Comments by Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Steven Hyman,

You really need to read about Chapter 9 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code BEFORE writing. Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot Springs, it was held that City assets need NOT be sold. It also allowed continued delivery of ALL City services.

Sorry to confuse with facts,
Ken Johnson

P.S. Marc Levinson of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe is Vallejo’s bankruptcy attorney

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

What is the cost of AB 1991 to us?

The CC4 won’t tell us! They could: Ask at the CC mtg 20 May

Orrick

This is just the beginning. After the Appropriations Committee, comes [maybe] Committee on Natural Resources and the Assembly Floor. Next would be a repeat of the whole thing in the Senate. Then who knows - a Governor Veto?

Following a doubtful passage of AB 1991, then the real money starts flowing out defending against real law suits by those who would have fought on our side. Just what has the CC4 budgeted for this?

Read the Settlement Agreement for what we are on the hook!

It doesn’t get any better than, with the exception of getting Harvard lawyer & Professor Alan Dershowitz as co-counsel for an appeal, having the free assistance of the California Coastal Commission and the State of California Attorney Generals office assisting on an appeal - Now, we will be paying to defending against their opposition.

CUSD will loose significant impact fees (what was in place in 1990 was far less than stat limit set today).

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Back to AB 1991.

The same coalition that supports AB 1991 were the ones that fought in 1972 California Proposition 20, Coastal Initiative. Hopefully, we will have the same result with the benefit of identifying the Anti-Environment Assembly Members for the upcoming election and their defeat at the polls.

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Ray Olson,

P.S. The prior few comments should also demonstrate Anneliese Agren on May 16 at 8:40pm comment.

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Ray Olson,

You asked about ‘Straw man’.

You are welcome.

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Ray Olson,

I am sorry you do not believe in God and we will pray for you! A loose ‘Straw man’.

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Ray Olson,

Once again, you have raised irrelevance to a new height. I would assert that any sentient being has standing as to the real substance and goal of AB 1991. AB 1991, at its heart, is a roadmap for circumventing the protection of environment and endangered species. All have a stake in saving a creation of God!

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Steven Hyman,

Actually the CC4 denied us the right to find out IF “Walker’s verdict is [would be] upheld” on Appeal. The galling thing is that the CC4 are spending our money, at an unprecedented rate, as you point out on the most expensive legal talent available to abrogate the vote of more that 70% of HMB’s vote on Measure A and 70% of California voters on Proposition 20 that resulted in the Coastal Act.

The irony, in your comment, is that if all else fails to stop the fulfilling of the terms in the CC4 ‘Settlement Agreement’, it will be the actions of a different prior liberal United States President in seeing to the passage of a series of environmental protection legislation 35 years ago. That would include the “Endangered Species Act of 1973” done by that flaming liberal - President Nixon.

How does the Appropriations Committee evaluate the cost to California in the passage of AB1991 and the “Road Map” it would create for the loss of even one unique species, let alone threatening an entire coastal habitat?

It is not a Liberal V. Conservative issue! It is not a Republican V. Democrat issue!  It is a Right V. Wrong issue!

One Planet.

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Anneliese,

Maybe you are right - I always thought of him as a turnip. But I don’t want to change the conversation from “Local Government Committee passes AB1991-next stop: Appropriations Committee” ;|

Ken Johnson

Opinion: Review’s coverage of AB 1991 is biased and incomplete

Kevin Barron,

Substantiate Your claims with multiple specific examples - if you are capable of doing that! Be complete, rather than vague, obtuse and illusionary! 

You wrote: “Coastsider postings on AB1991 are biased and incomplete.” YOUR posting is the only one I see that completely matches that description.

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

APPROPRIATIONS Committee
HEARING DATE :  05/14/2008

Ken Johnson

Local Government Committee passes AB1991—next stop: Appropriations Committee

Kevin Lansing,

Vallejo will file for Chapter 9 protection. They voted last night.

HMB next?

Ken Johnson

Watch AB1991 committee hearing live TODAY at 1:30pm

Kevin Barron,

A fact check and a veracity Check:

Let’s look at your full quotes:

You wrote above on May 01 at 9:09pm
“It was just not shocking to see a rep from the CCC, lay claim… like they do on EVERY measure that comes across their desk to say this would be unprecedented ... many of us think it’s about time to break the spell, so to speak.”

