Showing posts with label local politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label local politics. Show all posts

Saturday, October 30, 2010

YES on Measure D--City of Arden Arcade

GO ARDEN ARCADE. Neighborhoods that have incorporated have taken control of their destinies and improved conditions for their residents, as Citrus Heights (1997), Elk Grove (2000), and Rancho Cordova (2003) have done. No doubt, tough economic times will continue, but if a new city can bring a sense of law and certainty to the community, there will be an economic revival to the area that will improve the condition of the neighborhood and increased revenues will follow, just as happened with Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, and Rancho Cordova.

Nor would this shortchange the County for business tax revenue, so long as the County makes a hard (but fair) "revenue neutrality" payments bargain. For years, the area has subsidized much of the county anyway, but will be paying a neutrality agreement for years down the road to make sure that Arden Arcade does not leave the county short.

Sacramento County is just about the only county in the state with such a large urbanized population in unincorporated areas. The counties make perfect sense for implementing state programs, for the courts, and for local services in unincorporated areas that are just sparsely populated farms and ranches. It's only when the unincorporated areas turn into densely populated cities and suburbs that the county government becomes too unwieldy and not responsive enough.

Empirically, I remember Citrus Heights when nearly all of what was Birdcage Walk and much of Sunrise Mall was vacant and boarded up. Now that shopping area is thriving. This in an area that was "built out" with little or no vacant space, just like Arden Arcade. That tends to happen when you have neighborhood officials just a little way down Greenback Lane who give a damn, as opposed to county supervisors who, no matter how well intentioned, are busy enough with the courts and other countywide services.

It is amusing that both sides in the Arden Arcade incorporation debate claim to agree that Arden Arcade should not be annexed by the City of Sacramento. Given how poorly run Sacramento (city) proper is, understandably so. NOBODY in Arden Arcade wants to be part of "KJ's Kingdom," Although that is better than formerly "Fargo's Folly", formerly "Serna's Stalinism", formerly "Rudin's Red Square".

Yet the county is finding it more and more difficult to provide urban services, something that counties really aren't designed to do.So in other words, it is a matter of time before either Arden Arcade incorporates, or it gets annexed by the City of Sacramento. Perhaps Mike Duveneck and his "Stay Sacramento" (county) group ought to be honest and re-name themselves "Join Sacramento" (city).

As for the implication from the Sacramento (Soviet) News And Review that Sacramento (the region) is "cracking up", it was never united to begin with. The proposals for a Sacramento city-county merger were voted down because such a megacity would be even more unwieldy and far more unelectable and unaccountable than what the region has now. Far better to have local cities, no matter how balkanized they are, that have to respond to the local citizens. Neighborhoods that have incorporated have taken control of their destinies and improved conditions for their residents. Citrus Heights (1997), Elk Grove (2000), and Rancho Cordova (2003) are all more pleasant now than they were before incorporation.

Above all, I am disgusted with the rather lame arguments and claims of incorporation opponents! When you go to the "Stay Sacramento" website, all they do is cite how incorporated cities like Bell and Maywood, down in LA County, are badly run. Gee, that happens when a city is full of illegal aliens, who are either too busy trying to make an underground living and are accustomed to rampant corruption, rather than USA citizens who are more likely to give a damn and much less likely to accept rampant corruption. Other lame arguments against Measure D include the following:
"No City of Arden Arcade. Less government means less government."
I hear otherwise right-thinking citizens who parrot this as a reason to oppose Arden Arcade incorporation, forgetting entirely that *more local* government is less government. Federalism wept.
"Arden-Arcade is a really stupid name for a city."
As opposed to Elk Grove? Or Rancho Cordova? Or Citrus Heights? If the adjacent neighborhood of Carmichael had joined in, they could have called the whole new city "Carmichael."
"There are too many people lined up to run for office if D passes. It makes one suspicious that the whole thing is a power grab."
And they are volunteers with tiny stipends. How dangerous for people to care about their neighborhood and want to improve it by incorporating!
"Pro Measure D people use scare tactics that Sacramento City wants to gobble up and incorporate Arden-Arcade. This is bogus, since both residents of Sacramento and Arden-Arcade would have to support that... which won't happen."
That is absolutely FALSE. Voter approval of annexation is not required. State law allows a city to annex portions of the county upon a mere vote of the council and petition to LAFCo that includes a revenue neutrality study (which is already done).

In fact, Sacramento City Councilman Steve Cohn proposed to the city council that they allow residents to vote on annexation, and the only reason it didn't happen is because the City Council struck down that idea, fearing more conservative Arden Arcadians would upset their lefty liberal city.

