Comments for HALFWAY TO CONCORD

Comment on AB 871 proposes self-defense is reason enough for concealed firearm permit by Wendy Lack

Wendy Lack — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 04:13:41 +0000

A Harvard study has found no evidence to suggest that the availability of guns contributes to higher murder rates anywhere in the world. The report states: "The determinants of murder and suicide are basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the prevalence of some form of deadly mechanism." Meaning, it’s not guns that kill people. People kill people.

Comment on County Ban on Electronic Cigarettes is first step to new tax by Wendy Lack

Wendy Lack — Sun, 25 Aug 2013 19:00:00 +0000

Nick Gillespie at The Daily Beast nails the nanny-statists hellbent on banning harmless e-cigs, nicely summing up the puritanism of today’s anti-smoking activists:

“…There’s no question that in a nanny state, all of us- even those of us who don’t smoke tobacco or puff on e-cigarettes- are all treated like children incapable of making our own choices.”

Link to article here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/25/ban-e-cigarettes-the-anti-smoking-lobby-s-clueless-crusade.html

Comment on “Where’s the Beef” for new job creation in California? by BGR

BGR — Sat, 24 Aug 2013 00:30:43 +0000

Housing prices in California have "little to do with such things as construction costs, which have not risen as quickly in most of California as elsewhere," according to Forbes contributor Joel Kotkin. Prices

are largely the result of soaring land costs and stiff fees imposed on housing. Attributable largely to regulatory factors that restrict building in many areas, the cost of finished land for comparably priced houses has increased nine times as much in California as in the rest of the nation since 1970. Portland State University economist Gerald Mildner refers to this as "Economics 101," indicating that "as the demand for property in a region grows, the increase in demand translates into some combination of more space and high prices, depending upon the elasticity of supply." Beside regulatory restraints, California housing prices are driven up by the highest impact fees in the nation. An annual survey by Duncan and Associates shows that the average impact fee in California for single-family residence in 2012 was $31,100 per unit, nearly 90 percent higher than the next most expensive state and 265 percent higher than the norm among jurisdictions that levy such fees, which typically pay for capital improvements, like water and wastewater facilities, required by a new development. Many states and localities on the other side of the Sierras do not. These fees also impact multifamily housing; the state's fees on multifamily units averaged $18,800, 290 percent above the average outside the state.

The real issue is liberal elites that restrict land use to protect their shoreline views and pristine gated communities and privilege. Stack and Pack Housing is not a foregone outcome for reform in housing industry in California. It is only a self-fulfilling prohecy of haters of the middle class and their desire to live in the suburbs with a yard, safe schools and streets. There's a lot larger demographic, one that wants to have kids, than the hip single Google workers that planners assume will throng to their childless urban centers.

Comment on “Where’s the Beef” for new job creation in California? by Steven

Steven — Fri, 23 Aug 2013 16:25:06 +0000

Seems to me if you want to reduce the cost of housing to make the SFBA more appealing to job growth then you should reduce the amount of local regulation that governs development.
But this would also lead to the ‘stack-and-pack’ situation the author of this piece detests. How could it not? In my east bay community rent is remarkably high yet there are no apartment buildings over two stories.

Comment on Public hearings on future of Contra Costa Fire service delivery models; Aug 19-20 by Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette — Fri, 23 Aug 2013 12:00:06 +0000

The Fitch Study, is another sham, brought to us by the BOS. My property tax bill shows 1% county tax. The Valley Yellow Pages, list 4 pages of County services. The BOS controls the money sent to most of them.
The BOS will be asking for another Fire tax, because they can get shills coming to the sham meetings & writing LTTE’s to the obviously corrupt local propaganda rags, that call themselves newspapers.
The meeting in Lafayette, had a shill, sitting with the fire fighters, who said the fire fighters saved her child’s life, years ago & saved
her life recently.
I’m sure County Health Services have saved some lives . Their money comes from the BOS too. Will a tax for them be next?
Feeding at the same trough, we have the District Attorney’s office. They are fighting, fornicating & sodomizing each other, with lawsuits & payoffs at taxpayer expense. I wonder why their name isn’t on a tax increase?
When I mentioned firefighters on pension going back to the fire station, to retired fire fighter Jeff Davis, who lives in Lafayette, he laughed at me.
There is something woefully wrong with a fire protection study, that does not mention pension reform.

Comment on Public hearings on future of Contra Costa Fire service delivery models; Aug 19-20 by Wine Guy

Wine Guy — Thu, 22 Aug 2013 02:20:50 +0000

Edi -- You are on to something. I don’t see how this consultant can “predict” when the next fire will happen. I have researched this topic, and have not seen any meaningful changes made by this consultant in the Fire Service Delivery model. The financial shell game played by the politicians is despicable. The district suddenly “found” 15 million dollars and still wants to reduce fire protection for our community. I have yet to see any proposal of Cal Fire or another Fire Department absorbing Con Fire service area. Tax increases are not the answer, but having limited fire protection and firemen running around in a pick up truck doesn’t solve the problem either. I don’t have much hope that these 500K consultants will be able to make any progress, I read in the CC Times that there is a new Chief on the way. Maybe when they replace the Board and the Chief, some new ideas and models can be explored, until then this is all a big joke.

Comment on Public hearings on future of Contra Costa Fire service delivery models; Aug 19-20 by EdiBirsan

EdiBirsan — Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:31:19 +0000

I went to the first one in Pittsburg and I expressed concern that they were going down one path: they said that they would be showing other models of operation: I also was concerned that the data on calls was not in depth enough to support their theme of different coverage patterns: calls should have intensity of service, time and other features to really understand what has happened.

Also they seem to be leaning toward forward field deployment rather than stations.

Comment on Public hearings on future of Contra Costa Fire service delivery models; Aug 19-20 by Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette — Wed, 21 Aug 2013 13:07:38 +0000

I went to the meeting in Lafayette. I told Candice Andersen the consultants left out to much, when she asked me what I thought of the meeting. They did not mention privatization or prevention. Vince Wells & his army of union goons dominated the questions & comments. They bored the incredibly small number of people who were not politicians, or fire district white shirts, into leaving early. The consultant, who can’t think of anything but raising revenue or cutting services, can be e-mailed at: jbroman@fitchassoc.com.

Comment on Contra Costa DA says NO to medical marijuana dispensaries in Richmond by guy fawkes

guy fawkes — Tue, 20 Aug 2013 00:23:23 +0000

Does anyone care what the proper roll of government is? If they did they would be outraged that this is called a “debate”. The original claim was that the US government was put in place to protect the rights of the individual, their life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The foundation of individual rights must be based on the premise that you own yourself. If this were true you would be able to do whatever you want with your own body. It should be obvious to everyone that this has been turned on it’s head and now the government considers your body their property (as well as your money and property). How does smoking a joint violate the rights of anyone else? It doesn’t. Therefore it should be unconstitutional for the state to claim this jurisdiction.

Is it a coincidence that the past 20 years has seen violent crimes drop by 50% and vast improvements in marijuana access? I think they’re related. If it were legalized not only would jails/ courts/ police be freed up to pursue crimes with actual victims, but it would reduce crime by eliminating the black market (which creates the inflated value, turf-wars and violence) and by it’s side-effect of reducing aggression.
The only one’s who benefit from the war on drugs are the drug-lords and the law enforcement/ prison/ industrial complex, which Mark is beholden to.

Comment on Poll: Causes of Haiti EarthQuake by Kristen

Kristen — Mon, 19 Aug 2013 03:56:58 +0000

I know it’s late but i send my prayers out to Haiti and i wish i could do something more to help. Lots of love… Kristen