The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA.  I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

***

Did You, or Didn’t You?

As we approach 30 days until voting commences in Sonoma County and Marin County, I want to do more to see that David Rabbitt wins reelection to the 2^nd District fof Sonoma County Supervisor.  While I also want to see James Gore win, his race is not as contentious and competitive as Rabbitt’s.  For those that live in Marin County, I also understand there are a few political races of great importance for you as well.  I will speak to those in a later Soapbox.  This Soapbox is intended to reach out to those that are in a position to influence employees, coworkers, neighbors, friends and family, and ask them if they are doing all they can to ensure Rabbitt does get reelected.

Hopefully, I do not need to speak to the reasons why Rabbitt is the best candidate for Supervisor.  His track record is exemplary, and his work ethic is admirable.  He is known as the “budget hawk” that watches out for our tax dollars and refuses to bend to pressures that try to get the Supervisors to vote on frivolous and costly stuff like buying the Sears property.  Rabbitt held firm on that fiasco, and ultimately the deal was mercifully killed (Sonoma County scraps plan for government headquarters in downtown Santa Rosa (pressdemocrat.com)).

Rabbitt is being challenged by a former staffer from Jared Huffman, Blake Hooper.

In the recent debate, here is a direct quote from Blake Hooper–“It doesn’t make sense to develop out our county that much further,”.

I don’t know about you, but I believe basic economics would tell you that if a community does not continue to have some sustainable growth, businesses are not going to stick around, workers will not have a place to live, and young people who want to have a good paying job and a healthy community to raise their children, will look elsewhere to put down their roots and call it home.

Blake Hooper is from the political camp that wants to drain Lake Pillsbury, give money to everybody (yes-including homeless and non-citizens), and get more money from anybody who is still working and paying taxes so they can pay for the ever increasing costs of County services being paid by fewer and fewer people.

Blake wanted to have the County buy the Sears site, and obviously does not understand construction costs as he claimed the cost of building an 18 story office complex on an 8 acre downtown site that the County did not own, would be the same as building on an 80 acre site that the County does own.  Want Blake to be your contractor?

Enough said, I hope.  We cannot afford to have Rabbitt lose to this guy.  So how can we help David Rabbitt?  Let me give you a few ideas:

1. Put up a sign on your land, or your yard. To get signs contact Andrea Krout at 707-799-9932.  She can arrange to get signs put up and taken down.  Can political involvement be any easier?
2. Become an endorser for David Rabbitt.  (Contact David Rabbitt’s Reelection Campaign)
3. Contribute to David Rabbitt’s campaign reelection (Contact David Rabbitt’s Reelection Campaign)
4. Talk to your family and friends and make sure they know which candidate is going to actually do the work as a Supervisor. Be an influencer.  Influence them.
5. Let your employees and co workers know, to ensure their futures, they need to vote for the candidate that has done the work before to support their jobs, and will continue to do the work to support their jobs.
6. Let your subcontractors and suppliers know the best way to keep working together, is to have opportunities to bid on projects and only one candidate is the best option for that!
7. Write a quick letter to the editor (believe me the other guy is doing it-there is a letter writing campaign starting now to support Hooper and we need to be doing the same thing!):
8. Press Democrat-Letters, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Bay Area Newspaper, CA news

B.      Argus Courier-Online Services | timesargus.com

1. Bohemian-Submit a Letter | Bohemian | Sonoma & Napa Counties

1. Sonoma County Gazette-Submit an article or column (sonomacountygazette.com)

1. Sample Letter Templates: click on this here, use the template of your choice, please modify it with some of your own words, and follow the directions in A:D to send it to one, or all of the local newspapers

8. Social Media-many of you have Instagram, Facebook, or LinkedIn accounts. Post something positive and constructive that Rabbitt has done for the community.  Make it fun and positive!
9. Pick up a sign at the ECA Public Officials Night on Thursday, April 14, and put it up in your yard! I have arranged to have signs there for you to pick up!

When the votes are done being counted for this critical race, will you be able to look in the mirror and tell yourself

“I supported Rabbitt as best I could”?

Did you, or didn’t you?

For all of our sake, let’s hope you did!

That’s All Folks!

John

ECA Newsletter

2-14-2022

John’s Soapbox

The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA.  I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

***

Stay Put!

Last Tuesday the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors discussed moving forward with purchasing 7 plus acres where the vacated Sears Building currently stands by the Santa Rosa Mall.  I am happy to report at least two of the Supervisors were able to delay the $21 million purchase of this property unless and until more information is processed on the overall costs of well over $1.2 billion has happened.  Supervisor Rabbitt and Hopkins expressed their reluctance to “pull the trigger” on buying the Sears site until staff has provided a plan that they can study and discuss on how to finance the biggest dollar commitment the BOS has considered in several decades.  This is a huge decision.  And a complex set of circumstances needs to be thoroughly vetted and considered prior to moving forward, in my humble opinion.

To see a short view of the presentation staff presented, click on this link:

5-Presentation Sonoma Co

Now for the editorial part of this newsletter.  Remember, this is my opinion only, not an official opinion of the ECA’s.

