DISQUS

sunshinelb USA Department of Treasury Comptorller Consent order for International City Bank exists. January 26 2009 Consent Order is available online on OCC website. http://www.occ.treas.gov/
(#2009-011 International City Bank AA-WE-08-74)

..."The requirement in this Order to meet and maintain a specific capital level means that the Bank is not to be deemed to be “well capitalized” for purposes of 12 U.S.C. § 1831o and 12 C.F.R. Part 6 pursuant to 12 C.F.R. § 6.4(b)(1)(iv)."

Take a look at International City's board of directors.

Allen Miya And you think the Board of the DLBA and/or the DLBA itself controls the fact that cityplace has leased space to WalMart?

Dave in Alamitos Beach Yeah, and I could almost handle a financial failure if it was an esthetic success. Um, not so much.

The Toad DLBA should not be absolved of anything here, but I am having a real problem comprehending why Kojian is being singled out; it appears to me that he is being set up as a scapegoat. He is duty-bound to express the "endorsements of projects" of the DLBA Board in front of the City Council and elsewhere. I have frequently found myself at odds with many of said endorsements but I never saw fit to want to "kill the messenger". I have no vested interest whatsoever in defending him; I am seeking a "greater truth" here. Just how long do you think he would have retained his job if he publicly staked out positions in opposition to Queen Bev's pet projects, all of which have proven to be fiscal debacles? I'd say about 48 hours. The real issue here is who pushes Kojians button and susequently who pushes their bottons.

The Toad And all of this is Kraig Kojian's fault? How?

lbresident What should have been built specifically instead of cityplace and the pike?

John_Greet I believe you are artificially inflating your figures but I have already acknowledged that total City employee compensation (including that for public safety) makes up the largest share of General Fund expenditures.

I have never said that all of our current deficit can be corrected by cutting everything but public safety. I have simply said that if we were more fiscally responsible elsewhere in our budget, we would have more for those things, like public safety, that we *claim* are essential to us and priorities.

My argument is not, to any degree, "abstract". It is, in fact, most specific and pragmatic. It incorporates an apples-to-apples comparison of like professions (municipal law enforcement) and like activity levels within that profession (similarly-sized cities).

Your hypothetical, on the other hand, incorporates neither and, thus, is far more representative of the abstract.

The Toad You are so right! But look at what Jerry Brown did to Oakland, only to be elected Attorney General from whence he also will run for Governor. Any republican candidate is probably "toast" from the get-go due to Arnold having been such a failure (and that is putting it nicely and from a republican), so where does that leave us? Is there a fiscally prudent democrat in Calif. that has any chance at mounting a viable candidacy? I think it is time for those with most of their sanity intact to leave Calif.

wrongbeachJohn Compton residents (just like South Gate's) had no input with their wacky mayor, wacky council and wacky officials decision to eliminate their city police departments.

wrong beach residents have had no input with our wacky mayor, wacky council and wacky officials in their decision to attempt to overpay dean for his unbelievably overpriced land.

Compton, South Gate, Long Beach, Vallejo. Four cities administratively in common.

John_Greet And my contention is that City government could better afford to properly compensate its public safety personnel if it practiced more fiscal responsibility in other areas of its budget.

The POA *always* negotiates, Juan. Even, in the past, when negotiations went to impasse and working conditions were imposed on the POA membership without their ratification, the POA still negotiated, and in good faith, throughout the process.

Cops are prohibited by law from engaging in work actions like strikes or sick-outs. This is just one more example of how cops are treated differently from other employees...how they voluntarily waive their rights to certain recourses in some areas, in service to their communities.

All they're asking in return, in Long Beach mind you, not Vallejo, is to be compensated in a manner that is "average"..."in the middle range"...in comparison to their colleagues in similarly-sized cities.

This is not, in my view, in any way "excessive", especially in the context of what I believe to be considerable waste and inefficiency elsewhere in the City's budget.

John_Greet Juan: My comments do not “border on propaganda”. They are irrefutable and fully supportable fact.

Again you attempt a comparison between sworn law enforcement and other public and private sector professions and again I argue that there is no such apples-to-apples comparison possible. *No other employees* in either the public or private sector have a “duty” to enforce civilian law or to keep the peace. This “duty” brings with it considerable authority derived from and responsibility to the public and demonstrable personal risk that other professions are not required, as a matter of law, to assume.

You allege that I failed to answer your “most poignant question". I did answer that question; you simply appear to not have understood the answer. The answer is: “Long Beach…*must* establish budget priorities and then *must* scrupulously adhere to them, in both bad AND good economic cycles. Those priorities must likewise be reflective of the priorities of its People, as represented be a majority of its electorate”

Thus, if public safety is the top priority for the electorate, and time after time they (we) assert that it is, then we should not be considering cutting funds to public safety while continuing to fund lower or non-priority projects, activities or services.

Long Beach’s true challenge is less one of income, and more one of expenditure. To put this as simply as possible: Because we, as a government, spend money on non-essential programs and services, there is less money for the programs and services we have deemed to be essential. Thus we, as a government, are not truly budgeting according to the priorities we, ourselves, have set. If we were, there would be sufficient funds for public safety, even during economic downturns. That, Juan, is where the money should come from to fund those increased costs for public safety that are determined, by the electorate, to be reasonable.

