Twice a Month Sierra Madre has a City Council Meeting. Tonight is One of Those Nights

Then there is our City Council meeting, where the majority of our elected officials seem to believe that the epitome of good government is to get the residents of Sierra Madre to pay more for everything. Then, once that mighty goal is achieved, ask for even more a couple of years later. The current bi-annual campaign to raise our water rates comes to mind as a good example.

Speaking of which, you do know that the Mayor of Sierra Madre believes that last April's decision by the voters here not to extend the highest utility tax rates in California was due to some form of mass hypnosis, right? And therefore there must be a do-over vote? Part of the reason for doing so is that the Police Department can get yet another raise. So it makes perfect sense that, in the face of such Mayoral benevolence, the Sierra Madre Police Association is getting itself ready to sue us for the umpteenth time. This from tonight's City Council Meeting Agenda:

Anticipated Litigation Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9b(3)(C). A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Council/Agency on the advice of it (sic) legal counsel. Based on the below-described existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City Council/Agency. Receipt of Claim pursuant to Tort Claims Act or other written communication from Sierra Madre Police Officer’s Association threatening litigation (copy available for public inspection in the City Manager’s Office).

I'd feel much better about the Sierra Madre Police Department if they were to catch a burglar once in a while. Or maybe even just once. If our PD were to spend as much time and energy doing what we pay them to do, rather than dreaming up grievances and talking to their lawyers, I think this town would be a much safer place to live. Please, if you hate working here so much, just quit and go someplace else. Why waste our time and money?

The woman who replaced Nick "4 Felonies" Conway at the San Gabriel Valley Crime Organizing Group (SGVCOG) is expected to stop by as the public portion of our meeting begins to smile at the City Council. Expect her and John Harabedian to have a quick chitchat about the process, stakeholders, best practices and, of course, sustainability. Be sure to get your jargon safety screen up. Also, and please remember, the COG supports the 710 Tunnel, the Rain Tax, and has a President that just got herself busted by the DA for a nasty Brown Act violation. This really is a special bunch.

After that nonsense, and along with the list of things the City Council usually does, the meeting kicks off the business portion of the event. This first part is called the Consent Calendar, and the items are designated by lower case letters starting with "a." There are only two of this time, so the list ends with "b." Sometimes Consent Calendar items can go as high an "h." But not tonight.

a) RESOLUTION NO. 13-13 APPROVING CERTAIN DEMANDS: At this week's meeting $461,564 and change will be spent on hundreds of items. Karen Warner got a $10,000 check from us, mostly for yet another of her useless "Housing Element" reports. Merrimack Energy Group got around $31,000 for fuel for our fleet. $8,722 was spent for water meters. The list goes on.

b)CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT OF SCAG DELEGATE AND AUTHORIZATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 13-14 DESIGNATING SCAG VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE: Chris Koerber and John Capoccia will be rewarded with the pleasure of sitting from time to time with former Soviet Union planning boss Hasan Ikhrata (click here) to discuss SCAG enforced state mandated central planning. Why would an actual former planning commissar from the Soviet Union be running our regional planning authority for Sacramento and Washington DC? Do you really need to ask?

Item # 2) DISCUSSION - CONSIDERATION OF PREPARATION OF ORDINANCE REGARDING SMOKING IN MULTI- FAMILY HOUSING: In the future if you want to consume tobacco products in the privacy of whatever it is you call home, in Sierra Madre that will only happen for you legally if you own a house.

Item #3) DISCUSSION - ACCEPTANCE OF COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR) FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2012: This is an auditor's report that shows that if a City doesn't live within its means, it will either have to raise taxes and rates every couple of years, or go broke. Which is exactly what this report shows for Sierra Madre. The one surprising thing here is this report actually does take note of Sierra Madre's millions of dollars in water bond debt. Judging by last Saturday's Subcommittee on Water Whatever meeting, I thought we weren't allowed to mention that.

Item #4) DISCUSSION – ACCEPTANCE OF ROPS 13-14A AND DUE DILIGENCE REPORT FOR LOW-MODERATE HOUSING AND NON-HOUSING FUNDS FOR THE REPORTING PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30, 2012: Jerry Brown took away all of our Community Redevelopment Agency money so he could reallocate it for things like state universities and public schools. The City Council at that time, led by the Edison Lightning Bolt John Buchanan, thought that they could prevent our CRA funds from being spent on such evil things by "encumbering" it. Which in this case meant spending $10s of thousands of tax payer dollars on an outhouse, playground equipment we didn't need, a wine tasting room and the infamous Buxton Report on the consumption habits of Sierra Madreans. It now turns out that "encumbering" might not have worked, and some of that wild spending orgy is going to have to be covered out of our General Fund. Prepare to boo them loudly at some future meeting.

Item #5) DISCUSSION – PUBLIC SAFETY ANNUAL REPORT: This is a yearly ritual we go through. It gives the heads of our two public safety services the opportunity to explain to the City Council what they do. Chief Giannone will point with some pride to statistics that show both traffic and parking tickets hitting an all-time high in 2012. Certainly the men and women of his force worked hard to achieve this result. What he will probably not talk about is how home invasion robbers never seem to get caught in Sierra Madre, and the rank and file on his force sue us a lot, and often with a wild abandon.

Item #6)DISCUSSION – DETERMINATION OF SCOPE AND PRIORITIES OF SAN GABRIEL VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT (SGVMWD) FUNDING REQUEST:  The SGVMWD wants the City of Sierra Madre to supply it with a list of water related projects so that they might be able to help us with them. Seems almost too good to be true. Needless to say City Hall has come up with a long list. Mine would be for the SGVMWD to pay off our water bond debts. That way our water rates won't have to be raised. Don't think this is so far fetched. On the City's list they actual ask the Water District to forgive the $1,456,875 loan they fronted us a while back. Throw in the bonds and I think we'd be looking at a bright new day.

Item #7)DISCUSSION – CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF PHASE II WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES PURSUANT TO SMMC CHAPTER 13.24: One the one hand the City claims that our Water Department's current financial problems stem from residents using less water. The less water people use, the lower their bills are, the less money they send to Bruce. So wouldn't you know, now the City wants to find more ways for us to conserve even more water. Actually, with this one they are looking at ways to force residents to use less water. You know, in those really dry years. In which case I guess the water department will go belly up.

Item #8)DISCUSSION – EVALUATION OF EXISTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS: The City is leaving no stone unturned in its pursuit of the almighty dollar. Or, in this case, your mighty dollar. This is another one of those. If what you do falls within the purview of one of the "assessment districts" in town, get ready to pay more. They're leaving no scalp untrimmed.

Item #9)DISCUSSION – CREATION OF A SUB-COMMITTEE FOR A STAFF RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION PLAN: This is an obvious sop to the "tax me" crowd. Employees in Sierra Madre don't make as much as they would in some of the other cities, so they leave for a better payday elsewhere. This is bad how? If people are not happy working here, and they think they can do better elsewhere, then by all means leave. If you were to tell residents here in town that they could possibly get a job at City Hall, and announced that they could interview for some of those positions today, there would be line of applicants all the way down the street to the Library.

http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com