. Because the county can veto any city proposal, the city wants to provide a statutory formula to govern city withdrawals from the county system. The author [Sen. Mountjoy] has stated he will not be taking any amendments to this bill, but is willing to work with interested parties on clean-up legislation.” I can’t remember what the County’s total library spending was in 2009, versus its total LIBRARY specific real property tax collections, but back in 1997 L.A. County spent $55 Million while receiving only $28 Million in LIBRARY real property tax collections. The fact that Claremont would only receive $253,000 while leaving the library system seems very peculiar and illogical. Obviously, there must have been some other economics or politics motivating Claremont’s expensive decision to bear walk away from a the County which provided DOUBLE in library funding when compared with the amount of Library real property taxes it collected. The 1996 bill involving L.A. County only was apparently hotly contested between the County and its supporters on one side, and the more yuppified small cities on the other side. Both sides had peculiar allies, from outside of L.A. County. In the1996 Assembly, the Yes votes were 37 and the No votes were 36 with 7 abstentions/absences and 2 seats vacant. In the 1997 Senate, the Yes votes were 22 and the No votes were 13, with 5 abstentions/absences. When looking at the Legislative History website, showing who voted “yes” and who voted “no”, I realized that my friend Deirdre H. H.’s mom took a dive and abstained, when I would have expected her to be a strong vote in favor of the County. Deirdre’s mom was a quiet, rational State Senator from a fairly poor area of Los Angeles County. So everything about Education Code Section 19116 is a bit off, including the vote. You can look at how the various legislators you know voted on this bill on that Legislative History website below. Back in 1996, those formally supporting the bill, in communications with the Assembly staff were: California Contract Cities Association, San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, Browning Ferris Industries, Independent Cities Association, Cities of Bellflower, Claremont, La Palma, Lakewood, San Ramon, Pomona, Agoura Hills, Diamond Bar, El Monte, Hermosa Beach, Laverne, Manhattan Beach, Pasadena, Poway, San Gabriel, West Covina, La Mirada, Arcadia, Bradbury, Temple City, Sierra Madre, Carson, San Dimas, Glendora, Santa Clarita and Malibu. Those communicating their opposition to the bill were: California Library Association, California State Association of Counties, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, Alameda County, California Professional Firefighters, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the City of Stockton. The Assembly Floor vote report indicates that various factions of the California League of Cities were both for and against the bill. You can look at the entire Legislative History of SB 1998, as enacted “against” the County of Los Angeles, at: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_1998&sess=9596&house=B&author=senator_mountjoy_%28coauthor:_senator_beverly%29
  44. Jay HarnSeptember 4, 2010 at 6:46 pm
    Seeing the Piru Mansion for sale brings back an awful lot of wonderful memories of Ruth and Scott. It sure was a great place when they were alive. I hope someone who cherishes the history buys it.
  45. Timothy MyersSeptember 4, 2010 at 8:39 pm
    Jay: I am afraid that Ruth and Scott were the last people with some personal wealth “crazy” enough not only to buy the Piru Mansion but even rebuild it after it was accidentally burnt down. Since 2008 there are just not enough folks with that kind of money to do such a thing.
  46. A ReaderSeptember 5, 2010 at 5:47 am
    Do I understand correctly that David Gauny is now selling real estate for Bob Kellar’s company?
  47. Samuel AdamsSeptember 5, 2010 at 2:21 pm
    No, not Bob Kellar, — Keller-Williams, the national real estate company.
  48. NickelDimeSeptember 5, 2010 at 4:50 pm
    Samuel Adams: The listing (and Mr. Gauny’s brokerage) is through Kellar-Davis, a a local firm owned in part by Bob Kellar.
  49. GangFangSeptember 6, 2010 at 7:22 am
    Guess that means he got to keep the suit he borrowed from his Dad.
  50. NavigatorSeptember 5, 2010 at 10:33 am
    @a reader – so it appears.
  51. Coastal SageSeptember 7, 2010 at 3:15 pm
    RE: The next step in the City take over of the library process For those who are interested in the legal details of what happens next between the City, the County, the City resident library patrons and the County resident library patrons, go to the California Code below, and look at Section 19116: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=edc&group=19001-20000&file=19100-19116 Section 19116(d) is the most interesting: “(d) If a facility transferred pursuant to subdivision (c) serves residents of surrounding jurisdictions, the board of supervisors governing the county free library system may require, as a condition of transferring the facility, that the library services provided by the withdrawing entity to its residents also be available on the same basis to the residents of the surrounding jurisdictions. However, if the withdrawing entity contributes to the provision of library services from other city funds, or through taxes, assessments, or fees of its residents, the withdrawing entity may provide additional services to its residents. If the requirement to provide regional services is imposed and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the county and the withdrawing entity by July 1 of the base year, an amount of property tax revenues equal to the property tax revenues derived from property situated in the surrounding jurisdictions which were, in the fiscal year prior to the base year, allocated to the county free library system pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 96) of Chapter 6 of Part 0.5 of Division 1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code shall be allocated to and used to maintain library services by the withdrawing entity in the base year and, adjusted forward, in each fiscal year thereafter at the same time other allocations are made pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 96) of Chapter 6 of Part 0.5 of Division 1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. This subdivision shall not apply to property tax revenues that have been pledged to repay bonded indebtedness.” Bottom line, if the County does not want to give up the real estate related tax revenues from the surrounding County area, the City doesn’t have to let the County residents use the City’s libraries. If the County does give up its surrounding properties real estate tax revenues, the City still can provide extra services to City residents if the City is spending more than real estate tax revenues on the City libraries. So as to all those “equal deal terms” for County residents promised by Darren Hernandez and the City Council members, don’t count on them. They can change at the whim of the Council.

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support