Then you wrote: on May 04 at 10:51am
“I was talking about the CCC rep whom spoke at the meeting as I watched the video Barry so graciously gave us the heads up on. Thusly my verbiage clearly stated as:
(shocking to see a rep from the CCC, lay claim)
See, not read. “

Let’s see if you can REALLY find what you claimed, by giving a time reference on:
Local Government Committee passes AB1991-next stop: Appropriations Committee since you claimed you vividly remembered it 6 hours after the fact - this should be a snap for you to pass the veracity test. [I just don’t think so - prove me wrong.]

Oh, and can you name ANY other, that, in your words: “like they do on EVERY measure that comes across their desk to say this would be unprecedented “.

BILL ANALYSIS - ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
I think it is important, because I believe it will be useful for the opponent of any State Assembly Member who votes for AB 1991.

I would expect their opponent to identify the incumbent as voting for unprecedented exemptions to environmental statutes and regulations.

“exemptions to the environmental statutes and regulations ...of the scope set forth in this bill from so many different statutes are unprecedented.”

A vote for AB 1991 will provide the basis to defeat the Anti-Environmentalists in the State Assembly!

Ken Johnson

Senator Yee withdraws as a co-author of Beachwood settlement bill

Kevin Barron,

Fact Check:
It is zoned for residential development not commercial.

There is also the option of filing for Chapter 9 Reorganization; seeking an evaluation by the court of the Settlement Agreement which is really a contract to purchase property at a price beyond the fair value. There may be the prospect of seeing the dollar amount reduced. It would also be an opportunity to open up the process - did the City Council Majority ‘throw the case’?

Compared to watching the City Council Majority throw our money around like a sailor on shore leave; it doesn’t sound like a bad option.

If the cost [dollar bleed] since 1 April 2008 is not provided Tuesday, 05 May 2008, night at the City Council Meeting, the Citizens of Half Moon Bay should feel outrage!

Ken Johnson

Watch AB1991 committee hearing live TODAY at 1:30pm

Carl May,

Recalling my part in “the first attempts to create an LCP for HMB” is like recalling a root canal and a prior marriage. I’ll try to give a ‘short’ response to a multi decade effort.

HMB at that time was an owned subsidiary of the Building Industry Association and SAMCAR. It operated as if it was an independent country approving anything presented for building residential housing so long as they were providing a face saving gift. Quite literally, once they received jerseys for a ball team - reminiscent of the scene in the movie Rocky, where Stallone was wearing a robe with advertising, when asked what he had received for the advertising, he replied, “the robe”.

When the Coastal Act was passed, the City Council did not get it that they had to comply with State law. They were ‘annoyed’ when Enforcement began, griping about the hotel being stopped at Ocean Colony. On another development proposal, I had to bring in a legal transcriptionist (they produced no record of meetings at the time) to a City Council meeting, to get their attention that we were going to court!

At the California Coastal Commission meetings, it probably appeared as a ‘head scratcher’ from the audience. Being asked by the Chair to resolve that my name appeared in the front of the document yet my ‘speaker sheet’ had the box opposed marked, it offered the opportunity to explain and exceed my five minutes allocated to delineate the conflicts between the submission from the city and the requirements. The City consistently tried to circumvent the law and had their submission sent back for revision.

During the time period leading up to the Measure A vote [May 1991] [an interesting coincidence in numbering - AB 1991] the City Council approved every development they could before Measure A would beat the opposing City Council Measure B measure by a 2 to 1 margin. As an author of Measure A, I brought a legal action [seeking a Writ of Mandamus] to overrule the delaying action of the City Council.

To provide an understanding of the contempt the City Council had / has for Federal and State environmental law, Dykstra Ranch, so named at the time, represents the most egregious where a habitat pond for two endangered species was approved by the City Council per the developers request to be replaced with a ‘concrete pond’ to be chlorinated and maintained with filtration - that is the definition of a people swimming pool!

