Sister Cities Council of Sacramento

(frome my column in The Sacramento Union)

Take a deep cleansing breath and repeat after me: “The mission statement of the Sister City Program clearly captures our participation and investment in this endeavor – Promote peace through mutual respect, understanding and cooperation.”
Say this in a soft whisper-voice while in a yoga Mountain pose.
Mayor Heather Fargo believes that “Our participation in the Sister Cities Program has allowed Sacramentans to meet new friends and build relationships with people throughout our eight sister cities, as well as the entire world.”
I don’t know about you, but I have never been invited on a sister cities tour, much less met any new friends from a sister city. And come to think of it, I’m just not feelin’ the peace and respect either.
Heather continues: “Cities play a unique role in international diplomacy. Regardless of form of government, history or the philosophical direction of another nation – Mayors the world over share a unique bond and focus centering on the needs of our citizens. Sometimes those needs transcend national politics or other agendas and allow Cities to build relationships that foster peace and cooperation when national governments struggle to find ways to work together.”
Mayor Heather has worked to convince Sacramentans that her trips abroad are necessary (for peace) and are something we taxpayers should foot the bill for. “Mayors the world over share a unique bond…” Poppycock. It’s just a great way to travel! However, when I run for Mayor of Sacramento (ha!), I’ll actually disclose that I find the position a great way to travel, because “sometimes those needs transcend national politics… and allow Cities to build relationships that foster peace…” Give me a break. This is as valuable as one of our City Council’s worthless resolutions. What a boondoggle. This started with Mayor Anne Rudin (who is now the Honorary Chair), Heather Fargo’s soul sister. Remember Anne Rudin’s worthwhile drive to change the name of sewer manholes to “personholes?” Yup, the same Anne Rudin.
To fully understand Sacramento’s interest in having Sister Cities, we must voyage over to Sister Cities International, where they explain their purpose for existence on their website: "Sister Cities International is a nonprofit citizen diplomacy network creating and strengthening partnerships between U.S. and international communities in an effort to increase global cooperation at the municipal level, to promote cultural understanding and to stimulate economic development. Sister Cities International leads the movement for local community development and volunteer action by motivating and empowering private citizens, municipal officials and business leaders to conduct long-term programs of mutual benefit. (How’s that for a run-on sentence?)
· Develop municipal partnerships between U.S. cities, counties, and states and similar jurisdictions in other nations.
· Provide opportunities for city officials and citizens to experience and explore other cultures through long-term community partnerships.
· Create an atmosphere in which economic and community development can be implemented and strengthened.
· Stimulate environments through which communities will creatively learn, work, and solve problems together through reciprocal cultural, educational, municipal, business, professional and technical exchanges and projects.
· Collaborate with organizations in the United States and other countries which share similar goals."
I am unclear how “U.S. and international communities increase global cooperation at the municipal level.” This suspiciously resembles government-speak for doing nothing, but almoat sounds as if something is actually taking place. And “promoting cultural understanding” is as useful to Sacramento coming from Manila or Moldova as teats on a wild boar. The only opportunities they really seem to provide are “opportunities for city officials and citizens to experience and explore other cultures through long-term community partnerships.” That’s called travel; most of us pay for it ourselves.
The Sister City Annual Conference claims it provides “a place where you can learn how to raise more money, find out how to economically develop your community through the sister city program, gather new ideas to improve tolerance and understanding in your community.”
I especially love the part about improving “tolerance and understanding in your community. “ Tolerance and understanding about what, exactly? How our Mayor and City Council blatantly and grostesquely waste our hard-earned tax dollars for bogus junkets to far-away cities? How is that economically improving our community? Or gathering new ideas for tolerance and peace?
Even after navigating the Sister Cities website for more than 60 minutes, I was still left questioning what exactly the Sister Cities program accomplishes? What do they do? Other than making Mayors feel better about themselves, sister Cities International claims that they “provide Humanitarian Assistance: Projects helping communities address today's needs with long-term solutions.” Projects include:
· Wheelchairs for Peace
· International Partners Program
· Operation Iraqi Children
· Emergency Response Programs
And lets not leave out the “Sister Cities Network for Sustainable Development.” Oh, now I get it. Project areas include “good governance, energy systems, clean water, healthcare, economic development, environmental conservation, poverty alleviation, accessibility and disaster reconstruction.” Huh? How exactly does this help Sacramento’s continued sustainability? Does Sister Cities send us money for clean water and poverty alleviation?
While navigating the Sister Cities International website, I tried to gather information about the organization such as membership and annual budget, but the website would not let me sign up for membership, nor was I able to find any budget information. Hmmm.
And researching the Sister Cities International website, the only committees the Board Members serve on, involve nothing unique to the Sister Cities Mission. They are the usual committees on any Generic Board: Youth & Young Professional Committee, Strategic Planning Committee, Membership Committee, Human Resources, Governance, Fundraising and Development, elections, Conference Site, Bylaws, Budget and Audit Committees, and the Executive Committee.
Does this tell you anything about the organization? Not a thing. This appears to be just another bogus organization that spends government grant money, pays for member travel, and wastes everybody’s time. The very overused theme, "Promoting local action for global issues" is getting old when there is no accountability, and no results.
But Heather and Anne embrace our Sister Cities, and continue to build peace.
Sacramento’s seven sister cities are: Manila/Pasay City, Philippines, 1961/2006, Matsuyama, Japan 1981, Jinan, China 1984, Hamilton, New Zealand 1988, Liestal, Switzerland 1989, Chisinau, Moldova 1989, Yongsan-gu, Korea 1997, San Juan de Oriente, Nicaragua 2006. And if you are interested in participating in this feel-good, bogus program, here is the remaining 2007 meeting schedule:
September 17, 2007, Regular Room 5110, October 15, 2007, Regular Room 5110, Annual Election of Officers, November 19, 2007, Room 1104. For confirmation of meeting dates, please contact Mercedes Afar at mazar@cityofsacramento.org (916) 808-7171.
With no budget information, no discernable Board Members, no accountability, no line item for travel expenses, no way to sign-up for membership as a citizen, and plenty of unanswered questions, I’m thinking this sounds like a great travel benefit to being Mayor. I’ll see you at the meetings. I’ll be the blond taking copious notes – and plenty of deep cleansing breaths.

