SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
December 15, 2010· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

December 15, 2010 – Daily Brief

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

Image not recoveredbday.jpg

  • See if you can follow the logic: The City still believes it can collect on the County’s 1997 library tax that funds SCV libraries, but just in case they can’t, they’re polling residents to see whether there would be support for a new measure “to restructure the existing tax.” The restructured tax amount “would be based on each property’s size and other factors,” with average SCV homeowners paying less than the $28 they pay to the County now but owners of larger properties paying more. The City is paying a research firm $20k to conduct the survey of 400 SCVers SIGNAL
  • Councilman Frank Ferry off ventilator and now conscious according to KHTS. He’s still in the ICU at Holy Cross Hospital but he’s “interacting with his kids” and may go through physical therapy soon. KHTS
  • Marsha McLean sworn in as mayor, Tobo Construction selected for build-out of Newhall library, City buys the Ferrari of carbon pollution planning, plus Bob Kellar’s a global warming doubter? Excellent Bonus video in I HEART’S REPORT today SIGNAL
  • It was also Carl Newton’s last City Council meeting as our City Attorney. He told the Council that Santa Clarita has some of the most “intelligent and sophisticated people” and said we are fortunate to live here KHTS
  • SCV Chamber selects hybrid insider/outsider as new President/CEO. Theresa Kingerly lead the Maricopa, AZ Chamber of Commerce but used to live in Canyon Country according to the Chamber. She was selected after a search both locally and regionally. KHTS Kingerly is the second Arizonan to get hired by an influential SCV org in recent months; back in June the new SCV Economic Development Corporation hired Jonas Peterson of Mohave County Arizona to lead that firm SIGNAL
  • Higher fees and penalties imposed by the City of Santa Clarita on its residents and businesses is the fault of the State of California, not the City says Darren Hernandez. But it seems mid-year budget estimates were off too- “more than $14.5 million in adjusted expenditures were added to the existing budget.” SIGNAL
  • County supes will create an ordinance limiting how much light pollution can occur in unincorporated county areas like Acton and Agua Dulce. “It’s for those who enjoy star gazing and don’t want the nuisance of lights shining across the valley,” according to Tony Bell, Antonovich’s Deputy. The Local Astronomy club must be celebrating SIGNAL
  • California Fiscal Armageddon: Gov Elect Jerry Brown says the state’s budget is “much worse” than he thought. In fact, he’s “shocked” at how bad it is. If he’s shocked what the hell are we supposed to do? People who know the Gov-Elect say he’s going to present an “austerity budget” in the spring “then hold a special election in which voters can decide whether to raise taxes or other revenues in order to restore services” says the LA TIMES
  • House of Representatives to vote on repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell today. McKeon is fuming WAPO
  • Gary Horton is wary of Facebook’s location feature and thinks it’s odd how we attract and maintain friendships these days. For what it’s worth I think Facebook is untrustworthy but useful. I don’t use the location features either SIGNAL
  • You want Christmas pics? I got your Christmas Pics right here! BIG PICTURE

Comments (57)

  1. Jim FarleyDecember 15, 2010 at 6:36 am
    On the parcel tax. The city doesn’t need a poll to see if this will pass. All they need is the assurance that the developers with developer agreements vote ‘Yes’. Whitaker-Bermite, the largest, will be able to vote for 3000 unbuilt homes. If the developers all vote yes it would require about 2/3 of the remaining homeowners to vote ‘No’ just to break even. Then they will only have to pay the tax based on the value of their undeveloped land. How undemocratic can a process be?
  2. CCDecember 15, 2010 at 9:34 am
    I’m starting to wonder if there is a benefit to purchasing a home anymore.
  3. Coastal SageDecember 15, 2010 at 12:00 pm
    Jim, you might find it interesting to read the City’s Official Statement (akin to a securities prospectus) which they issued when they used the cash flow from the Open Space assessment to issue sale/leaseback Certificates of Participation to, in effect, borrow against that cash flow: http://emma.msrb.org/SecurityView/SecurityDetails.aspx?cusip=801685CB2
  4. Jim FarleyDecember 15, 2010 at 3:09 pm
    I studied this a bit when the COPs were originally issued. This issue for 15 million would cover about half the total revenue stream expected from the tax over 30 years. Although being strongly opposed to the tax in the first place I felt this was not a bad way to get the money up front to pay for land sooner rather than later. When I was researching a possible law suit to stop the tax after the CA Supreme Court decision in Silicon Valley Taxpayers vs. Santa Clara County the COPs would have been an interesting issue if the revenue stream from the tax was stopped.