I hate the idea of moving County admin to Sears.

The County owns 82 acres of land easily accessible off of Steele Lane, Mendocino Avenue, and Bicentennial Way off of Highway 101.  Currently, the County Courthouse, Jail, and the Sheriff are all on site and even if the County buys Sears, they will all stay at the current site off of Mendocino Avenue.  Yes, the old admin buildings are old and in need of replacement.  But they all sit on land the County owns and has control of, right now.

Here are some of the talking points that I have read and heard about supporting moving to the Sears site:

1. Close proximity to the bus terminal and SMART train.
2. Close proximity to the Federal and State buildings on the corner of E Street and Sonoma Avenues.
3. A County move of 1800 workers would revitalize downtown Santa Rosa merchants, bars and restaurants.
4. Moving County offices could “free up” land on the current County admin site for building much needed affordable housing that would be closer to Kaiser health care facilities.

All of the other arguments in favor of moving downtown have to do with getting rid of deferred maintenance costs which go away with either site, and with modernization of facilities that would be more energy efficient which also would be true with either site.

Here are some of the arguments against moving County administrations to the Sears site:

7. Construction would be more expensive-tougher site to build on-7.8 acres vs 82 acres to access and lay down and stage.  Some estimates say the per square foot construction costs would be 20% higher at Sears site.  Or more.
8. Advocates for the move are “hoping” that County workers will stay in the downtown area after work and go to restaurants, merchants, and bars. I do not think that will happen because it is pricey to go out in downtown SR (anybody been to CA Bianca lately?) and County workers are not highly compensated unless they are administration heads.  County workers will simply go home after work.  Downtown SR will not be “revitalized” with 1800 workers working at the old Sears site during the day.
9. Parking will be a nightmare. Advocates for the move are banking on County workers taking public transportation to and from work.  “Not Gonna Happen” in my opinion.  Most workers with families, have one or two stops to make at their lunch time, and/or after work to pick up kids, take kids to practice, go shopping for groceries, or other errands.  Public transportation will not allow that freedom of movement, so I see most of the County workers driving to work.  With less than 1200 parking spaces onsite and adjacent to the Sears site, ALL parking will be used up by workers, and NO parking will be available for residents and businesspeople to go get permits, meet the County staff, attend County Committee meetings, or otherwise go to the new County offices.  People driving around looking for a parking spot will negate any benefit from carbon friendly construction of the new buildings!
10. Spreading out the County workers is the antithesis of efficiencies in my opinion. Right next door to our office at the NCBE is 37,000 sf of office space being leased by the County right now.  All of the remote office rental space should be consolidated into a new County planned facility near the existing Courthouse and Jail which are not moving anytime soon.  I think the benefit of having State and Federal offices near the Sears site is far less efficient overall than having all of the County on one 82-acre site.
11. If properly planned on the existing 82-acre site, the construction could be easily staged in such a manner as to make the operation of existing services cheaper than staying in the old buildings while new construction goes on at Sears. My thought would be put a bunch of modern trailers on site now, demo the existing buildings, construct the new 18 story facility, and maybe a “twin tower” somewhat smaller next to it, and then the move is onsite rather than across town.  Much cheaper in the long run.
12. If the County thinks they can house 1800 employees on a 7.8-acre site at Sears, then certainly they could house all 4,000 employees on 40 acres at their current site. And with lots more parking spaces!!  That leaves 42 acres they could develop for the much-needed affordable housing and a park like setting to enhance both the work environment and the ambiance for the affordable housing units.

I know my opinion is at odds with the Santa Rosa Metro and several of the current Supervisors.   Either site will see the construction be under a Project Labor Agreement so there is not an advantage to labor either way.  I just think it is “folly” to go to a very tight site that “hopes” workers will ride the bus to and from work, instead of how they get to their work now.  If Sears is to be considered seriously, I would highly recommend/demand an intensive survey be done of all the County workers at their current and remote sites to see if they will ride public transit to and from work, and if they will hang out after work and eat and shop downtown.  I bet the survey does not happen, but if it did, and the workers were honest, you would cross off Number 1 and 3 from my list above advocating for the move.  And if a good plan for the existing County site can be developed to include affordable housing units, you could cross off Number 4 from my list advocating for the Sears site.  That would leave the only good reason for moving to Sears being close proximity to the Federal and State buildings.  No way would that reason wipe out the cost increase for building on the Sears site.

This to me in a no brainer.  Stay put County!

That’s All Folks!

John

ECA Newsletter

1-31-2022

John’s Soapbox

Vote For Your Interests, Not the Special Interests of Another

The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA.  I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

***

I am going to talk a bit about health care to make a point.  I know-what does health care have to do with the ECA?  A little bit, we all know that.  But what my point is today, is that if we keep blindly voting one side of the ballot without knowing how that is going to affect our businesses and lives, we are going to get just what we deserve.  And it is not good.

I was a part of another organization talking about whether to take a position on AB1400 last week (that is the ballot measure that would provide single payer health care in California), and I was amazed at how little we are aware of what is being voted on today.  I am making this the topic of my soapbox today, in order to get people to think about blindly voting along party lines.