“Sacramento Intermodal Transportation Facility”

(from my column in The Sacramento Union)

I didn’t make that up. Some brilliant government-lifer came up with that winner. A Sacramento native, I have a very difficult time seeing Sacramento transportation as “intermodal…” or even efficient for that matter.

Anyone who has read this column knows I completely distrust the judgment of our Mayor and City Council. And from the email response I receive back, I am not alone. So when they gleefully jump on any deal, my hackles raise, and my radar sounds.

The latest, hottest deal is the Railyard Development just North of Sacramento, immediately adjacent to downtown. In the June 29, 2007 issue of The Sacramento Union, I wrote about the City of Sacramento’s plans to use the Railyard Development to build more “affordable housing,” or rather the slums they will shortly become.

The City of Sacramento website describes the Railyard project: “The Railyards is a collaborative planning effort between the City of Sacramento and Thomas Enterprises. The 240-acre brownfield site is located just north of Sacramento’s central business district and east of the Sacramento River. It is recognized as the largest urban infill site in this region and presents Sacramento with a significant opportunity to accommodate future growth utilizing sustainable and smart growth principles.”
In a December 2006 Business Journal story, a few details of the transaction between the City of Sacramento and Thomas Enterprises emerged: “At the same time as the larger land deal, Thomas sold 8.8 acres -- including the rail depot -- to the city, the first part of a transaction necessary to complete the city's plans for a transit center combining rail and bus service.
The Sacramento City Council approved a change to its agreement with Thomas to clarify that Measure A transportation sales tax money would be used to cover some of the costs of the deal. The change, approved 8-1 at a special meeting where some council members were called back from vacation, was necessary to make the finances work for the larger railyard deal between Thomas and Union Pacific.”