  5. Petz2December 15, 2010 at 7:20 am
    Petz is celebrating the effort by the county in Agua Dulce/Acton to limit light pollution. Unfortunately there has been a steady degradation in the sky caused by the light domes in the Antelope Valley to the north- and the San Fernando Valley to the south. There are a number of cities committed to preserving the Night Sky and limiting light pollution. For all you health nuts and animal rights wackos out there…you should know the deliterious effects of artificial lighting. The International Dark Sky Association is a good place to get information- http://www.darksky.org
  6. Jim FarleyDecember 15, 2010 at 7:42 am
    Yesterday on my way to work at about 5:30 the sky was dark enough for me to see a meteor from the Leonid meteor shower. It surprised me a bit.
  7. ToddDecember 15, 2010 at 7:56 am
    Jim- the Leonids are well over by now… December is the time for the Geminids. The other big one, the Perseids, is the summertime one coming in late July-early August. See, I knew that astronomy course at Arizona State would come in handy someday….
  8. Jim FarleyDecember 15, 2010 at 8:05 am
    Thanks for the correction – Indeed the Leonids are in November. The best meteor shower I ever saw were the Leonids out at Red Rock canyon several years back. It was incredible what a difference a dark sky makes.
  9. john adamsDecember 15, 2010 at 8:29 am
    Nah it was the PORK not the dark
  10. navigatorDecember 15, 2010 at 11:28 am
    I remember lying on the hood of my car in Red Rock back in ’64/’65 watching that shower. What a show!
  11. Mark from SaugusDecember 15, 2010 at 7:45 pm
    Go Sun Devils! Class of ’80.
  12. ToddDecember 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm
    Go devils! ’99 myself, my wife ’98.
  13. ToddDecember 15, 2010 at 8:36 am
    Holy carp! I’m agreeing with the ubiquitous Petz?!?!?!?!? Say it isn’t so! One of the things that has always struck me as a missed opportunity is the lack of light pollution control here in the SCV. Instead, on a random evening, I’m treated to lovely views of the park and ride at Golden Valley and the 14 from all the way across town… both from Copper Hill and from way up the 14 towards Escondido Canyon.
  14. Petz2December 15, 2010 at 8:41 am
    Even a broken clock is correct twice a day…you can’t be wrong all the time.
  15. NickelDimeDecember 15, 2010 at 9:04 am
    I want limited government! Keep freedom free! Don’t tread on me! Except when it serves my cause. Keep off my medicare, social security and night sky. No tall buildings in my line of sight. Damn you if you own that dirt, this is MY town. What a contradiction.
  16. Petz2December 15, 2010 at 9:16 am
    Hey ND-you own the dirt not the sky.
  17. Petz2December 15, 2010 at 9:18 am
    Petz is headed over with his boombox to see how you like a little Eminem in the morning.
  18. NickelDimeDecember 15, 2010 at 9:31 am
    Petz, for clarity, I agree with the ordinance. I also think the contradiction is obvious.
  19. Petz2December 15, 2010 at 9:51 am
    At least you avoided calling me a hypocrite. Stray light is a nuisance like loud noise that affects the quiet enjoyment of others. Most people want to do the right thing when there is a positive benefit for themselves and others. To compare this to social security and medicare is beyond the pale.
  20. NickelDimeDecember 15, 2010 at 10:19 am
    Everyone has their cause, Petz.
  21. Petz2December 15, 2010 at 8:32 am
    Petz notes that the county also approved a 9.7 Million Dollar visitor center for Vasquez Rocks Natural Area–with all the LEED goodies. http://www.the-signal.com/section/36/article/37951/ Petz wonders why they can’t staff the parks, yet have the $$$$$ to build huge edifices. One would hope that the lighting at the visitor center would be Dark-Sky friendly fixtures.
  22. CCDecember 15, 2010 at 9:40 am
    I posted something on this in the forum some time ago and I was concerned where they would locate the structure. After some review, it would basically use the footprint of Smitty’s current trailer. The area is definitely in need of real restrooms and I would guess that by the amount of filming done in the area it should pay for itself.
  23. IHeartSCVDecember 15, 2010 at 8:38 am
    I don’t know that Bob Kellar is a global warming doubter so much as a global warming pragmatist. OK, probably both. But it’s silly to pay $160K for a plan that’s not going to recommend any new, interesting, or meaningful ways to reduce what, at a global scale, aren’t significant amounts of carbon emissions. It’s well-intentioned irrationality. Certainly it would make more sense for the millions that have and will be spent on Climate Action Plans to be diverted to research with worldwide applications.