Whether you are a Blue or a Red voter, voting strictly along party lines exacerbates the problems we have from special interest groups basically running our government.  And do not be fooled-this AB1400 and ACA 11 (ACA 11 is a constitutional amendment that dovetails with AB1400 to basically eliminate private insurance in CA and set the stage for additional taxes to pay for single payer insurance) are being promoted by special interest groups that do not care a whit about your business in California.  If you care to see what special interest groups are backing this expensive, and very socialistic ballot measure, just read who is endorsing this bill.  And if you want to see how demanding the democratic party is in California, feel free to read this where they basically say “vote no on AB!400 and lost all support” from the democratic party.  Please read this chilling “threat”:

California Progressives Warn Dems Against No Vote on Single-Payer (commondreams.org)

AB1400 will be voted on today-January 31, 2022, and if the predominately democratic elected legislators pass it, it will go to the voters in November to be voted upon.  I urge all of you to review how your State electeds vote on this bill today and write or call them and let them know how happy or unhappy you are with their vote today.

****

Here are what supporters of AB1400 say are FIVE FACTS about AB1400:

1. What would CalCare do?
   CalCare would establish a state insurance plan that would cover all California residents regardless of employment, income, health status, marital status or documentation status.
2. What medical services would CalCare cover?
   CalCare would include coverage for medically necessary services currently covered under the Affordable Care Act, PLUSoral health, audiology, vision services and long-term care.
3. How would CalCare be different from private health insurance?
   CalCare would eliminate premiums, deductibles, co-pays and coinsurance. It would also eliminate hassles like pre-authorizations for treatment, provider networks and enrollment periods.
4. How would CalCare be financed?
   CalCare would be financed by a public Trust Fund, which would be funded by monies from federal and state government agencies along with additional revenue sources, like a wealth tax, to be determined by the California State Legislature.
5. How can CalCare capture federal funding?
   To capture healthcare dollars from the federal government, the Governor of California must request waivers from federal agencies such as Health & Human Services.

***

And if you want to read parts of, or the entire bill, have at it.  It is right here in this link-Bill Text – AB-1400 Guaranteed Health Care for All.

***

I would like to add a few “facts” of my own about AB1400 if possible:

A.  A recent survey shows nearly 93% of California residents are insured already.  So, I have to wonder, who is going to benefit from this universal health care bill that is not already covered?  LOL-I’ll let you guess!!

B.  Nobody knows what it would cost existing or new businesses, but the assumption is it would cost A FREAKING LOT!  An example of the cost from 3 very democratic states that tried the universal approach, Vermont, Colorado, and Massachusetts, is shown here:

C.  I know Biden wants to send Kamala down to Honduras, Guatemala, and other countries to find out what the “root causes/reasons” are for all these folks coming up and crossing the border into America might be (179,000 in December alone by the way!), but I would hazard a guess that free health care for your family for the rest of their lives, without having to pay into it one copper penny, MIGHT JUST BE A REASON TO LEAVE AND COME TO AMERICA! You think?  And if you do not believe that allowing 179,000 folks to cross the border, get medical insurance at no cost once they are in the USA, and be allowed to vote regardless of if they are undocumented or here illegally are not part of the same program, think again.

D.  Passage of AB1400, combined with the passage of ACA 11 (a constitutional amendment) would essentially make it illegal to have private insurance in the State of California. And ACA 11 will open the door for the legislator to impose new fees and taxes on businesses and workers to pay for all those that do not have to pay into the system.

California Democrats’ single-payer healthcare plan passes first hurdle (yahoo.com)

I guess my point in writing this newsletter soapbox piece is that no matter which side you vote for, do not vote unilaterally for all GOP or all Dem ballot measures and candidates.  We are (or should be), better than that.  When Trump comes out and says he is going to pardon those that stormed Washington on January 6, 2021, it is equally wrong to blindly support that position.  If you believe they should all, be pardoned, by all means, vote for Trump in 2024.  But if you do not believe they should be pardoned, and they should be prosecuted for trespassing and damaging federal property, then be aware of where you put that ballot check mark.  Similarly, in California, where voting one side of the ballot is nearly a “given”, know what you are voting for and if that is what you want to vote for, never complain about the high cost of doing business in California.  There is clearly one party in charge in CA, and if they are making your life better for you, then by all means, keep voting them in.

If you think “not so much”, look at each line item on the ballot and vote according to your interests, not those of the nurse’s association or any other special interest groups!!

That’s All Folks!

John

1-24-2022

John’s Soapbox

The opinions expressed in the Soapbox are not necessarily the opinions of the ECA.  I am speaking my own mind and not stating any collective ECA opinions.

Getting More Projects Out to Bid Sooner!

The City of Santa Rosa is not delivering capital improvement projects at a rate needed to sustain their infrastructure.  Putting it in “laymen terms”, the sewer/water/streets assets that the City has, need to be replaced on a regular basis and that replacement has not been happening for several years.  The ultimate result of not maintaining/replacing your assets that wear out?  Failure.  Failure of water lines, failure of sewer lines, and failure of road.