But what if they took a second look at Arden Arcade's two major (if run-down) shopping centers and one major (if run-down) Auto Row, from a neighborhood that contributes more to County coffers than it takes in, and decided to make a revenue grab, as liberals are wont to do? I guess that is why Sac proper studies annexation (See here). See also here, from pages 2-125 forward.
"Arden-Arcade is too small to run it's own services (unlike Rancho or Citrus Heights), without raising taxes for residents & businesses. It can get along just fine staying part of Sacramento County."
It has about as many people as Citrus Heights, two major (if run-down) shopping malls, and one major (if run-down) "Auto Row". The LAFCO study proved not only it would go well without raising existing taxes (which is why the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association endorsed incorporation Measure D). The LAFCO economic report indicates that Arden Arcade is fiscally viable without raising taxes. They wouldn't have approved it for the ballot if that were not the case. LAFCO in fact is notoriously skeptical of incorporation, or of creating any new agency in general.

Thursday, May 06, 2010

Students Kicked Off Campus for Wearing American Flag Tees

And to think this happened yesterday in MORGAN HILL!

Students Kicked Off Campus for Wearing American Flag Tees

On any other day at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, Daniel Galli and his four friends would not even be noticed for wearing T-shirts with the American flag. But Cinco de Mayo is not any typical day especially on a campus with a large Mexican American student population.
And what is *that* supposed to mean?

Galli says he and his friends were sitting at a table during brunch break when the vice principal asked two of the boys to remove American flag bandannas that they wearing on their heads and for the others to turn their American flag T-shirts inside out. When they refused, the boys were ordered to go to the principal's office.

"They said we could wear it on any other day," Daniel Galli said, "but today is sensitive to Mexican-Americans because it's supposed to be their holiday so we were not allowed to wear it today."

The boys said the administrators called their T-shirts "incendiary" that would lead to fights on campus.

And what have things come to when the American flag, which all students should be able to share in common and rally around, leads to fights? These are the wages of "multiculturalism". But this is what you get when you allow leftists to take over the schools who only think they have "power" when they indoctrinate our children.
"They said if we tried to go back to class with our shirts not taken off, they said it was defiance and we would get suspended," Dominic Maciel, Galli's friend, said.

The boys really had no choice, and went home to avoid suspension. They say they're angry they were not allowed to express their American pride. Their parents are just as upset, calling what happened to their children, "total nonsense."

"I think it's absolutely ridiculous," Julie Fagerstrom, Maciel's mom, said. "All they were doing was displaying their patriotic nature. They're expressing their individuality."

But to many Mexican-American students at Live Oak, this was a big deal. They say they were offended by the five boys and others for wearing American colors on a Mexican holiday.
But it *isn't* a Mexican holiday. It is hardly noticed south of the border. It was originally for Mexican Americans much as Saint Patrick's Day is for Irish Americans, and Columbus Day for Italian Americans (although the Left has trashed that day too, come to think of it).
"I think they should apologize cause it is a Mexican Heritage Day," Annicia Nunez, a Live Oak High student, said. "We don't deserve to be get disrespected like that. We wouldn't do that on Fourth of July."
So this young lady does not think she's an American too? That is truly sad--multiculturalism at work. And with an attitude like that, times many other kids, what does this mean for the future?
The five boys and their families met with a Morgan Hill Unified School District official Wednesday night. The district released a statement saying it does not agree with how Live Oak High School administrators handled this incident.
The boys will not be suspended and they were told they can go back to school Thursday. They may even wear their red, white, and blue colors again, but this time, the day after Cinco de Mayo, there will be no controversy.
Wrong. The next day, the story gets worse:

A day after five Morgan Hill students were sent home for wearing American flag t-shirts, the controversy erupted ten fold.

Students at Live Oak High School made a mass and impromptu walk out of class Thursday.... Many support the school's decision and say they were offended by their classmates wardrobe choice.

Many of the students who walked out Thursday held Mexican flags as they left campus. The students walked to City Hall for a loud but calm noontime rally. There were about 200 students taking part in the protest.
"Multicultural Education" at work! The 5th column at home.

Related: Roger Ebert needs to hurry up and die of cancer:


Weird I haven't read anything from Mr. Ebert bashing our horrible, primitive healthcare. I wonder why that is....anyway, I got news for you, Roger. California kids ALREADY have to share tables with other kids wearing hammer and sickle shirts. And big red star shirts. And (of course) Che Guevara shirts. In many upper-middle class California neighborhoods, you can routinely see a few teenagers wearing those three designs. Coming soon, I'm sure: Mao, Fidel, and Ho Chi Minh.