  24. Timothy Myers SRDecember 15, 2010 at 9:16 am
    IHeart: Are you sure you are not a reincarnation of some Midwestern Lutheran? You have sarcasm down to a science!
  25. TimBen BoydstonDecember 15, 2010 at 9:59 am
    Santa Clarita’s OVOV was stopped cold by the State because the plan did not properly deal with “greenhouse gas” increases. The fact is when you have a plan that creates a lot more traffic you will have a lot more pollution from autos. When you make traffic worse as this plan will do, people will be sitting in traffic gridlock running their engines longer, and creating more pollution. Paying top dollar for the “best” firm to create a plan gives the City the “best” chance of the OVOV surviving litigation against it, even though the plan will create a lot more pollution. A better solution would be to use the same benchmarks for traffic that our existing plan uses. The General Plan that we have now was written by our citizens, instead of an out-of-town consultant who is being directed to increase our density, without increasing our road system enough to accomodate the growth.
  26. Alan FerdmanDecember 15, 2010 at 10:03 am
    The smoke and mirrors continues in relation to Library costs and services. The new city phone poll says the City will reduce taxes and increase Library services. At the same time staff is looking for a way to collect the special Library Parcel Tax. So, what is the truth. Last Year approx. $6 million per year was collected from city residents for Library operations through payment of yearly property taxes and the special Library Parcel Tax. If the Library parcel Tax is no longer collected the City Library System funding is reduced by approx. $1.4 million. This leaves a total of $4.6 million for City Library operations. The LSSI contract was granted, for the next 5 years, at a cost of slightly less than $4 million per year. This leaves a surplus of $600,000 per year. Do the math and you will see there is no need for a City Library Parcel Tax. Someone at City Hall must have plans for the money other than Library operations.
  27. Berta González-HarperDecember 15, 2010 at 11:15 am
    @Al Ferdman says on scvtalk 11/12/10 “The $4,978,343 FY 2001-2008 County subsidy (without adding in the $2,600,000 in “Developer fees” from the County) is a fact. If you like, I would be happy to share the spreadsheet with you.” So now wait a minute Al, you are the one who has been saying for months that we have not been sending extra money to the county but have been subsidized by the county instead. You are sounding like Ms. Todd who cannot seem to keep her “mystical math figures” straight either. Her tally seems to depend on whether she is asking the Supervisors for more money or receiving extra from us. Now you are saying there will be an excess even WITHOUT the extra parcel tax with LSSI managing our libraries. So which is it according to you? We have been a donor of extra funds not spent here to the COLA library system or we have not. Conversely, are you agreeing that the County simply costs too much to operate our libraries and LSSI is a better deal?
  28. Coastal SageDecember 15, 2010 at 11:38 am
    Al, if they are going to “borrow” the money to buy the existing libraries and their books, to build the new Newhall Library, and to reimburse the City’s General Fund for the cost of buying the new Newhall Library’s land, at today’s prevailing municipal bond interest rates at 5% (bad market) that $600,000 will pay for only $12 Million in annual interest payments on borrowings. To me, that means that convincing city parcel owners to approve a new parcel tax, to fund the city library system borrowings, will be necessary if the stated goal of borrowing and making annual debt service payments on $25 Million is to be met.
  29. Alan FerdmanDecember 15, 2010 at 11:59 am
    Berta – You are mixing numbers from two different issues. My previous comment was an analysis of money collected and money spent by the county in Santa Clarita. My comment today relates to money to be collected by the city vs. LSSI operational costs. Coastal Sage – I believe you are absolutely correct. My gut feel is, the special tax proposed by the city will be used to fund the takeover plus build the new Newhall Library and not for Library operational costs. I’m waiting for staff to release information relating to precisely where all the money will be spent. At that time it will be plain to see if the assertion “we are lowering costs and increasing services” is a fact.
  30. Berta González-HarperDecember 15, 2010 at 12:41 pm
    @Al questions are separated; you did not answer any one of them. So to recap: Did Santa Clarita residents donate more money as a donor city vs. services received to COLA library system, or are/were we a drain receiving more in services than the money we put in? Is LSSI a better financial deal than COLA since you say we do not need the special parcel tax once LSSI is managing our libraries, or is a COLA administered library system a better financial deal?