I have been writing about this problem for a while.  Some of you have been speaking to me about this problem for a while.  We held a CIP workshop in October of 2021 with the City of Santa Rosa staff in an effort to understand if the problem is real, and what can be done about it.  Since October, I have had discussions with several department heads in Santa Rosa, they have hired Mike Prinz to kick the capital improvement project backlog in the butt, and they last week reported to the board of public utilities.  Here are some of the findings reported to the BPU last week:

Local projects awarded in 2021 = $3.1 million

Local projects scheduled for award in 2022 = $24.9 million

Subregional projects awarded in 2021 = $1.3 million

Subregional projects scheduled for award in 2022 = $50.9 million

To see the staff presentation click here for the link–

As you can see, Jason Nutt was correct when we spoke a few weeks ago about a lot of work coming out in 2022.  However, I must clarify that a large portion of the subregional project cost is in a project for new ultraviolet equipment for the wastewater plant ($49 million for that one project!).  Although it looks like a lot of work is coming out to bid in 2022, not all will benefit our members unless they bid on the UV project.  That is more what my old firm (Kirkwood Bly, now Western Water) would be bidding on, not the ECA members.

One of the most interesting slides in the presentation, depicted the “need” dollars @ $99 million/year vs the “allocations” of $36 million per year. That, folks is a shortfall of $63 million per year!!  To make matters worse, the current “bandwidth” (actual CIP projects going to bid) is only around $24 million per year.  Even worse!!

Summary Conclusions from the staff report concludes:

• Delivery has been falling behind relative to past years’ CIP Plans
• Our CIP Plan appropriations (and proposed rate increases) are not sufficient to sustain our infrastructure long-term
• Grant funding pursuits, disaster recovery, and other “extra” projects are needed, but cut into our baseline delivery capacity

The staff report concludes that the CIP program needs some major work to deliver projects.  This is no surprise to those of us that follow the City of SR, but now the staff report has been presented to the Board of Public Utilities and there is no hiding from their conclusions.

This is a complicated issue (made so by City of SR staff shortages and difficulties in getting right of way easements and bid documents delivered for public bidding in a timely manner.  The new CIP Deputy Director has been recently hired, and he is Mike Prinz.  Mike is a take charge “get ‘er done” kind of guy, so I would expect to see more aggressive hiring, implementation of design build concepts, and some redefining of staff incentives coming soon.  The entire program needs to have a reset attitude of HOW FAST CAN YOU SAY YES from top to bottom of both utilities and transportation/public works departments.

The ECA has reached out and will continue to do so to offer ideas, and solutions so we can get more projects out to bid sooner!

That’s All Folks!

John

Standard Disclaimer-The “Soapbox” is not intended to portray any official ECA position or opinion. Nor is it to be inferred that any ECA member shares the opinion stated in the Soapbox. The Soapbox is purely intended to be an Op-Ed piece done by John Bly each week to stimulate interest and thought on a wide range of topics.

We all feel the higher gas prices and diesel prices at the pump, and we can certainly see that higher transportation costs are making our goods, groceries, and travel cost us more. Our businesses, which are largely based on carbon engines, are some of the first to experience the higher cost for fuel. And by God, we want to blame someone for those higher prices.

Those of you who know me, can understand why I want to loudly and assertively scream “Hell Yes” to my own question as to should we blame Biden. Alas, I have to (sometimes) use logic and facts to form my opinions.

“But Biden cancelled the Keystone Pipeline-surely that has caused oil prices to rise!”. Sumbitch-that Keystone Pipeline argument is a tough one to toss away.

Ok-let’s go back to “Oil and gas” civics class. Although I would like to blame Biden for higher gas prices, the fact remains there are few actions a president can take to impact gasoline prices in the short term. Those few actions historically have been 1). Release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; 2). Increase gasoline taxes; or 3). Engage in a war in the Middle East.

Sleepy Joe has done none of these. While I will argue that what he has done will certainly lead to higher prices in the long term, his actions have neither helped nor hurt the oil and gas industry yet.

After cancelling the Keystone pipeline, Biden suspended new oil and gas leasing and drilling permits for federal land and water.

That action along with the Keystone Pipeline cancellations, were clearly the main reasons behind the rise in gasoline prices.

Not so fast.

Note when oil and gasoline prices began to rise. That rise started in May 2020. Between the first week of May 2020 and the last week of December 2020, oil prices had tripled.

Hmmm—darn it. Biden did not cancel the Keystone Pipeline until 2021. Shoot, Biden did not cancel oil and gas leases until the Spring of 2021.

So, at this point, you are thinking-“ok genius John-if it wasn’t Biden, then who do I blame?”

The reason oil and gasoline prices rose is that the economy started to open back up from the Covid-19 shutdowns. Those shutdowns had negatively impacted a couple of million barrels of U.S. oil supplies, and those supplies were slow to bounce back once the economy opened back up. That’s why we have soaring oil and gasoline prices.