What exactly is the incentive for Thomas Enterprises to take on this project, with a toxic cleanup pending, and unbearable City oversight? Money and subsidies – and lots of it. The city initially pledged $55 million, which included an upfront payment of $30 million and a Bank of America loan for the remaining $25 million. And that dirty little toxic mess problem… follow that one closely. Who would take on a toxic land problem without promises from the government of “assistance” in the cleanup?
“The city ultimately would take control of 32 acres to accommodate the transit hub and move the railroad tracks northward to make room for new streets to connect the railyard development to downtown without street-level railroad crossings. The transit hub would cost an estimated $200 million to $300 million, including the costs of moving the tracks and the present depot.”
The Sacramento City Council approved a change to its agreement with Thomas Enterprises to define that Measure A transportation sales tax money would be used to cover some of the costs of the deal. The change approved at a special meeting, was necessary to make the finances work for the larger Railyard deal between Thomas and Union Pacific.
Remember Measure A from the November 2004 election? “To relieve traffic congestion, improve safety, and match state/federal funds by: Improving I-5, I-80, US 50, SR 99; Constructing a new road connecting I-5/SR 99/US 50; Maintaining/improving local roads; Increasing transit for seniors and disabled per son; Expanding/planning for light rail and commuter rail; Shall Sacramento County voters continue the existing half-cent transportation sales tax for thirty years, including creating an Independent Tax payer Over sight Committee to conduct audits ensuring all voter man dates are met.”
How legal it is for Measure A tax dollars, by its own definition, to be used to help finance a land deal? Measure A tax money is to be used exclusively for alleviating traffic congestion – not for land purchases. But who is going to challenge the City?
Let’s sum this up: Thomas Enterprises wanted to develop the Railyard property, and the City of Sacramento wanted the 8.8 acres that houses the rail depot. The City agreed to purchase Thomas’s 8.8 acres for $55 million so they can ostensibly expand public transit (Measure A) and create a big “transit hub,” and Thomas Enterprises gets to develop the 240-acre Southern Pacific Railyard property. Hmmm. How is it being in bed with the City?
However, I have heard from reliable sources that City officials really intend to move the train station way out near Richards Blvd., away from downtown. Plans to move the old train station a few feet back to make room for new streets seems to have been a ploy to justify purchasing the 8.8 acres for a paltry $55 million. What’s really going on? If the City moves the train station to Richards Blvd., that would boost their development plan for Township 9, a $1.7 billion transit-oriented development plan to build nearly 3,000 condominiums, town houses and apartments on 65 acres just north of the Sacramento industrial zone called the River District. And with Light Rail in place in the new development, the City could allow the developers to ignore improving any infrastructure – freeways, roads, onramps, etc…

But back to the Intermodel Transportation Facility… The Downtown Sacramento Partnership offers this on their website about the development: “We’re on the verge of a regional renaissance,” said Mayor Heather Fargo. “Just as the railroad employed our people and shaped our future, this project, and in particular [the Sacramento Intermodal Transportation Facility (SITF)] will set the tone for smart growth into the next century.” The purchase of the historic depot allows the City to move forward with the SITF proposed for the area. The SITF proposal relocates the historic depot 350 feet north and restores its original use as a waiting area, ticketing counter and dining room. The depot will act as a gateway to a concourse offering rail connections, parking, bus terminals, restaurants, shops and other retail. The Sacramento Northern configuration will connect light and heavy rail, bus, shuttle, taxis and future high-speed rail. The City still plans to purchase additional land to support the transit services involved in the facility.

While the clean up of the railyards is a high priority and will begin immediately, a detailed project timeline has yet to be determined. According to developers, both the City and Thomas Enterprises, Inc. will continue drafting the environmental impact report and the entitlements for the project with public hearings expected in late spring.