  31. cashDecember 15, 2010 at 12:46 pm
    Nice card BG-H!
  32. Berta González-HarperDecember 15, 2010 at 1:34 pm
    @Cash if you are referring to my written comment card at last night’s Council meeting, I meant every word. I do appreciate the hard work the Mayor (both Weste & McLean), other City Council members, and City Staff, do through out the entire year to make Santa Clarita a wonderful place to live much of it while subjected to unfair criticisms and very few appreciative comments. I do hope Frank Ferry is well soon. I also wish them all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2011. I even wish YOU a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. We do not have to agree in order for me to wish you well…
  33. cashDecember 15, 2010 at 1:45 pm
    Yes, the card was nice. Merry Christmas to you and your family. The criticisms are most often not unfair, they are earned. Perhaps you have become too much of a insider to see this. I am hopeful a Happy New Year is ahead, but I think our state and our city is for a rude financial awakening. However it’s only money and money is not the only thing that makes for a happy life.
  34. Berta González-HarperDecember 15, 2010 at 7:46 pm
    @Cash what is it you think I am an “insider” of exactly?
  35. cashDecember 16, 2010 at 9:53 am
    You try too hard to be friends with the council and staff. This may be clouding your objectivity on issues.
  36. Alan FerdmanDecember 15, 2010 at 12:58 pm
    Berta We will not know wither a City run library system or the County run library system is a better deal until, at least, two pieces of information become known. 1) What services the City run system will provide vs. the services the County was providing? and 2) What is the total cost of operations? The first of these two questions will hopefully be answered by the Library committee of which you are a member. The second needs to be answered by the city. Until we are made aware of all the facts, a bottom line value decision would only be speculation.
  37. Berta González-HarperDecember 15, 2010 at 1:22 pm
    @Al so yet again you nicely side stepped my questions, which by the way were based upon YOUR ASSUMPTIONS. Never mind, I actually already know the answers. We are/were a donor city for COLA library system and LSSI is a better financial deal than the county for managing our city libraries in the next few years. I look forward to your efforts to prove me wrong in the coming months.
  38. Alan FerdmanDecember 15, 2010 at 2:01 pm
    Berta We have had this discussion many times and again you are not looking at the facts. If you take the amount of money COLLECTED FROM RESIDENTS WITHIN THE CITY for the period of FY 2001-FY2008 the County of Los Angeles subsidized Santa Clarita’s libraries to the tune of $4,978,343. That, by the way, is without adding in the $1,600,000 in “Developer fees” the County put on the table to upgrade the Canyon Country and Valencia Libraries. Santa Clarita was only self sufficient in FY 2007 and 2008 when regular library revenue exceeded costs by a total of $491,891. Now add in the $1,600,000 the County contributed for the Canyon Country and Valencia library upgrades and we were again subsidized by another $1,108,109. That is a total County subsidy to Santa Clarita’s Libraries of $6,086,452 between FY2001 and 2008. You may have noticed that, in the interest of accuracy, the County Developer fee expenditure numbers were reduced to show the latest published data. The numbers are the numbers. Let’s get to the next part of the discussion and use them to determine if the city plan is, or is not, the best interest. If you have other data make it known.
  39. Berta González-HarperDecember 15, 2010 at 4:56 pm
    @Al and you see that is the problem with your analysis and I keep telling you that. You only count the dollars contributed from residents within the City via regular taxes, developer fees, and special parcel tax and exclude all of the additional dollars the developers and residents in unincorporated surrounding areas also pay flowing into the County coffers, yet those residents have also been using LIBRARIES WITHIN THE CITY for the last 23 years of cityhood. The County only recently opened a storefront in Castaic and a new branch in Agua Dulce. Many of the developer fees paid in to the county for unincorporated areas have since become part of the City too. Did the County turn over that money to us? I doubt it. For 50 years or so, the County has been saving money by not building additional facilities out here for anyone, let alone for unincorporated residents, all the while collecting both City dollars and unincorporated dollars. When you factor in all of those additional dollars, forget about all of the money the County saved by not building anything, Santa Clarita residents have been paying much more money than we received back in services.
  40. Alan FerdmanDecember 15, 2010 at 6:32 pm
    I use numbers that represent the City resident’s contribution because that is all we are going to have as we withdraw from the country system. Money contributed by the unincorporated county did not come from City residents. Money that was collected 23 years ago was spent a long time ago. If I were to use your logic, City residents would be required to pay the County, because after withdrawal Santa Clarita City residents will still be able to use the County Library. Neither you nor Saugus Splasher are providing any real data or a compelling argument. You both just sound like spoiled children who want it all because you are spoiled children.