I can enjoy filling up at the pump and chanting “Let’s Go Brandon” with several other rowdies. It is kind of fun. And Lord knows Biden is easy to blame and easier to laugh at.

But as the Brothers Osborne explain as if Biden was singing it-“It Ain’t My Fault”. Click here for their music video-https://youtu.be/E5RDEXpc8OY

It is the fault of China-who did more to create the pandemic and spread the COVID virus than any other person on the planet.

So, you want somebody to blame for higher gas prices now-blame China. If you want to blame someone for higher gas prices in the long term, blame Biden.

Just my opinion folks.

That’s All Folks!

John Bly

Standard Disclaimer-The “Soapbox” is not intended to portray any official ECA position or opinion. Nor is it to be inferred that any ECA member shares the opinion stated in the Soapbox. The Soapbox is purely intended to be an Op-Ed piece done by John Bly each week to stimulate interest and thought on a wide range of topics.

“Bringin’ It”

I thought about writing regarding any number of topics, but I feel compelled to make one final attempt to finish what we started regarding the “raffle” concept of backfilling income during this pandemic year. The short version of why this is important is not the few dollars it brings in that will help supplement ECA income that we did not get in 2021 from events that had to be “free” or postponed until 2022. The importance of the raffle is that it would demonstrate that our Board and membership is in step with us.

We certainly hope we are uniformly working towards some of the items that we are working on like getting up to $85 million in backlog for City of Santa Rosa Utilities/Public Works projects out to bid sooner rather than later. Nobody is working on economic development that would so directly benefit ECA member firms as that. But we are.

I am not going to list all of the other things we are working on by representing ECA member firm’s interests on, but when you look at what we do and what monumental efforts it takes to get either Measure DD passed (woot woot), or SB! (woot woot) or working with the City of SR to get more dollars on the street than anybody has been able to do in the past 20 years, we certainly feel we are “bringing it”. By bringing it, I mean “return on investment”.

If you agree, won’t you help us by showing your support by committing to buying a few of the remaining 30 or so raffle tickets for $100 each that would give you a “1 in 100” chance at a $5,000 coupon from Novato Mayor Eric Lucan’s bike shop? If you are so inclined, please contact Mary at Mary@nceca.org and let’s get the last of these tickets sold so we can announce the winner at the next Board meeting on November 16.

Thank you for your continued support of the ECA in the past 45 years and we hope we stay sustainable and relevant for another 45 years!!

That’s All Folks!

John Bly

The ECA held its last fundraiser of 2021 on Friday night. Look, we all know trying to get people excited about a virtual auction is not the easiest thing to do these days, and we had no illusions as to what success we would experience (or lack of success). But it did not just happen by itself. I feel it is time to acknowledge some true “heroes” in our effort to make lemonade out of lemons Friday night:

1. How about Tom Boylan folks?!! Boylan has been there for us professionally and in friendship and counsel for years. When the Auction started out slowly (that’s an understatement) on Friday night, we were getting bids from our volunteer auctioneer Mr. Tom Boylan himself. I appreciate his counsel, friendship, positive “can do” attitude, and all of us at the ECA owe Boylan a huge thank you! I urge you to utilize their services at the Boylan Point Agency and say, “thanks Tom for helping to support the ECA!”
2. Sound Ideas Media-despite some unforeseen internet issues we unfortunately encountered Friday night, Don, Alejandro, and Angela were there Thursday night setting up and doing a check on our high-tech setup, and they were there Friday night with a big “thumbs up” until the thumbs up turned into thumbs down. We still do not have a grasp on what happened to our live feed bandwidth at 6:30pm, but it was not the fault of Sound Ideas. They have talent and professionalism, and I urge you to consider hiring them for promotional events in the future. Thank you Don/Alejandro and Angela!!
3. How about Tony Cabrera and Mary Kennedy Cabrera? As I mentioned, bidding was slow to none starting out on Friday night, yet here was Mary and Tony investing in the ECA and bidding on items, as well as making a cash donation without being asked, or expected to. Lots of work went into the auction, and Mary ran many committee meetings, put out many requests for donations from ECA members, and if folks do not care for what we had to bid on Friday night, it was not the fault of Mary. She worked her ass off and is just as disappointed as I am that our auction did not resonate with our members better than it did. We wish we had all of you in our boat helping us to pull towards the goal of being the absolute best advocate for your businesses and your workers that we possibly can be. We hope you will reach out to us and let us know what did not resonate with you, and we really hope you reach out to Mary and Tony and give them a big “Thank You” for going above and beyond!
4. Corinna Fernandez. Jenah Smith. Great advocates for all you ECA members and they were present and participatory all year in preparation of this auction. Jenah in particular went out and got donations on her own, and she is not even still a member of the ECA. Corinna was there with us through the stress of Friday night, positive and constructive throughout. All I can say is buy some pipe and fittings from Pace and mention you are doing so because of Corinna!!
5. Bidding picked up because of Josh Cleaver and BoDean, Dale Mahoney of Ghilotti Construction Company, Mike Gulley, Kevin & Jason Holtzinger of NWG, Kevin Robison, and many others. We appreciate your support! Kevin Noonan of Toby’s Trucking, you were persistent and won the Mayacama Golf Foursome!
6. Donations were made to the ECA Auction and we very much appreciate all of the donations. How about Serres Corporation donating a Hog Hunt and a day shooting at Wing and Barrel?? Huge!! Ghilotti Construction Company stepping up again and donating tickets to the 49ers with the signature tailgate party! Fantastic! The biggest money maker came out of BoDean with their Blast and Brew donation!! Blow it up! And a big thanks to Gwen Trappe, Canyon Rock. You ROCK!
7. To all that bid on silent auction and live auction items, we appreciate you. For all that did not, we will continue to try and provide you with “return on investment” as best we can. We are all in this together and together we will succeed!! Bidders:
8. 9. And to our Board of Directors, those who donated wine to the wine item-thank you! Special shout out to Mr. Glenn Smith for stepping up and letting us hold the auction at his office conference room.
   10. And finally-a shout out to incoming President Walt Turner and Randy for donating $1,000 to our cause on Monday morning!!Brent Stromgren-dressed in his own fantastic style, he was there for rehearsal and on Friday night trying to help us out. Did I also mention he and wife Kelly donated a pool party/BBQ at their house to the ECA cause? Thanks Brent and Kelly!