Patriots can't say a word about THOSE shirts, of course. That would be a violation of freedom of expression.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Toys in "Happy Meals"

When did 3 out of 5 of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors become such WEENIES?
I expect this in SF and/or Berkeley, but Santa Clara County always was a safe enough distance away. Maybe not anymore.
Whenever anyone on the Left cries something about "keep your laws off my body" - just remember that it is the Left that is continuously telling us how to live our lives, what we can eat, what we can drive, etc. And now, what kind of promotional toys a fast food chain can pass out. This micromanagement of our lives is a loss of liberty - many, many small losses add up to a significant loss of our freedoms.

Oh but this is for the good of kids, who aren't adults, they say? Fine. If we're going to regulate what kids can see about sugary cereals and plastic toys in fast food because it might be bad for them, how about we regulate what they see in schools about sex and their bodies?
--No more teaching them that sodomy or other gay sex is perfectly normal, and safe as can be as long as you use a condom.
--No more enabling them to have abortions without their parents' consent.

But will the Left do that? I thought so, or not.
What the McDonald's Corporation should tell these liberal local governments.

Friday, August 01, 2008

The fix is in for Sacramento commuters

Well, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) has made its transportation plans, and it appears that the fix is in for us hard pressed commuters.

Click here to go directly to the survey.

I should have been paying attention sooner. In any case, the survey continues until Labor Day and it's not too late to register your point of view to The Powers That Be at Regional Transit (RT), for what little that is worth.

Looking at the three choices presented to us, it becomes clear that the luddite goons and ECOmmunistS aren't content to stop road improvements, they want to saddle us with trolleys. And they have the ears of whoever runs RT. These trolleys have incredibly high fixed costs, so they are more expensive than simply increasing bus service in the areas where they are to be placed. They do not have exclusive rights of way and will only take space away from buses and cars, and thus congest streets further. But hey, for the ECOmradeS, that's the idea, isn't it?

But let us look over the three options:

Option A: Probably the least objectionable and most realistic. Double tracking on the Blue Line bottlenecks from downtown to Watt and I-80 would certainly help, as would an extension to Cosumnes River College (assuming the flyover ramps and exclusive right of way option at the RT website).

However, a light rail Stub to Richards Boulevard? Gee, how about a vehicle bridge between Truxel and 7th/8th streets that buses and even cars (gasp!) could go on? I know, cars are evil and we must all ride unicycles... never mind that people will use their cars anyway from Natomas to Downtown and turn I-5 from Natomas to Downtown into a permanently congested mess. Already RT runs bus lines between Natomas and Downtown that could easily be routed to serve the new Railyards urban renewal area if there was just a BRIDGE across the American River at Truxel.

Option B: The Trolley Wanking begins here. Not everything about this option is awful: The Gold Line to Folsom could use a good double tracking. However, couldn't they just do the Gold line double tracking with the money they intend to waste on the Richards Boulevard stub in Option A?

Trolley systems for downtown / West Sac and Rancho Cordova? As if expanded Neighborhood Ride shuttles couldn't achieve the same ridership at a fraction of the cost? What crack are they smoking?

But that's not the worst of it. Just think about where these trolley lines will go. That's right, at street level, taking away badly needed road space. It would be one thing if a new trolley line to West Sac was built as an extension of the existing RT line at R Street (where a railroad overpass already exists over I-5), and then on a *new* bridge over the Sacramento River from there. But will that happen? Noooooo. Instead that new trolley will putt-putt-butt-plug its way across the Tower Bridge, taking away already strained road space. Ditto for whatever they want to build in "Raunchy Cadaver".

Moreover, will an airport rail line really outdo Yolobus to the airport in terms of service? At least in this option they are beginning to think of a New Bridge at Truxel, which is a must. But I suspect that once again the new RT line will not be elevated and will putter its way at street level. In general, LRT at street level just is more congestion--if you are going to expand the Rail system at all, give it grade separation and it's own right of way.

Option C: Now this option just has to be a masturbatory fantasy of trolley fetishists. Gold Line towards El Dorado County? On an old railroad line that was used by loggers and meanders its way to Placerville? And yet more pathetic trolleys that poke along on street level, taking away badly needed lanes on Arden, Fair Oaks, Howe and J Streets! Once more: If you are going to build rail lines at all, build them with exclusive rights of way and grade separation.