With City officials, Developers and Commercial Real Estate Brokers dominating the public opinion about the Railyard development projects, the proposed Richards Boulevard development (Township 9) and the Intermodel Transportation Facility, comments and opinion from locals are grossly overshadowed. And how self-serving; of course developers are in favor of development. Of course City officials are in favor of development – it makes it seem as if they are actually doing something while spending your money.
If Thomas Enterprises can develop the Railyard without subsidies, if they are required to help fund the infrastructure upgrades (streets, onramps, freeways) and they assist financially with stemming the flood risk (levee), if they build housing that is not Section 8 but standard, full-price homes and apartments, I’ll work on Mayor Fargo’s reelection campaign.
And if the City really plans on developing the Intermodel Transportation Facility where the old train station is currently located and not move it out to Richards Blvd., as is the buzz amongst transportation specialists, why is it that Regional Transit is currently planning cutbacks? (More on that next week…)
However, the developers are subsidized – by taxpayers. The new housing will be low-income. The additional traffic will be horrendous. People will not give up their cars in new neighborhoods to take public transit. Flood-risk will remain a threat while development continues. City officials are in denial, and frankly, pretty dim to be taken in again by the latest round of developers. Taxpayers are growing weary.
Mayor Heather is going to find herself unemployed and sans driver if she keeps blowing smoke up the skirts of Sacramento taxpayers.

Politicians Avoid Politics

Politicians avoid having to work as well. So when a legislator introduces yet another ridiculous time-wasting bill, I ask when we are going to demand accountability from these lazy dimwits.

State Senator Elaine Alquist is championing a ban on trans fats in schools and says if people can't make healthier choices, lawmakers have to somehow control spiraling health care costs.

Sen. Elaine Alquist, (D) Santa Clara: "It's a common sense thing to do. That will eventually save people's lives and cost the state a lot less money and will cost the taxpayers a lot less money."

Senator Elaine Alquist, Democrat, knows what's best for you. How just like a liberal, to be so pompous and condescending to profess that they make the best parents for us. What she doesn't consider is that her trans-fats ban will end up costing poor people more money at Wendy's and McDonald's. But because she believes in big government, and knows that she takes care of the health of these same poor people, she believes that by forcing them to eat less trans-fats, the health care costs for the poor will be less.

How's that for liberal reasoning?

And then there is this one: The California State Assembly has passed a bill to ban trans fats in all restaurants statewide.

Last year, New York City became the first city in the country with a ban on the artery-clogging fat, but now California is looking to become the first state, KSBW Action News reported.

When the author of the trans fat bill was speaking to the Assembly on Thursday, he told his colleagues that California needed the bill because it would protect consumers and make restaurant food safer.

California Assembly Member Tony Mendoza is new in Sacramento (the capital of California). He won election in November 2006. His first legislative act was to introduce a bill to ban trans fats in California.

Do you think Tony Mendoza has too much time on his hands? He's been in office since November 2006, and this is the best he can come up with? He's from Southern California, Norwalk, CA to be exact, 17 miles Southeast of Los Angeles. The towns in his district (56th District) include Pico Rivera, Cerritos and South Whittier - not exactly a bastion of cute towns with white picket fences. It's gang-infested. And Tony Mendoza thinks the gang members care about trans-fats? Ha.

Legislators and politicians claim that they just want to make America and our towns safer for us. Banning smoking, trans-fats, and fois-gras really has no impact on our daily lives. Banning gang violence, corporate monopolies and politicians per diem pay, would make an impact.

Nick Gillespie of Reason Magazine has this to say about political intereference: "They rob us of the right to make decisions--however stupid, unwise or repugnant to refined sensibilities--about how we want to live, work and eat.

Although "give me partially hydrogenated vegetable oil or give me death!" is not likely to become a rallying cry anytime soon, it's worth pausing a minute to consider the country's headlong rush to prohibit just about anything that bureaucrats--or simple majorities of voters--find offensive."

And when Ald. Ed Burke (14th), who sponsored a similar measure earlier this year, told The New York Times, "I'm disappointed we're losing bragging rights to be the first city in the nation to do this," we know why Tony Mendoza raced to be the first kid on his block to propose trans-fat banning legislation in California. I'm just surprised it wasn't Babs Boxer or Sheila Kuehl who always race to propose the most absurd legislation, "in order to help make us safer."