Does that sufficiently clarify my position?

John_Greet Juan Pardell: The other strategic plan cities all hire police officers on and off throughout their budget cycles. Moreover they sometimes hire “lateral entry” (trained and experienced) officers when they are not hiring entry-level officers. Hiring lateral entry officers derives considerable benefit for an agency because they get a trained and experienced officer without having had to bear the initial (and considerable) costs for that training.

Many agencies are willing to pay far above the median for such an officer and this is precisely why it is in Long Beach’s best interests to offer not only the median but above…to remain attractive to all its officers, but especially to its more experienced officers as well as competitive with those other agencies.

As you can imagine, competition for public safety jobs is extremely fierce. The standards for selection and retention are high and constantly elevating. 95-98% attrition rates during the grueling process between original application and academy graduation are not uncommon and graduates must still successfully complete a difficult and demanding field-training program AFTER making it through the academy.

Long Beach is atypical of most cities in that it that still operates its own State-certified police academy. Many cities simply contract to other agencies, like LASD and Long Beach, or with College-based Academies such as Rio Hondo or Golden West, to provide basic and advanced police training to their applicants. Long Beach’s academy is highly regarded within the profession because we routinely provide more hours on every training topic than the State requires.

These circumstances, and the fact that Long Beach police officers generally gain far more experience and expertise far faster than those from most other area cities, tends to make experienced officers from our City very highly sought after and very actively recruited by agencies that very often offer better pay and benefits. Some of our experienced officers do, indeed, move on to agencies making better offers. This is their choice and I in no way fault them for it.

But most of our experienced officers do not leave, even though they certainly could. There are many reasons for that as well. Some, like myself, were born here or grew up here or live here currently and, so, have very strong ties to this community. Like me they do not choose to assume the risks of their chosen profession for just anyone or any agency. They have chosen, and choose to remain in, Long Beach, because they are truly dedicated to this city and its people.

I agree with your overall premise that the fiscal paths that most jurisdictions are following these days are simply not sustainable. Some, but by no means all, of the reason for this is the cost of employee pay and benefits, which, I think you’ll agree, is always the greatest operating cost for ANY employer, public or private sector.

Long Beach, like all other cities, *must* establish budget priorities and then *must* scrupulously adhere to them, in both bad AND good economic cycles. Those priorities must likewise be reflective of the priorities of its People, as represented be a majority of its electorate. If the People determine that they will remunerate their public safety personnel in a certain way then that’s the way they should be remunerated. There will be consequences, both positive and negative, attendant to whatever level of compensation is decided upon.

As a resident, as a taxpayer and as a cop in Long Beach, this greatest of Southern California cities, I feel that’s precisely the way it *ought* to be.

The Toad Long Beach may well "follow the path of Vallejo". I hate to say it, but most LB residents/voters probably have no clue what we are talking about. By this time next year, MUNICIPAL BANKRUPTCY should be looking mighty damned good!

Jim McCabe I have no idea. Someone in the Finance Department at the City has some idea but its hard to imagine anyone in the public who would have sufficiently detailed financial information to figure out if LB could go BK. I suppose that the national rating agencies follow medium sized cities like LB but even their info must be dated.

The Toad Amen!

Mike Ruehle I second that thought and commend your actions.

John_Greet Juan: Thanks very much for your responses. You raise some very valid concerns and I, in fact, share some of them with you. Unlike you, however, I’m not prepared to lay all of the challenges of the 9th District entirely at Mr. Lerch’s feet. I believe he has accomplished or helped to accomplish much. This is not to say that there is not still much to be done. Mr. Lerch has said as much himself and expressed a strong desire to continue to work to improve his District.

In this day and age of officials that seem far more interested in self-aggrandizement and self- enrichment than in true public service, is Mr. Lerch’s stated desire really so terrible?

One of the challenges you identify…that of overall City budgeting…is indeed a very difficult one for me and, I believe, for each of our Council members as well. As a City employee I do, indeed, benefit from enhancements in wages and benefits that are negotiated on my behalf. No doubt like you and most others, I strive greatly to provide the very best life for my family that I can.

But as you say, our General Fund, like those of so many other municipalities, Counties and States, has been in near continuous deficit for some time now. It’s sometimes tough, at least for me, to reconcile the two competing interests…providing properly for my family and desiring that my City be managed in a more fiscally responsible manner.

I say “sometimes difficult” because I see a lot of what I believe to be waste throughout this city; money squandered, misspent and allocated needlessly in many areas. This is also a reason many General Fund projects and other needs sometimes go un- and underfunded. It’s not solely due to employee pay and benefits. When I see such waste; it’s considerably less difficult for me to provide for my family by accepting the pay and benefits that are sometimes negotiated on my behalf.

And when I see that we remunerate our non-management level City employees, sworn and civilian alike, consistently at or below the median of other Cities of similar size…and that this has been our practice for the nearly 25 years I have been thus employed…then accepting the best contract that can be negotiated becomes less difficult still.

I understand your frustrations, Juan. But I do not agree that they are all caused by or the responsibility of either our Council or our City employees.

As I have said many times before, at the end of the day, it is the electorate that has the ultimate responsibility for our City government and, thus, it is the electorate that must shoulder the lion’s share of any blame that is to be apportioned.

howardx excellent point juan.