So what are we to do?

1. *Don't* renew the Measure A half-cent sales tax. In the absence of ironclad language that says the revenue will go to real road improvements, all the money will only go to trolley fetishists.

2. *Don't* approve any additional tax, unless the initiative somehow has ironclad language that says the revenue will go to real road improvements. (Given shifty judges and shysters, I'd even be a bit skeptical here)

Friday, May 09, 2008

"Traffic Calming": The Butt-Plug Mentality

Katy Grimes, in the Sacramento Union, points out the deceit of "Traffic Calming" schemes, which are choking off a downtown Sacramento that is finally revitalizing.

At least some of the denizens of Midtown Sacramento and the Land Park areas, those who brought us the farce of "traffic calming", have a "butt-plug" mentality; they enjoy constipating the traffic flow for those who need to commute in or through the area. Many of them are Luddites who want us to ride unicycles whereever we go. (OK, bicycles, but anyone carrying groceries and children knows this to be unrealistic.)

No, I really don't care what people do in their private lives, but the metaphor is really appropriate when you think of the demographics of the "rainbow sector".

What to do? Give these neighborhoods a Traffic Enema; perhaps perhaps many Midtowners could appreciate that metaphor.

Here's how:

1. Reopen E and F, G and H, and S and T streets to one way traffic, signals timed appropriately. I have an old city map from 1964 which shows those streets as one ways east-west.

2. Reestablish 19th and 21st streets as one way all the way up to E and F streets, and all the way down through Land Park.

Now in the old days, 19th and 21st, E and F, G and H, and S and T Streets had three lanes going one way. I would do this differently. I would have two wider and safer one way lanes, with bike lanes on each side, the way P and Q streets currently are.

Perhaps 15th and 16th and J and L Streets could get the same "fewer but wider and safer lanes" treatment.

Note to drivers: this is NOT just a sop to bicyclists; bike lanes allow for easier parallel parking maneuvers and wider and safer, albeit fewer, remaining lanes.

The "Mexico City Solution" to traffic, using paint to make more lanes that are VERY narrow, just does NOT work, as anyone from that hell hole can tell you.

Why force Midtown open? Because "traffic calming" is EVIL, that's why!

The term "traffic calming" is simply an attempt to put a favorable "spin" on tactics used to ruin traffic flow (that is, obstruct, divert and slow traffic). Proponents of these tactics are usually persons who live along urban streets in areas known as "mixed neighborhoods" who object to motor vehicle traffic passing by their homes.

Although proponents usually couch their complaints in terms like "speeders" and "reckless drivers," the true irritant for "traffic calming" advocates is "heavy" traffic. Their desired objective is to divert traffic to other streets outside their neighborhood. The devices employed to accomplish this diversion of traffic include:
--inappropriate stop signs --speed humps and bumps
--cement "plugs" blocking streets (metaphoric "butt plugs" if you will)
--lane narrowing and vehicle turning obstructions, and
--absurdly low speed limits.

Only traffic lights (properly timed) are justifiable (for example at pedestrian crossings and busy intersections), the rest are simply hazards.

Increased traffic on residential streets is often caused by misguided and ill-informed management of the main arterials and collector streets. These streets are designed to carry most of the traffic, keeping it off of residential streets.

Misguided proponents of "traffic calming" always fail to realize that the reason they are seeing more traffic on their residential streets is because the same tactics have already been applied to main arterials and collector streets. These include improper installation of stop signs, mistimed traffic signals, and under-posted speed limits on the major arterials that have no relation to actual vehicle speeds. In Midtown, major arterials were actually REMOVED in an utterly perverted attempt to "calm" traffic, such as smoothly flowing one-way streets that were blocked off or were turned into two-way traffic jams. Throw in construction and congestion, and it is no surprise that residential streets are experiencing increased commuter traffic.

The solution to this problem is not to further obstruct traffic flow by pushing the problem into someone else's neighborhood. The real solutions are:

1. To upgrade and improve the traffic handling capabilities of main thoroughfares. This means implementing physical improvements, as well as raising speed limits (major boulevards only) and synchronizing traffic controls to accommodate actual vehicle speeds. If main streets provide convenient access between home, work and shopping destinations, motorists will use them, and stop taking alternate routes through residential neighborhoods.