Nick Gillespie summarizes his thought: "Most important, these bans reduce all of us to the status of children, incapable of making informed choices. Is it quaint to suggest that there's something wrong with that in a country founded on the idea of the individual's rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?"

Now remember to brush your teeth before going to bed. Oops! I probably just gave Babs Boxer an idea for more good-for-you legislation: The mandatory brush-your-teeth before bed bill...

Muslim Prayers In California Elementary School

The San Diego Union Tribune reported that a San Diego public school has become part of a national debate over religion in schools ever since a substitute teacher publicly condemned an Arabic language program that gives Muslim students time for prayer during school hours.

Carver Elementary in Oak Park added Arabic to its curriculum in September when it suddenly absorbed more than 100 students from a defunct charter school that had served mostly Somali Muslims.

The special accommodations for Carver Elementary's nearly 100 Somali Muslims don't stop with organized prayer. The school cafeteria has banned pork and other foods that conflict with the Islamic diet. I remember fish sticks on Fridays in my elementary school cafeteria for the Catholics, but I brown-bagged my lunch. No one had to eat the fish sticks if they didn't want to.

And the K-8 school has even added Arabic — the language of the Quran — to its curriculum, while segregating classes for girls, a la the Taliban.

Is this in the same country where Christians cannot pray at commencement ceremonies, Christmas plays in schools have been cancelled and we cannot even wish each other "Merry Christmas?"

But the Muslim students at Carver Elementary School are granted the time to pray to Allah everyday.

The midday prayer for Muslims here generally falls between 1 and 2 p.m., North said, and that is before the school day ends.

“What is unique about this request is the specificity of the religious requirement that a prayer be offered at a certain time on the clock,” he said.

North went on to say, “The district's legal obligation in response to a request that a prayer must be performed at a particular time is to treat that request the same as it would treat a student's request to receive an insulin shot at a particular time.”

Have you ever heard such drivel? Comparing the necessity of an insulin shot to saying prayer?

Investor's Business Daily reports that The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which is defending the Carver program, insists public schools must cater to the growing number of Muslim students. "Our country is transforming demographically, religiously," said the spokesman for CAIR's San Diego chapter. "Our country has to now accommodate things that are not traditionally accounted for before."

But when does accommodation become promotion? In California's brave new schools, Johnny has been forced to recite the Quran along with Ahmed.

Seventh-graders at a San Francisco-area school were required, even after 9/11, to "become Muslims" for two full weeks as part of California's world history curriculum. This included reciting the Muslim profession of faith — "Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger" — and chanting "Praise be to Allah" in response to teacher prompts.

Parents naturally were outraged that teachers would be shoving Islamic beliefs down their children's throats. And some of them sued the school district, only to lose in federal court. They appealed, but the ultra-liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals out of San Francisco ruled that such Islamic catechism is constitutional.

How can Islamic catechism in public schools be constitutional when Catholic catechism is not allowed in public school curriculum?

It is not constitutional to outlaw one religion in America, and honor another in our public schools.

Live Earth Leaves HUGE Carbon Footprint

The Live Earth concert, Al Gore's pathetic "worldwide effort to raise environmental awareness," wasn't a big television draw. In fact it was a flop, with most people changing the channel after being nearly bored to death.

"This weekend, rock stars will jet around the world, cars and buses will clog traffic, and elaborate sound stages will be set up to burn massive amounts of fuel to send the message to fans at home that they better conserve their energy or face the allegedly dire threat of global warming." (John Berlau, openmarket.com)

NBC's Saturday-night highlights show was seen by 2.75 million people, according to Nielsen Media Research, or fewer people than watched the soccer match between Argentina and Peru that night on Univision.

The "talent" at the Live earth concerts, was also questionable, with many performers sounding worse than the aspiring amateurs on American Idol.

Andrew Malcolm of the Los Angeles Times quipped: "Many, perhaps disappointed that Gore did not announce his candidacy for president, were no doubt out back gathered around smoking grills helping to further warm the earth's atmosphere. Perhaps what we really need next is a live global concert to raise awareness about the omnipresence of live global concerts trying to raise awarenesses."