   That’s my Top 10 for how to make Lemonade out of Lemons! A fine list it is too!

   That’s All Folks!

   John Bly

Standard Disclaimer-The “Soapbox” is not intended to portray any official ECA position or opinion. Nor is it to be inferred that any ECA member shares the opinion stated in the Soapbox. The Soapbox is purely intended to be an Op-Ed piece done by John Bly each week to stimulate interest and thought on a wide range of topics.

I am going to write an opinion piece about being honest with the voters at the time the government asks you to vote to tax yourselves. It has as much to do with the idiotic estimates of the high-speed rail line (represented to voters to cost $33 billion to get voters to pass the bill) as it does with passing a school bond measure that School Boards and Trustees later negotiate to give all the work to union firms. My point is not against unions, it is against deception to the voters. I hope you do not think I am ranting against PLA’s because if you do think that after this, I have failed. I am taking the position that School Boards, our State, and others have a “playbook” that must read “the public is really stupid and cannot handle the truth-so let’s vote this tax measure in and we will let them know what is good for them”.

**

Several years ago, I was in a small room with labor representatives, elected officials, and a few other influencers in discussing a tax measure that was going to go out to the voters. From my perspective, it was a tax measure that would not pass if there was any substantive opposition raised by any special interest group, so we were trying to “hammer out” details that would appease (to the extent that none of our groups would oppose the tax measure) both sides that were trying to get the tax measure passed. Obviously, one “side” was labor, and one side was “business”.

One side of the room wanted very specific labor participation included in the language of the tax measure, and one side of the room did not want that. The discussion went something like this: “if you won’t agree to put that in the language now, we can just pass it as is and then negotiate the terms after the bill passes”. To my surprise, one well known elected official spoke up firmly and forcefully and said “Bull. We are not going to pass something that represents one thing to the voters and then negotiate behind closed doors some “sleight of hand” to get you what you want!”.

Bravo.

One small victory was realized. But the “playbook” still exists today. We saw it when the SRJC Trustees in 2014 supported and got passed a major tax measure that raised some $420 million for much needed improvements at the Santa Rosa Junior College campus. I asked Frank Chong at a public meeting “will they work have a PLA attached to it”? He responded publicly “No. PLA’s have not and are not being discussed as part of this bond measure”.

After the sales tax measure was passed, several “centrist” Trustees were defeated in an election, a manager was hired to manage the $420 million and that manager was a well-known PLA advocate that was hammering out the PLA before the Trustees even voted on whether to impose a PLA on the work. Elections were held, and to nobody’s surprise, PLA friendly Trustees were elected. Back room negotiations continued to take place and “lo and behold”, a PLA was placed on the $420 million worth of projects that was NEVER discussed with the voters.

So, you do not think my angst is simply focused on PLAs, because it is not, I would like to bring up another well-known lie that the government foisted upon the voters in California. And it has nothing to do with “labor issues”.

Governor Brown wanted to build a high-speed train to connect SF to LA. He and his advisers had no real estimate of costs, but they produced an estimate of $33 billion to build out the train system that would transport folks at 215 miles per hour from SF to LA. Wow-sounds so damn good.

Voters were told they could have a high-speed train from SF to LA for $33 billion and they voted for it. Needless to say, a very small segment is costing 3 times that amount and it does not come close to connecting SF to LA. More like possibly connecting Madera to Fresno for several hundred billion dollars. Did they know about the higher cost? Undoubtedly yes! The strategy was the proverbial “camel nose under the tent” whereby once the camel is allowed to sniff the food inside, you can forget about keeping the camel outside.

So why am I writing about this subject matter now? Because I am getting tired of voters being asked to vote for something that later gets negotiated into something completely different.