2. To reconsider land use away from "mixed neighborhoods" in the affected area. Although it has become vogue to have "mixed neighborhoods" (residential, commercial and light industrial closely juxtaposed) in cities, the downside of mixed neighborhoods is very clear: People from outside the neighborhood will come into the neighborhood for the workplace, commercial interest, or recreational interest, and they will drive there to do so. Even if there is an efficient bus system and lack of parking in the neighborhood to discourage driving, that bus system in itself means heavy traffic! There would be a lot less traffic in a neighborhood if it was only residential.

3. Frankly, one real solution is for people in affected mixed neighborhood areas to GET OVER IT. The price of living in an area "where the action is" (an area within walking distance to lots of cafes, "night life", nifty boutiques, and office space) is to have increased traffic. That's simply a fact of life.

Midtown is located between downtown Sacramento and the Cal State University area, and contains many office workspaces, night clubs, cafes open late hours, historical landmarks like Sutter's Fort, two major hospitals, and an industrial park located on a former cannery site. All of which will bring in traffic into and through the area.

The "butt-plugs" who lobbied for these traffic hazards live in Midtown. Middle-of-town. Get it? If they wanted nice quiet neighborhoods, they should go live out in more residential neighborhoods without the commercial and office space nearby.

4. To construct bypasses when possible.

COMBATING TRAFFIC OBSTRUCTION INITIATIVES IN YOUR COMMUNITY

1. Know Your Enemy

Traffic obstruction advocates are local residents, usually few in number, who have decided to rid their street of unwanted traffic. They may use a collection of "politically correct" (sic) excuses about the evils of cars, but usually they are saner and they espouse a safety concern or the "it's for the children" argument. However, their overriding concern is most often "heavy traffic." Because they are local residents, they can attend public meetings and harangue elected officials, unlike motorists who simply pass through a community. The debate is usually one sided and the local officials eventually cave in to the demands for traffic obstruction installations. From their perspective, it's the easiest thing to do.

2. Know Your Advantages

If you also live in the community and you can attend public meetings, your influence will be equal to or greater than your opponents'. Your presence puts elected officials on notice that they can't eliminate the source of their aggravation by appeasing the other side. Now they have to contend with you, your allies, and your arguments.

3. Know Your Allies

Along with other residents in your neighborhood who do not relish more irritation in their daily travels, there are other sources of support to oppose traffic obstruction projects.

Devices that physically impede vehicle speeds hinder emergency response services such as the police, EMTs, and fire trucks. These same devices create problems for public works departments, road maintenance crews, and delivery services. Indeed, I wouldn't want to be an elderly person in an area affected by "traffic calming". If you have "fallen and you can't get up", Life-Alert won't help the paramedics in their attempt to dodge all the asinine traffic barriers.

Traffic engineers are often stymied in their attempts to stop the improper use of traffic control devices, like stop signs, because they have no support from the citizenry. They only hear demands from "squeaky wheels" who want a barrier on every corner to slow down traffic, or even block it entirely. If nobody is coming out in opposition to traffic obstruction, these engineers are less likely to fight the very council that determines their promotions and raises. They may be thrilled to find that there are people in the citizenry who understand that traffic obstruction goes against the general body of traffic engineering knowledge.

Representatives from such factions, combined with a few local residents, can provide formidable opposition to traffic obstruction projects. Also, you may find elected officials who oppose traffic obstruction projects.

4. Finding And Gathering Support

Approach the editors or reporters and let them know that you are forming a citizen's group to oppose traffic obstruction projects. With a little encouragement, the paper may do a story about your efforts. This is a tremendous opportunity to explain why you think traffic obstruction tactics are harmful to your community. Including your email address and telephone number will make it possible for potential supporters to contact you. If it is not possible to arrange for this kind of article, a letter to the editor can serve the same purpose. Do not be discouraged by a small response. If you are starting this fight alone, even one more person on your side will double your capabilities. Personal visits to the police and fire chief, public works superintendent, and the city traffic engineer may encourage them to work with you or suggest other supporters. Do not overlook local car clubs, businesses on affected streets, neighbors, and like-minded friends.

Of course, this all depends upon the local paper. If they are dominated by the sort of interests who want everyone to live in hives and ride unicycles wherever they go or other such Luddites, you won't get a fair hearing. But give it a try anyway.

5. Arguments Against Traffic Obstruction Devices

Traffic obstruction devices:

A. Can increase response time for emergency vehicles. When seconds matter, having to slow to pass over speed bumps and humps or navigate narrow roadways can mean the difference between life and death, or the loss of one's home. The fact that some of these devices can seriously damage emergency vehicles and other vehicles along the roadway is also a concern.