And apparently, Live Earth wasn't very green either. Big surprise. 1,000 tons of garbage, the green concert has received mixed reviews.

This morning, people are wondering if a concert aimed at raising global awareness actually caused more global damage. One estimate said 100,000 trees needed to be planted to offset the carbon emissions released during the 24-hour event.

Critics argued the estimated 220,000 miles musicians traveled to get to the shows defeated the event's purpose. Bob Geldof, the man behind the Live 8 charity concert, questioned whether the event served a purpose.

"Why is [Gore] actually organizing them? To make us aware of the greenhouse effect? Everybody's known about that problem for years," he said.

In a rare bit of rock-star sanity, the Who’s Roger Daltrey offered his take on global warming: “I can’t believe it. Let’s burn even more fuel.” Then, in a rare bit of humility for famous entertainers, Daltrey argued that it’s possible that rock stars may not have all the answers. “We have problems with global warming, but the questions and the answers are so huge I don’t know what a rock concert’s ever going to do to help,” he said.

And the latest is from the new band Arctic Monkeys, who expressed skepticism about the concert to the French wire service AFP. “It’s a bit patronizing for us 21 year olds to try to start to change the world,” drummer Matt Helders said. “Especially when we’re using enough power for 10 houses just for (stage) lighting. It’d be a bit hypocritical.”

Duh. We've been saying that for years!

"But thanks in large part to the 75 hours of free airtime that NBC gave Gore on its various stations, starting with NBC and including CNBC, Bravo, the Sundance channel, Universal HD and Telemundo, Gore may now be the 800-pound gorilla this political season. 75 free hours of television time... When a conservative appears on talk radio, liberals cry for the Fairness Doctrine. Seventy-five free hours for Archbishop Gore's Church of Climate Change? Not a peep." (Investors Business Daily)

And from John Berlau, the author of Eco-Freaks: "And there is even a question about how seriously environmentalists take the global warming “threat.” After all most eco-groups are opposed to nuclear power, which involves no pollution and carbon dioxide emissions. And they want to shut down the non-polluting dams that provide electricity in the Pacific Northwest, which would result in a sharp increase of the dreaded coal and oil to provide power. These are even bigger hypocrisies than a fuel-burning concert, and provide even more evidence that global warming hysteria is jumping the shark."

Poor Little Gore Boy

The poor little Gore boy, busted again for possession of illegal drugs. I guess his work at a philanthropy magazine is just not satisfying enough, and he must look elsewhere for thrills.

*****************

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The 24-year-old son of former Vice President Al Gore was arrested for drug possession on Wednesday after he was stopped for allegedly speeding in his hybrid Toyota Prius, a sheriff's official said.

Al Gore III -- whose father is a leading advocate of policies to fight global warming -- was driving his environmentally friendly car at about 100 miles per hour on a freeway south of Los Angeles when he was pulled over by an Orange County sheriff's deputy at about 2:15 a.m..

A subsequent search yielded a small amount of marijuana, along with prescription drugs including Valium, Xanax, Vicodin and Adderall, said sheriff's spokesman Jim Amormino. There were no prescriptions found, he said.

Gore was arrested on suspicion of drug possession and booked into the Inmate Reception Center in Santa Ana, about 34 miles south of Los Angeles, on $20,000 bail, he said.

It was not Gore's first brush with the law. He was arrested in 2003 for marijuana possession and in 2002 for suspected drunken-driving.

Gore was still in custody as of mid-morning and was sharing a holding cell with an unknown number of people, said Orange County Sheriff's spokesman Jim Amormino.

"There are no special privileges," he told Reuters.

Gore cooperated with law enforcement as soon he was pulled over and quickly identified himself as the son of the former vice president, Amormino said.

A spokesman for the elder Gore said he was traveling and could not immediately be reached for comment.

*********************

Speeding while in a Prius is a dangerous offense.

Aren't we getting a little tired of celebrity's kids breaking the law and getthing but unrelenting PR for it?