Last week, we saw the SR School Board debate imposing PLAs on their bond issued funds passed several years earlier (without any mention of imposing PLAs to the voters to get it passed). The “official play book” of get the tax measure passed then negotiate what we want behind closed doors is firmly in place. To read a little about it, here is a PD editorial written a few days before the School Board meeting which I watched last week. PD Editorial: Don’t tip the scale on school construction contracts (pressdemocrat.com)

So, what does this do to a “schmo” like me? I will tell you what it does.

When the hand-picked School Board votes in a few weeks to impose PLA’s, I will not be upset that a labor agreement is in place. I will be upset that they did not have the balls to inform the voters what it is they were actually voting on when the ballot came out.  Tell us at the time that it is going to be a PLA imposed bond measure.

TELL US THE TRUTH-THE WHOLE TRUTH-AND LET US DECIDE HOW TO VOTE TO SPEND OUR TAX DOLLARS!!!

I say we can handle the truth. I hope I am correct. If Governor Brown had of been honest with us about the high-speed train cost, would anybody have voted for a $3 trillion price tag? I would guess not. But to put forth an intentionally low and wrong estimate of $33 billion price tag, is just plain wrong. If voters had been told that the SRJC needs new buildings and we want you to all pay sales tax for it, but that only signatory contractors will be allowed to bid on the work, would voters have passed the measure? I do not know, but I bet voters would have wanted to know that!

So, as we sit here and see the Federal “hang wringing” of an Infrastructure Bill that has a small percentage of it actually going towards infrastructure costs (and believe me both parties are to blame for passing this “turkey” of a bill), let’s actually make the politicians tell us what they are going to pass. I would have wanted to know that my vote was going to go for a congressman that backs voting on maternity leave before they vote to fix our roads, bridges and airports.

I know, I am preaching to the choir.

Can we handle the truth?

Lord I hope so—and I say we need to DEMAND it from now on.

That’s All Folks!

John

Standard Disclaimer-The “Soapbox” is not intended to portray any official ECA position or opinion. Nor is it to be inferred that any ECA member shares the opinion stated in the Soapbox. The Soapbox is purely intended to be an Op-Ed piece done by John Bly each week to stimulate interest and thought on a wide range of topics.

NINCOMPOOPNESS

Recently, everybody that lives in Sonoma, Marin, Napa and to a lesser extent, Solano/Mendo/Lake Counties have all witnessed a dramatic downturn in supply of housing while seeing a dramatic rise in demand for housing. That lack of supply, combined with low interest rates driving demand, has driven the cost of housing up and up and up. Recognizing that there is a shortage of housing (some might say this shortage has increased the homeless population as one effect) has happened with our State and local politicians and staffers, but have they been effective in dealing with the problem?

My opinion is a resounding NO.

My experience is to see more and more “State mandated” policies come out that are at odds with helping to deal with a housing shortage. Consider one example: the State has stated that they want to see more housing get constructed in higher density areas like downtown neighborhoods, for the following logical reasons:

1. Closer to where people have to work means less commute times, less need for expensive road infrastructure costs and maintenance
2. Building housing closer to transit hubs will promote the use of public transit and lower our dependency on gas driven autos that contribute to greenhouse gases and affect “climate change”.
3. Protection of endangered species has reduced open land that used to be easy to build upon. There is less and less land that is inexpensive to develop.
4. Most folks in Sonoma and its contiguous Counties do not want to see “sprawl” where subdivisions keep getting built out of the City’s inner circle and lead to a “San Jose” type area that is undesirable.
5. Recent years have shown that wildfires can move quickly in areas of rural development making houses in those outlying areas at risk for being destroyed by fires.
6. Policing and fire protection is easier to do in higher density areas than it is in rural areas.

For all those reasons, and some others, the State Government has passed regulation after regulation that borders on “social engineering” in order to accomplish their means to a problem-build more housing in higher density areas.

Editorial: California is on the verge of flushing six years of housing progress down the toilet link

Some recent examples of what is being imposed upon developers and builders: development now must pass the test of whether the new housing starts will increase “vehicle miles travelled” (VMT’s) or not. If not, developers can build. If new housing increases VMT’s, forget it. City and County planning departments and permitting agencies have to deal with VMT’s first and foremost. Making new housing depend on a zero increase to VMT’s seems obvious that the State regulators are forcing house builders and developers to build close to where jobs, schools, and public transit hubs exist. They do not want someone driving 20 minutes out on a rural road to get to their house, and to get from their house to the school/doctor office/store/or place of work.

Let me introduce you to some, for most of you, new acronyms. RHNA stands for Regional Housing Needs Allocation. The State, since 1969, has required each local government to plan (by zoning, urban growth boundaries, open space designations, and general plan amendments) for its share of the state’s housing needs for people of all income levels. Let me translate that-since we continue to allow and welcome more and more lower income immigration into our country, the state needs somewhere to house these folks. Voila-we will simply pass the required housing needs onto the local Cities and Counties! So every eight years, the state requires, through a process called RHNA, that every jurisdiction receive their share of an assignment of housing units which the state determines will meet the state’s housing needs for the next 8 year cycle. In order to get the local jurisdictions to take their assignments seriously, the state has figured out a way to tie transportation funding to whether that jurisdiction is planning to build enough housing for their assigned numbers.