  41. Berta González-HarperDecember 15, 2010 at 7:43 pm
    Al since I am nearly as old as you are and have worked very hard all my life for whatever I have been able to achieve I hardly think I qualify as “a spoiled child”. I use numbers that make sense and look at the big picture as a whole. You use numbers which justify your anti city rhetoric and leave out at least half of the equation. As usual, we are simply not going to agree.
  42. JerryDecember 15, 2010 at 9:28 pm
    What numbers do you use???? Where are they?? Where did they come from?? Tell us “the other half of the equation”. Justify your comments. The only numbers you quoted came from Al. Let’s hear what you got.
  43. Saugus SplasherDecember 15, 2010 at 5:17 pm
    Gadly Ferdman doesn’t know, and can’t decide, if the library takeover is a financial boon or a financial boondoggle. So within the course of a few days he slams the city claiming both. Funny that he was pointed out above as some type of financial analysis wizzard.
  44. Coastal SageDecember 15, 2010 at 7:54 pm
    I guess they don’t teach spelling at Pepperdine or Northridge.
  45. JerryDecember 15, 2010 at 8:31 pm
    …. Nor Logic either.
  46. JeffDecember 15, 2010 at 1:15 pm
    This has been covered many times in many different places. In some years, Santa Clarita was a net donor. In some years it was a net debtor. In all years, however, resources that were purchased for other libraries in the system were available to SCV residents through regular old-fashioned interlibrary loan. Finally- “LSSI a better deal…” depends on how you quantify service. I think the current service level is splendid. I’m more than happy that we have well-paid library workers with good pensions here in town; after all I want good jobs in the SCV. The new paradigm involves paying less workers to do the same amount of work. That’s usually a recipe for a decrease in service quality.
  47. cashDecember 15, 2010 at 12:46 pm
    Darren Hernandez is quick to pass the buck on budget when there is a negative light. Money also flows into the city from the state and the federal government which helps Darren look good. Perhaps he should mention those monies from time to time. Oh and let’s not forget the earmarks submitted by the boot salesmen. It appears Darren was overly optimist on the revenue side. One has to wonder when the City of Santa Clarita always looks good when the rest of the state is falling apart. Is it library economics AKA voodoo economics, or are “cracks” starting to form.
  48. Darren HernandezDecember 16, 2010 at 11:54 am
    Correction: the report to Council noted total revenue increasing by $23.4 million. Revenue is coming in higher, not lower. Our projections were conservative, not optimistic. Here is a link to the agenda report: http://apps.santa-clarita.com/agendas/CouncilItemPrint.aspx?ID=5328 Santa Clarita remains in sound financial condition. It hasn’t been easy, but we have weathered the Great Recession while maintaining a balanced budget ever year.
  49. cashDecember 16, 2010 at 5:22 pm
    Looks to me like revenues from the state or the federal govenment made you look good. That is the point. What will you do when those one time revenue sourses dry up and your 20% decline in sales tax does not improve? Let’s give credit were credit is deserved. The city council complains about the state taking funds from the city, but the city has no problem balancing its budget on the backs of other taxpayers and sources of revenue.
  50. cashDecember 16, 2010 at 6:06 pm
    Oh, and thanks for the details. Much appreciated.
  51. Gang FangDecember 15, 2010 at 3:10 pm
    Dear Buck: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/15/gays.in.military/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1 Love, GF
  52. SFC PerezDecember 15, 2010 at 7:55 pm
    Did you see the voting tally? Not a close call as some wouldve thought. Talk about PWN’age! lol
  53. Lori RivasDecember 15, 2010 at 8:19 pm
    SFC Pérez — perhaps you work out of the recruiting office? Our homeschool group had a Pérez speak to the kids on Flag Day (?) a couple of years ago at a local park. My son had lots of battle strategy questions afterwards.
  54. Lori RivasDecember 15, 2010 at 8:28 pm
    Found the photos — Sept. 11, 2009, talking to the kids about how to respect the flag –
  55. SFC PerezDecember 15, 2010 at 8:48 pm
    I am actually with the Army Healthcare Team and didnt get to the blessed weather until a lil over a year ago )
  56. cashDecember 16, 2010 at 10:34 am
    It’s too bad Nancy spoke.
  57. The real King of SCVDecember 15, 2010 at 5:09 pm
    Property Tax. Here we go again folks.

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