Maybe it should be time for the people of San Bernardino County to show some teeth at their city councils.
This is a potential county ballot measure I would like to see implemented.
The General Plan Reform Act
1. Mixed zoning changes do require the consent of surrounding property owners by buying permission by paying 1/10th the property value to the property owner of the said parcel to the left and right of the development. This helps to compensate for potential property value loss.
2. Zoning change elections cannot be done in a separate election, they must be done in a consolidated election such as November in the odd year, or primary or general in the even years.
3. General plans must be voted on by 55% of the voters of the city in an even year regularly scheduled election in November.
4. Cities or counties cannot spend more than half of one percent of their yearly budget to pay for general plan consultants if other departments and services were cut more than 3 percent in the last three years.
We should work together to filter this out and see if the idea could come to fruition.
As someone who ran against Sen. Leyva I am not a big fan of her advocacy to unseat people such as Assemblywoman Brown who helped to defeat SB 350 which will make it more expensive for working families to go to work and do their daily errands. As a member of the working class I wish she realized how each dollar and cent adds up to a family budget.
California can no longer be the state for just the very rich and the very poor. We need a middle class and a vibrant cadre of small businesses to make California golden. If we want to pay for the extended public services that Leyva and her allies want, we have to have the employers to hire the people that pay those taxes.
Even though gasoline is at an all-time low, we still pay the highest gasoline prices in the nation. We should not price out people from driving and being able to function in society. Even though SB 350 was defeated, it may come back again.
I don’t have any tears for the plight of Cheryl Brown being opposed by progressives in the Democratic Party (Re: Democrats vs. Democrats: Assembly moderates face challenges) on Jan 12 in the Sacramento Bee. I would love to see more ‘moderate’ Democrats in our legislature, but finding a moderate in the caucus is like finding a unicorn in a forest.
Her Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Score is 23.6 percent and she lent her name to a regional government agency to retrofit freeways we already paid for to add toll roads on I-10 and I-15 in Southern California. If Assemblywoman Brown was not a supporter of toll roads and had a score around 40-50 as a Democrat with the Howard Jarvis scorecard, then she would deserve to be spared for another term.
Republicans should run their own candidate in her district so Brown cannot survive solely on their votes as how she was spared by them in two elections.
For me to pass probationary period at my new employer. I am 86% there towards the goal of 1400 items processed in an 8 hour shift. Current record is 1204.
I aspire to have one fourth of my credit card debt to be paid down and hopefully refinanced.
Save up enough money so I can buy a functional used car of my own.
Contacting Gro Elect so I could be a possible candidate for school board in November 2016.
Making a plan to save up enough money so I can go back to school one final time either for a Masters degree in Political Science or a legal assistant certificate program.
Even when life has its hardships we have to brush off the dirt off our legs and keep on going. 2016 seems to be a decent year for me. It may not be as radical as what happened to me last year, but we all have to keep on fighting on.
People say that if you’re a male, you shouldn’t have an opinion on abortion. That logic doesn’t hold up of course, because weenie liberals don’t have guns, but they sure have a lot of opinions on how other people shouldn’t own them. Except for cops of course. Only cops should have guns, even though liberals think all cops are evil, white racists because #liberallogic
Note: Privacy for All’s 2015 attempt failed. However they will likely try again to use the anti-transgender hysteria in order for their allied groups to raise donations.
These are my bill ideas I would like to see Equality California to sponsor. Groups such as Privacy for All sponsor ballot measures to be considered to be on the ballot that go after transgender people, but they do not care about following FPPC regulations about campaign finance.
According to the FPPC list of outstanding fines as effective of November 2015, Privacy for All has accumulated a good number of unpaid fines adding up to $6870 that they need to pay up on. One of my suggestions is if an organization or individual has FPPC debts of more than 5000 dollars they are blocked from filing any new ballot measures. If fines of 2000 dollars or more unpaid for more than 18 months, FPPC can reserve the right to put liens on property or ruin one’s credit.
If the 460 campaign finance forms are not on time the second time in a year (more than 14 days late), the penalty would be 25 dollars a day from 10 dollars a day. I know some groups do not want to file their campaign documents on time because they want to be stealth, but it is an unfair and unethical tactic that needs to be clamped down.
Second idea I would like to see is a neutering of the Privacy for All ballot measure via the legislature. Since we have people who have a fear of people they do not know, it is easier for groups such as Calvary Chapel Chino Hills to throw the raw meat on the balcony to get support to limit people’s rights due to ignorance and prejudice.
