Damage to the downtown Long Beach was also extensive. |
Notice: This is not a City of Long Beach site.
Dear Readers: Please note that this is not a City of Long Beach website and is not paid for nor maintained by taxpayer funds.
If you contact Gerrie Schipske through this site on any matter pertaining to the City of Long Beach, a copy of your contact will be forwarded to her official city email as an official public record.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Long Beach Was Devastated in 1933
Building codes have certainly been improved since the 1933 earthquake hit Long Beach. But what is happening in Japan is showing us once again that we cannot be totally earthquake proof. Get yourself and family ready in case we get hit.
Are you ready for the big earthquake here in Long Beach?
It happened in Japan and it is going to happen here in Long Beach. It is just a matter of time.
So please check out these links on information you need to get ready. Click here.
Also, please read the message from the Long Beach Fire Department on earthquake preparedness that I have posted to the left on this blog.
So please check out these links on information you need to get ready. Click here.
Also, please read the message from the Long Beach Fire Department on earthquake preparedness that I have posted to the left on this blog.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Pushing for Feds to Remove Cap on Local Hires
Last night , the Council supported an agenda item which I sponsored and which was co-sponsored by Councilman Patrick O'Donnell that will ask the federal government to waive a cap on how many local hires we can require on the construction of the Gerald Desmond bridge. Because federal funds are being used from the federal highway administration, the project is capped to requiring only 30% of the jobs go to local hires.
Long Beach has 14% unemployment -- one of the highest rates in the state. So it makes no sense that any projects that will hire workers would be capped at on 30% of those jobs going to Long Beach residents.
So Long Beach needs to asks the federal government to waive the cap and allow more than 30% of the jobs to go to Long Beach residents!
The agenda item now goes to the City Attorney who will work with the City Manager to craft language making this request of the federal government.
Long Beach has 14% unemployment -- one of the highest rates in the state. So it makes no sense that any projects that will hire workers would be capped at on 30% of those jobs going to Long Beach residents.
So Long Beach needs to asks the federal government to waive the cap and allow more than 30% of the jobs to go to Long Beach residents!
The agenda item now goes to the City Attorney who will work with the City Manager to craft language making this request of the federal government.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Councilman DeLong Needs to Get His Facts Straight -- and Truthful
So Councilman DeLong thinks that my objections to selling city assets and services to private entities is because I received so much money from the unions.
Don't know if he or his handlers wrote the response to my blog but whomever writes his responses needs to be truthful first. I have not received one penny from the unions that provide the services he is trying to sell -- street sweeping, towing, etc. Both Mr. DeLong and I received $350 from the LB Police Officers Association. I received an in kind contribution of printing of campaign signs from the LB Firefighters Association. That's the sum of what the city unions contributed.
But I did not receive one penny from the unions whose services I believe should not be contracted out.
Now in comparison, I took no money from Tom Dean either. Mr. DeLong did. So are we to infer that is why he pushed the Dean land swap so vigorously? Since councilpersons are limited to receiving $350 from one source (union or non-union) it would seem silly to infer that any council person could be bought for $350. Don't you think so?
I also sent back a check a towing company sent me during the campaign because I had heard that after the election Mr. DeLong would be trying to get the city to contract out towing services and I felt the money was a conflict of interest.
So back to the facts about contracting out city services. Towing and street sweeping provide an incredible amount of revenue for the city. Revenue that pays for the salaries and benefits of the people who provide the services and then some. The "then some" provides for funding for other things in the city.
So why would we want to share revenue with an outside business? Does that make sense for the taxpayers? No.
So let's have a discussion on the merits and shortfalls of contracting out and what is best for the taxpayers and not the politicians.
Don't know if he or his handlers wrote the response to my blog but whomever writes his responses needs to be truthful first. I have not received one penny from the unions that provide the services he is trying to sell -- street sweeping, towing, etc. Both Mr. DeLong and I received $350 from the LB Police Officers Association. I received an in kind contribution of printing of campaign signs from the LB Firefighters Association. That's the sum of what the city unions contributed.
But I did not receive one penny from the unions whose services I believe should not be contracted out.
Now in comparison, I took no money from Tom Dean either. Mr. DeLong did. So are we to infer that is why he pushed the Dean land swap so vigorously? Since councilpersons are limited to receiving $350 from one source (union or non-union) it would seem silly to infer that any council person could be bought for $350. Don't you think so?
I also sent back a check a towing company sent me during the campaign because I had heard that after the election Mr. DeLong would be trying to get the city to contract out towing services and I felt the money was a conflict of interest.
So back to the facts about contracting out city services. Towing and street sweeping provide an incredible amount of revenue for the city. Revenue that pays for the salaries and benefits of the people who provide the services and then some. The "then some" provides for funding for other things in the city.
So why would we want to share revenue with an outside business? Does that make sense for the taxpayers? No.
So let's have a discussion on the merits and shortfalls of contracting out and what is best for the taxpayers and not the politicians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Save Station 18
Popular Posts
-
Prior to the construction of a 150-acre airport in 1923, pilots could be seen taking off and landing on the long strand of beach or on a san...
-
Hot off the City Council Agenda -- the item proposing reducing the number of council meetings to two a month has been withdrawn.... now the ...
-
Below is the city management memo and list of retail stores in Long Beach that will not be able to use plastic bags. Things that were not di...
-
I will have to pull the video on the debate. I could swear that we were told during the discussion that stores such as Target, Walmart and K...
-
For the first time in the history of California, politicians of either major party will NOT be having influence on how the boundary lines ar...
-
Was precinct walking today. Now that the rain has stopped for a while I am back out there walking and talking to residents. It's funny. ...
-
Date: January 19, 2010 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE “Creating Community Through People, Places, Programs and Partnerships” Public Meeting Sche...
-
You can see the proposed new maps of how City Council boundaries might be depending upon how City Council votes. New boundaries are requir...
-
If you worked in the aircraft plant or the shipyard or any where else that helped the United States win World War II -- then we are honoring...
-
The Council on a 5-4 vote approved the first reading of an ordinance that will strongly regulate when and where a medical marijuana collecti...