Skip to main content

Long Beach city government - Google News

Open Government - Google News

Long Beach Residents Need to Know What Potential Liability Is on Telephone Tax Case

The Sacramento Bee has just disclosed that a case against the City of Long Beach could possibly cost millions if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiff. (http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/12/long-beach-phone-tax-case-tests-taxpayers-rights.html#storylink=misearch)

I asked for this information several months ago when I discovered that the City of Los Angeles had publicly acknowledged in its budget statement that a similar suit had been filed against the City of Los Angeles and that the potential liability could be up to $750 million.

The suit is about the City collecting a telephone users tax despite a federal telephone excise tax being eliminated.

To put this in the proper perspective, $750 million equals 17% of the City of Los Angeles' year’s General Fund.

In both the LA and Long Beach cases, the plaintiffs are suing for refunds for residents claiming that the taxes were illegally collected by the City.

I asked for information on how much at risk the City of Long Beach is because of the suit against us by John McWilliams.

I still believe the residents of Long Beach need to know what potentially is coming our way. Last time I asked for the information it was put into a closed session. I think now that everyone who reads the Sacramento Bee knows about this case, it is time to let residents of Long Beach know what to expect.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Popular posts from this blog

Sign the Petition -- Repeal Officeholder Accounts in Long Beach

Sign the Petition to Stop Political Slush Funds in Long Beach
The Long Beach Mayor and City Council have totally changed the purpose of "officeholder accounts" by voting to triple the amounts they can raise and by voting to allow the transfer of the officeholder accounts to political campaigns. The voters of the City of Long Beach enacted campaign finance reform back in 1994 to try and stem the flow of special interest money into local elections and to "allow candidates and officeholders to spend a lesser proportion of their time on fund raising and a greater proportion of their time dealing with issues of importance to their constituents." A measure should be placed on the ballot that allows voters to repeal officeholder accounts so elected officials can get back to spending time representing their constituents, instead of doing year-round fundraising.

Article Discusses the Tyrannies of Local Government

It is ironic that last night the City Council without any dissent, passed the City Budget in record time (even before all council districts were able to hold public meetings on the budget) ignoring the continued concerns of many residents about the lack of adequate police services particularly in and around City parks and today an article (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119249/fergusons-lesson-local-government-poses-real-threat-liberty) appears in The Nation titled: The Greatest Threat to Our Liberty Is Local Governments Run Amok.
The article rightly points out with the lack of strong local media watchdogs and elections that are bought by special interests, local elected officials have developed political monopolies and enact proposals that do not reflect the concerns of their constituents: 
Political scientist Jessica Trounstine calls “political monopoly”—officials and organizations who have so effectively defeated any potential predators that they can lazily begin to gorge. She …

Why Mayor Garcia Won't Veto the Bad Ordinance on Office Holder Accounts

By the time this is published, the deadline to veto the recently passed office holder account ordinance will have passed and it will have become law.
The ordinance allows council members, the Mayor, City Prosecutor, City Attorney and City Auditor, to raise funds for their "office holder accounts" and then to contribute those funds to other political campaigns.
Mayor Robert Garcia should have vetoed this very bad law, but he didn't.
Here's why.
The voters of the City of Long Beach enacted campaign finance reform back in 1994 to try and stem the flow of special interest money into local elections and to "allow candidates and officeholders to spend a lesser proportion of their time on fund raising and a greater proportion of their time dealing with issues of importance to their constituents."
The Long Beach Campaign Reform Act was the brain-child of the Long Beach Area Citizens Involved (LBACI that also moved the City to form council districts instead of elec…