B. Can increase congestion on other streets and create problems in other neighborhoods. If traffic obstruction devices divert traffic to other streets, they may compound congestion problems that already exist in those areas. If not successful in diverting traffic to other streets, traffic obstruction devices will compound congestion problems on the streets on which they are installed.

C. Will increase vehicle wear and tear, air pollution, and noise. Braking and accelerating in response to speed bumps, speed humps, stop signs, and traffic signals increases fuel consumption and emissions. This can contradict other efforts to reduce emissions and contribute to a community becoming or remaining a "non-attainment" air quality zone, thereby being subjected to federal mandates and restrictions. (Of course, one suspects that for the Luddites, that's precisely the idea!)

D. Can increase street maintenance costs. Speed bumps and humps impede tree pruning and leaf cleaning equipment, a serious concern in older neighborhoods. Removable devices may soon be available, although they will require additional labor to install and remove them. Municipalities must maintain and repair stop signs and traffic signals, at taxpayer expense, of course. Barriers that impede leaf removal (already a BIG problem in Sacramento proper) are that much worse.

E. Increase a community's liability for accidents attributed to such devices.

F. May cause physical discomfort, even pain, for disabled persons or persons with physical ailments. Being jolted or jostled by speed bumps and humps can be painful for persons with injuries or painful illnesses.

G. Create neighborhood friction. Road rage is a growing phenomenon, and the "traffic calming" mentality has much to do with it. Frequently, the response to unnecessary stop signs is to angrily ignore them. One suspects that the growing popularity of jacked-up pickup trucks and very large sport-utility vehicles in Sacramento has a lot to do with the fact that they can drive over speed bumps and turn the corner on those "corner chokers."

Not all persons (not even most persons) on a given street will appreciate having to run an obstacle course every time they drive to or from home or their kids' school. Some traffic obstruction opponents blow their horns or yell verbal insults when having to slow or stop for speed bumps or humps. (Personally, I liked to blow my horn loud and long whenever client business took me to the Midtown Sacramento area with such asinine devices installed. When asked why I am doing so, I always reply, "for safety, because of the children, don't you know...")

6. Presenting Your Arguments

Again, use the local newspaper to broadcast your reasons for objecting to supposed "traffic calming" projects. A letter to the editor will again substitute for an actual article. Letters from multiple supporters (of your position) will add momentum to your efforts. Remember, local officials read "letters to the editor" to gauge local opinion.

Personal visits to local elected officials will put a human face on your arguments and will add credence to the degree of your sincerity. It also puts them on notice that you are not going to go away if they decide to ignore your concerns. Encourage your supporters to make similar visits and to regularly talk with their local elected officials.

Always arrange for someone to attend public meetings where "traffic calming" projects are likely to be discussed. If public notices do not list the topics to be discussed, your friends in the public works department, or an advocate on the council or board, can probably keep you on top of the issue, should it be a topic of discussion.

7. Solving The Problem

The mere presence of organized opposition will often stop the advance of traffic obstruction projects. However, heavy traffic in residential neighborhoods will continue, as will the agitation to reduce this traffic. If the problem is not corrected, your victory will be temporary.

A strategy that encourages traffic to move to major streets only will have the greatest effect on reducing through traffic on residential streets. Raising speed limits (on major boulevards only), synchronizing traffic lights, removing four-way stop signs, and improving access to roadside businesses will bring traffic back to the main arterials, where it belongs. You can present this as a "win-win" solution.

If you offer positive alternate courses of action, your municipality cannot argue that it has no choice but to install traffic obstruction devices. You will have proven that these devices do not solve the problems of traffic congestion. You will have shown that they create new and more serious problems for city departments, emergency services, and the general motoring public. You will have offered suggestions that will reduce traffic in all residential neighborhoods, not just the ones slated for traffic obstruction devices. Finally, you will have offered suggestions for improving traffic flow on the city's main thoroughfares.

Here's a great leaflet for people in neighborhoods considering "traffic calming" measures. Tailor it for your situation:

THINKING OF SIGNING THAT SPEED HUMP PETITION?

Here are some questions we thought you'd want the answers to. You may want to reconsider signing!

Fire at your house? Well, the fire truck will eventually arrive after it makes a complete stop at each hump. Time lost at each hump will be about 15-30 seconds. Sit tight, help will arrive - later.

Relative having a heart attack? The ambulance will be there - later.

Does your youngster have skates, a skateboard or a bicycle? Speed humps attract children into the street and into traffic. It's fun to jump those humps! The ambulance will be there - later!