The “why” is more difficult to explain. ‘They’ have little support beyond those most obligated to residential development and their campaign contributions. This is comparatively a cheap place to develop because of the minimal requests beyond the legal minimums. So we have a symbiotic relationship - only the residents loose. There is also an entertaining emotional component for them that I have observed. At various conferences where they were representing the City and I attended by other representation they looked so ‘cute and proud’ of their little name badges showing Mayor. I don’t think they ever knew they were the brunt of laughter upon leaving the room. As was put being the big fish in the bitty pond of HMB - in south Texas speak, a pond the size of a heal print after a morning shower.

Today CUSD and CCWD have joined HMB. The best example was their using an Administrative CDP to approve the Cunha Middle School project last year - absurd. CUSD didn’t want it publicized that their insistence on holding to Wavecrest squandered about as much money as the City in the Settlement Agreement. That the New Cunha School will look a lot like the Old Cunha School.

So you may ask how that relates now to development interests. For the past year, a group in the development business has been meeting with CUSD to decide what school properties they can sell off for development. [The only specific comment made last year in the recording of our new School Superintendent by Darin Boville referred to this activity.] The proceeds they hope will cover what was lost by their last land debacle! And the City Council will be requested to ‘expedite’ the project ‘for the children’. The irony is that the ‘for the children’ chant ends up to the detriment ‘to the children’ and their parents!

Not quite as short as I had hoped,
Ken Johnson

Watch AB1991 committee hearing live TODAY at 1:30pm

Kevin Barron,

I agree with your self characterization that you “have no clue”! Did you ignore or simply lacked the knowledge to understand that the quotation didn’t come from the California Coastal Commission?

I provided the citation to the document immediately before the quotation.

For your edification:
From ‘Glossary of Legislative Terms’, Prepared by: The Legislative Counsel, State of California:

“Bill Analysis:
A document prepared by committee and/or floor analysis staff prior to hearing the bill in that committee or on the floor of the Assembly or Senate. It explains how a bill would change current law and sometimes identifies major interest groups in support or opposition.”

Interesting, in that you presumed the source to be the CCC, demonstrates that actually know that the CCC is correct!

Ken Johnson

Watch AB1991 committee hearing live TODAY at 1:30pm

Kevin Barron,

Were you attempting to direct a question to me? I am sympathetic to the ELL challenged. I simply can not make any sense of your writing. Maybe you can attempt to rephrase your question or comment - which ever form of a sentence may apply. An ellipsis simply does not provide sufficient information as your only form of termination punctuation. Sorry!

Ken Johnson

Watch AB1991 committee hearing live TODAY at 1:30pm

The List in Support tells one story. The Legislative Analysis tells it in one word - “unprecedented”!

BILL ANALYSIS - ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
“While limited exemptions to the environmental statutes and regulations affected by AB 1991 have been granted before, it appears that exemptions of the scope set forth in this bill from so many different statutes are unprecedented. They will no longer be unprecedented if AB 1991 passes. “

“Support: 
City of Half Moon Bay [SPONSOR]
CA Association of Realtors
CA Building Industry Association
Californians for Property Rights
Coastside Community First
Half Moon Bay Coastside Chamber of Commerce & Visitors’ Bureau
Half Moon Bay Firefighters Association
Half Moon Bay Management Team
Half Moon Bay Police Management Association
Half Moon Bay Police Officers Association
San Mateo County Association of Realtors
Stationary Engineers, Local 39
Individual letters (77)”

Do you see a theme to the list? Can you tell why they support AB 1991?

Ken Johnson

Watch AB1991 committee hearing live TODAY at 1:30pm

On a 4-2 vote, AB 1991 moves to next hearing.

Ken Johnson

Coastal Commission director says HMB never wanted to appeal

Kevin,

City Council members don’t need outside help to make “shameless distortion[s]” - they really need help to make them seem less embarrassing!

Half Moon Bay has always been a laughing stock, now, with their efforts, our little insular village is a laughing stock to a much larger audience! Who can forget their combined meeting at the Coastal Commission or the letter opposing SB 1295?

They continue to always give fresh material for cocktail party monologues outside of this area.

A memorable story was of a man who had voted for an MP who had just been released from an insane asylum. He explained that it was the only candidate who had been certified as no longer a danger to the public.

Ken Johnson

Page 5 of 14 pages « First  <  3 4 5 6 7 >  Last »