So far are you with me? The state wants houses to be built near city centers. The state wants housing to be built for “all income levels” but they are skewing the “all income levels” by allowing lower income immigrants to cross the border and live in California. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), is the ones that establish those housing needs numbers to go from the state to the local jurisdictions. And to put the “cherry on top” of this tasty process, the state will FORCE the local jurisdictions to plan for building the new housing by withholding gas tax funded transportation dollars if they do not plan for those new houses. That would get my attention if I were Sonoma County.

Now, Sonoma County and the cities and Counties surrounding them, wait with bated breath for ABAG to give them their new assignments. Certainly, ABAG won’t force the rural area to build a whole bunch of houses that would violate the VMT (vehicle miles traveled) mandate. Certainly—–

Think again.

The new numbers that the County of Sonoma has to plan for, shows a decrease for the City of Santa Rosa of 14% over the next 8 years, while the rural County of Sonoma sees an increase of 654%. Not a typo.

You might ask what happens if the County does not plan for the 654% increase in their housing allocation in the next 8-year cycle? Answer-they could lose $25 million a year in transportation funding from the MTC that was collected from gas taxes.

You might be like me and scratch your head in wonderment at the infinite capacity for “Nincompoopness” that comes out of Sacramento every year. I am not arguing for the housing need-that is a given with all the new folks coming in. I am declaring a “nincompoopness foul” on where they are forcing local jurisdictions to plan for those houses. YOU CANNOT PUT THEM OUT INTO RURAL SONOMA COUNTY-THEY WON’T GET APPROVED BECAUSE OF THE LAWS YOU JUST IMPOSED ON VMT’S!!!!!

Just sayin’

That’s All Folks!

John

Here is the standard disclaimer-these thoughts and opinions are mine, they do not reflect any ECA opinion or any ECA member’s opinion.

Governing “little ole” Northern California from Washington DC does not work. Now that you know I am an advocate for smaller government (SHOCKER ALERT!), let me provide a few examples of a Government for the People and By the People, run amuck.

Ok, now that I have that off my chest, back to my “loose theme”. Before I start my fairy tale about a mythical group called FEMUH, I need to provide a little background of other examples lest you think I am a “conspiracy theorist”.

I am reminded of a fiasco several years ago when the Fed and State prison system was sued for overcrowding and their solution was to release the prisoners back to the local County Jails. The local Counties tried to inform the State and Feds that their jails were set up for short stays by prisoners, and long prison sentences could not be accommodated without major expenditures to revamp their jails. The response from the Feds and State? No money is heading your way-

deal with it.

I am also reminded of a Fish and Wildlife “proclamation” forcing local jurisdictions to hire biologists to set up fencing, set in buckets with sponges in the bottoms, and count how many California Tiger Salamanders they caught after it rained. I recall going to the meeting with the Feds when they were expanding the areas that had to be mitigated for impact on the little critters, because they were supposedly “worse off” than several years before. I asked the question: “Mr. F & W guy, you did not know how many of the critters were around several years ago, and you do not know how many are around today, correct?” Mr. F & W guy says, “that is correct”. So, I followed up with “then how can you say the CTE population is worse off today, then yesterday?”. F & W guy replied, “because that is what this report says”. END OF THE QUESTIONING AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD! Final response from the F & W guy when folks complained that we need housing and the land to build affordable housing on-

deal with it!

Bottom line, the FEDS come out and proclaim there is a problem without any thought of how that might affect the local County. They also take zero responsibility for their “study or report” to be accurate before proclaiming it the basis of the new rule the County has to live under. These things have consequences!

In order to protect the “innocent”, I am going to refer to a federal group with a “made up” name-I will call them “FEMUH”. In the style that we have unfortunately become accustomed to, FEMUH decided to declare that South Santa Rosa Avenue is an at-risk area that needed stricter land use designations due to flooding. FEMUH did not wish to be burdened with FACTS such as “this area has not flooded in anybody’s memory”, or the erroneous adoption of elevations of channel embankments that were wrong and pointed out to FEMUH that they were wrong by licensed Civil Engineers, the FEMUH response is basically “we do not care, as our reports and studies show this to be a problem and we are here to solve the problem”. Good Lord. There is no problem other than the one FEMUH created with their new and wrong flood plain mapping.

Bottom line-some 300 landowners will be impacted by these new Flood Plain designations, and their properties will be worth less for no good reason. Ripple effect will go to the County who will most certainly have many, if not all, of these landowners appeal their assessment for property valuation in order to get their taxes lowered. Let’s see-lower taxes flowing into the County bank account might mean less money available to spend on services that are provided now.

FEMUH does not care. FEMUH basically says to the local County government-

deal with it!

Aren’t you glad this is just a fairy tale about a make-believe group called FEMUH? If it were true, maybe the solution would be to pay your taxes with make believe currency called “NOTHING”. Maybe you can write your check and after filling out the amount with “nothing”, you can write in the memo section-

Deal With It! 

That’s All Folks!

John