Has leaf removal or storm drain gutters backing up been a problem? If it hasn't, it probably will be.

Is your house attractive? How will it look with two of those 2 1/2-feet-square "Speed Hump - 20 mph" signs (the color of this page) out in front? And those foot-wide zebra stripes on the hump? Lovely! Or maybe they won't be in front of YOUR house. Do you feel lucky?

What do you think will happen to the suspension and exhaust systems on your nice car at normal, legal speeds when you cross those humps at least twice a day? Ouch! It's hard on the brakes, too. And what about your wallet? Ouch!

Some vehicles, like delivery trucks and maybe your own small car, almost have to stop at speed humps. What happens when vehicles unexpectedly stop in traffic? Back to the repair shop!

Are speed humps good for the environment? No, the unnecessary slowing and accelerating they cause results in wasted fuel and increased air pollution.

Humps can cause noise pollution, too, because some drivers who aren't happy with them will lean on the horn button.

Any way you look at them, humps are a major nuisance, and drivers may indeed avoid them so that traffic increases on neighboring streets. In any case, even if you're the only one left driving on your street, you'll have the pleasure of bounding over those humps every day, again and again and again....

Next to last question: Who's paying the bill for installing or removing the humps? (Hint: It's not the city.) You are! Ouch!

Have you thought about signing that petition? We hope you'll reconsider.

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

How San Jose (and the Bay Area) became unaffordable

A fascinating Cato Institute study on how anti-growth and rail transit policies are screwing over San Jose and leading to the very L.A.-style sprawl that advocates of such policies claim to oppose.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Arden Arcadians Desire Incorporation

It looks like large numbers of people in the Arden Arcade neighborhood want to incorporate, with two different possible sets of city boundaries, here and here .

Good for them, I might add. Neighborhoods that have incorporated have taken control of their destinies and improved conditions for their residents, as Citrus Heights (1997), Elk Grove (2000), and Rancho Cordova (2003) have empirically shown. Nor would this shortchange the County for business tax revenue, so long as the County makes a hard (but fair) "revenue neutrality" payments bargain.

"The county isn't meant to do what a city should do," (incorporation proponent Trish) Harrington said. "A county is meant to provide social services, provide judges and the courts. It's not meant to do infrastructure and provide garbage services."

Meanwhile, when it comes to incorporation, Dan Walters, McClatchy's anointed guru of the Cali political scene, is half-perceptive and half-clueless:

"Sacramento County's flurry of incorporations reflects its unique development pattern after World War II, when -- thanks to shortsighted decisions by local civic leaders -- large residential subdivisions and major commercial areas evolved into unincorporated suburbs, served with a pastiche of municipal services by county government and a welter of single-purpose districts....One by one, these unincorporated communities in what The Sacramento Bee has dubbed the "uncity" have become frustrated with the lack of local control and cityhood movements have been mounted."


He's right on about that. However, he also injects this:

"the state's 58 counties are hobbled by their antiquated structures and bifurcated roles as units of local government and agents of the state."

Oh really? Why is that? The counties make perfect sense for implementing state programs, for the courts, and for local services in areas that are just sparsely populated farms and ranches. It's only when the unincorporated areas turn into densely populated cities and suburbs that the county government becomes too unwieldy and not responsive enough.

"Simply continuing to expand cities without dealing with counties will backfire in the long run. A strong case could be made for eliminating urban counties and merging them with cities into larger regional governments -- super-cities, in effect."


Gee whiz Danno, we already have a "super city", namely, the urbanized area of unincorporated Sacramento County. And it is sluggish, unwieldy and often out of touch with its citizens. You want a new "regional" bureaucracy instead, which I suspect would be even more unelectable and unaccountable? That's revealing. Far better to have local cities, no matter how balkanized they are, that have to respond to the local citizens.

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Sufferin' Succotash! A sad farewell to John Katz


I always wondered what happend to a local radio host, John Katz, who went off the air a while back. Well, now I know it was due to his declining health, and he has passed away.
He had a radio show on Modesto Radio Station KCBC (770AM) called "One Man's View Of Americanism" ("One Manth View Of Americanithm") every Sunday from 4 to 6 PM. It was based upon articles from John Birch Society publications like the New American magazine. Unfortunately, Mr. Katz had a bit of a lisp, resulting in a radio voice that reminded me of an angry and grumpy version of Sylvester The Cat.

