Hi Aubrey and All,
1. Senate Bill 33
I finally had a chance to go over the tons of informational material received at the Bay Area Coalition meeting Aubrey and I attended on March 15. There is so much liberty-killing stuff going on, it is frightening. But, I believe nothing reaches the level of barefaced affront than California Senate Bill 33. This bill, as Aubrey will recall, was mentioned at the meeting a the "back up bill should SB1 not make it into law." The text of the bill goes on for miles, but the crucial item in it seems to be that voters are summarily relieved of their burden to approve infrastructure bonds. Well, we may not have to worry about Phil and Aubrey having to face the liberals in the future to discuss these bonds.
Although we are the San Francisco LP and need to focus on City events, I feel that regionalism has obliterated city lines to the extent that most of the legislation that will seriously affect San Franciscans will be those emanating from the California senate and assembly aiming at drastically changing what needs to be voted on, who makes decisions on what, whose property is placed in peril, etc.
An example of what needs to be done to counter this trend might be the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association's work on acquainting themselves with legislation and working to defeat the really bad proposals. We at LPSF don't have enough activists willing to participate in such tedious work, but maybe we should make an effort to attract some.
Here is a link to the text of the bill. If the link does not work for you, just Google California SB33.
Here is the wording regarding the elimination of voter participation:
This bill would revise and recast the
financing districts. The bill would eliminate the
of voter approval for creation of the district and for
issuance, and would authorize the legislative body to create the
subject to specified procedures. The bill would instead
a newly created public financing authority, consisting of 5
3 of whom are members of the city council or board of
that established the district, and 2 of whom are members
the public, to adopt the infrastructure financing plan, subject to
by the legislative body, and issue bonds by majority vote
the authority by resolution. The bill would authorize a public
authority to enter into joint powers agreements with
taxing entities with regard to nontaxing authority or powers
2. Michael Stogner, Libertarian running for San Mateo Board of Superviso: Maybe we should include in our Elections recommendations Libertarians running in nearby counties. San Mateo LP is planning to work hard on Stogner's campaign.
3. And Kevin, VC of San Mateo LP, is interested in the idea Aubrey tried a few months back to get the LP counties in the Bay Area together to exchange strategy plans, etc. He is thinking of a first meeting somewhere in Alameda at a restaurant with a back room, within walking distance from a BART station. Any one know of a good place to recommend?