There is a mechanism that allows for a 4,000 dollar fine when someone catches a transgender person in the ‘wrong’ restroom or locker room. My proposal is if the law is in effect was passed in any state where false accusations of gender identity would also be liable for fines. So if someone wants to arrest someone for being a man in the women’s restroom and the man is really just a butch woman, the butch woman could win the 4,000 dollars in damages.
Sacramento we do have a problem and it affects people from San Francisco to San Diego. Our income tax rate of 13.3% is not an incentive for athletes to play for our teams. No matter if it’s the Lakers, the 49’ers and the Dodgers we are handicapped by the high taxes our state have. Lebron James would rather play for the Miami Heat than to consider the Lakers, Zack Greinke recently moved to the Diamondbacks.
San Diego tax activist Richard Rider brought forth this issue a year ago and I realized that this was going to happen to fans in California sooner or later where the issue would hit home for Dodger fans.
By providing an incentive for top athletic talent to play for California teams it helps the value of the franchises and the communities that host them. I would consider the Top 25% in performers in their leagues eligible for the tax incentive where the 13.3% tax rate gets cut in half for the duration of their contract. 6.65% would be the tax rate for these eligible athletes.
How would we consider the Top 25% in performance? Leaders in wins, strikeouts, home runs, hits, earned run average would be good metrics if we were considering a baseball player. You would have to be a leader in 2 of the categories in order to be eligible for the tax incentive. The NBA, NHL and NFL would also set their categories in consultation with the Board of Equalization.
As a compromise and to encourage investment in our state, I would require a minimum home purchase of 1/10th the average yearly value of the contract be in California and it must be their primary residence in order to get the tax incentive. If your primary home is near Dallas Texas then no tax cut.
If we give incentives for Hollywood productions to stay in our state, we can do the same for our pro-athletes. Progressives may say let them eat cake or teams should just pay more to compensate for the high taxes in our state, but we need to have the incentives to encourage the best to play for our teams,
If we have modest tax rates we could remove the fiscal considerations for athletes who decide which city to play in when they are in free agency and they could just worry about the weather, the stadium and other non-financial factors in choosing the team of their choice.
California already has every single gun law that Obama and the Bloomberg-funded gun control lobby want, including an assault weapons ban, restrictions on high capacity magazines, and very strict universal background checks. But that didn’t stop the San Bernardino shooting, now did it?
Since rdio is bankrupt and no longer taking any new customers as of November 23rd of 2015, I decided to take on a trial period subscription with Google. Because I am an owner of their Chromecast dongle, I was able to get a 90 day trial period which led me to consider them as a customer.
I was happy that I got commercial free YouTube access as part of my subscription, but I realized the song library is radically reduced compared to rdio. You are not going to get the new Hurts album Surrender nor Kylie Minogue’s deluxe version of her Christmas album on the streaming site compared to rdio. However not to complain much, Google does have some music that rdio did not carry such as indie musician Matt Fishel.
Also, the website format for Google Play Music All Access is not exactly user friendly or have the quality user interface rdio ever had as well. Its better to use All Access on a tablet or a smart phone.
If Google and any other company wants to fight for rdio’s former customers listen to our pleas so we can become your customers for years to come. If Google does not work out, I will likely review Apple Music in the near future.
I got into streaming music around four years ago. I have paid 5 bucks a month to enjoy countless music from rdio. Rdio was one of the forerunners who helped innovate the streaming music industry aside from Spotify. Losing two million dollars a month and relying only on venture capital funding can go so far for a company where they realized the business was not quite sustainable.
It seems that streaming music will be a loss leader for companies such as Apple, Google and Microsoft where it will be more difficult for companies such as Pandora and Spotify to compete. The costs of licencing the music is one of the biggest costs for a business like this. I do appreciate the opportunity to try out music from different acts. The radio format that plays random tunes actually did lead me to buy some music from various bands as paid downloads which some musicians should understand.
I know streaming music may not pay the money making music used to provide before the era of the mp3 and Napster, but we should be innovative so we can be pro-consumer and pro-producer of the art we enjoy.Perhaps we should do a paid stream where one pays 99 cents to stream a mid tier release and one gets a 1.29 credit to buy the whole release if they end up liking the release within a 24 hour window, and for a high tier release it would be 2.99, and then a 3.29 credit to buy a release such as Adele’s 25. This could be one way that Adele and Taylor Swift could adapt to technology while still getting paid.
I will be trying out Google, Apple and perhaps Spotify in the next few months to find my new home for streaming music.