I think Mr. Katz, like the John Birchers I have met, was a well-meaning and patriotic man. However, to attribute everything to a seemingly unstoppable conspiracy involving one world order types, the Trilateral Commission, the Council On Foreign Relations, and the Freemasons is tiresome. Too much doom and gloom do not inspire; they paralyze.

The philosopher Robert Nozick distinguished between two approaches to political thought: the "invisible hand" and the "hidden hand." Those who embrace the "invisible hand" believe that people, given the freedom to make their own choices, tend to achieve social goals without being forced to do so.

Sometimes the invisible hand fails, and strong central leadership is needed. But as a general rule, free markets and civil liberties have worked well in promoting human progress. They have certainly proved better than the alternative, in the form of state control, which has produced only poverty, war, and misery.

"Hidden hand" thinkers, by contrast, believe that everything is controlled by unseen forces -- not spiritual but human in nature. Socialism thrives on such ideas. In fact, socialism depends on conspiracy theories to justify its war against personal liberty, to blame for its inevitable failures, and to cover up its own very real machinations.

Although Mr. Katz was a patriotic and free-enterprise oriented man, he sadly fell into the "hidden hand" delusion, only he came from the Right rather than the Left.

Moreover, Mr. Katz always touted the American Independent / Constitution Party, calling the Republican Party "Socialist Party B". While I grant him that RINOs do often disappoint us, American history has taught us again and again the futility of 3rd parties. Rather than pushing for patriots to get involved with the Republican Party and push it in a proper direction, 3rd party movements only squander effort.

The Modesto Bee
March 10, 2006

CONSERVATIVE RADIO SHOW HOST
JOHN KATZ, 70, DIES
MERRILL BALASSONE, BEE STAFF WRITER

John Harry Katz, a lifetime member of the ultraconservative John Birch Society whose demonstrations in Modesto targeted the United Nations, died of natural causes Monday in Manteca at Kaiser Foundation Hospital. He was 70.

Katz was a resident of Modesto for more than 40 years and was the host of a weekly radio show for 26 years called "One Man's View of Americanism," where he targeted what he believed was an oppressive government trying to establish a New World Order -a global communism that would mean "total subjugation of the people of the world."

Pamela Reddington, an engineer on Katz's show at KCBC for eight years, said Katz never had a shortage of listeners wanting to call in, whether it was to show their support or start a passionate debate. And when a guest became too contentious, Katz would simply tell Reddington to "cut 'em off."
"Some of the listeners didn't appreciate the things he said, but his shows were always lively, and I was always on my toes," Reddington said.

Reddington recalls Katz once hosting his show from his hospital bed after undergoing hip surgery.

"He was trying to run the show while yelling at people coming in the door," she said. "I never laughed so hard in my life. He was always great fun one way or the other."

But to local law enforcement, Katz was a more ornery figure. In 1974, Katz was escorted from a United Nations celebration at the Stanislaus County Library in Modesto because he tried to stop Sea Explorer Scouts from flying a U.N. flag next to the American flag.

Katz, a native of Sacramento, opened an advertising agency called Inter-Related Services in Modesto and produced his own lithographing, silk screening and print work. Katz also spent three years in the Army.

Katz is survived by his children, Ken Katz of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, Kim Katz and Kristopher Katz, both of Modesto, and Kurtis Katz of Thousand Oaks; brother, Ellis Katz of Sacramento; sister, Sue Biancalana of Mill Valley; and six grandchildren.

Visitation will take place from 10 a.m. to noon Monday at Salas Brothers Funeral Chapel. A funeral will be at 1 p.m. Monday at the chapel, with burial to follow at Lakewood Memorial Park, Hughson.

Remembrances may be made to Sovereign Grace Baptist Church Building Fund, 6509 Shoemake Ave., Modesto 95358.

The Modesto Bee
March 14, 2006
RADIO SHOW HOST KATZ WILL BE MISSED

I was brokenhearted to learn of the death of John Katz, who died March 6 in Manteca. Like many longtime Modesto residents, I first learned of John through his Saturday morning talk show on KTRB, a weekly excursion into the far reaches of what many call the political fringe. John was an unapologetic member of the John Birch Society, and that's what he talked about, relentlessly.

Although I found much to disagree with him on politically, we eventually found ourselves on the same side of a local issue and met in person. I was pleasantly surprised to find him possessed of a keen sense of humor. We became friends. John was one of the kindest and most gracious men I've ever known.

Modesto will remember him for his politics and his talk show, and so will I. But there's much more to miss about the man than a colorful and often intimidating public persona.

MICHAEL PULLEN
Modesto