Saturday, April 12, 2014

Silvestri: The "ENRON-ization" of Democracy - Part I

See Article in the Mill Valley Patch:The "ENRON-ization" of Democracy - Part I

Government "Off the Books"

A multi-part investigative report into what's behind the push for Plan Bay Area's regional planning, and how the abuse of joint powers authorities are robbing us of representative government.

PART I
In August of 2001, Sharon Watkins, a vice president at ENRON Corporation, an “innovative energy trading company,” wrote a memo commenting on some unusual accounting practices. By October, as the news hit the press, ENRON’s stock began to dive from its recent highs of $90 per share to below $1 a share, by November 1st. 

Its precipitous fall had little to do with the events of 9/11.
The financial world was in shock. How could one of the most valuable companies in the world, with $100 billion in assets, suddenly become worthless: a company whose finances were overseen by one of the country’s most prestigious accounting firms, Arthur Anderson? The answer is complex but at the risk of over-simplifying, their demise was due to something that might be called “off the books” transactions that showed up as “assets” in their balance sheet but were actually liabilities.  More accurately, most of those “assets” turned out to be worthless.
What ENRON had been doing is taking all its questionable business deals, failing investments and operations and putting them into so-called “arm’s length” subsidiary entities that were out of the public’s (and apparently their accountant’s) view. Then they were free to magically value them as wildly profitable. They only kept trades and transactions that were actually profitable in the main company, and those turned out to be far and few between (see The Smartest Guys in The Room, by Bethany McLean and Peter Elkind).
At the time, ENRON was the biggest bankruptcy in American history. But as the old saying goes, “You ain’t seen nothin' yet.”
By the fall of 2008, the world’s 14 biggest bankers showed us how it’s really done and almost brought down the global economy in the process. ENRON’s little accounting games were nothing compared to the tens (hundreds?) of trillions of dollars of worthless “assets” that the big banks held on their books: assets with fancy names like collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and mortgage backed securities (MBS debt), and other more exotic derivatives and financial creations.
These billionaire banksters had succeeded in creating an off the books shadow banking system far larger than the real banking system itself. It’s a crime that you and your children will be paying for, either through inflation, taxes or debt, for the rest of your lives (See The Big Short, by Michael Lewis).
You would think we would wise up. But not to be outdone, your government is now hard at work perfecting this way of doing business in ways ENRON never dreamed of.

The Rise of the JPA
In the early 1920’s a variety of government agencies began to realize that collaboration with other cities or other government or quasi-government agencies allowed them to more efficiently and effectively provide services, purchase insurance and implement programs, or in some cases stay solvent. Since that time, a series of legislative acts and court rulings evolved into what has come to be known as a “Joint Powers Authority” (JPA).
As described in the 2007 report, Governments Working Together, by Trish Cypher and Colin Grinnell:
     “Joint powers are exercised when the public officials of two or more agencies agree to create another legal entity or establish a joint approach to work on a common problem, fund a project, or act as a representative body for a specific activity.
     “Agencies that can exercise joint powers include federal agencies, state departments, counties, cities, special districts, school districts, redevelopment agencies, and even other joint powers organizations. A California agency can even share joint powers with an agency in another state.
     “Examples of areas where JPAs are used commonly include: groundwater management, road construction, habitat conservation, airport expansion, redevelopment projects, stadium construction, mental health facilities construction, educational programs, employee benefits services, insurance coverage, and regional transportation projects.
     “For example, the City of San José signed a joint powers agreement with Santa Clara County to jointly administer redevelopment funds. In another example, the City of Palo Alto has a joint powers agreement to provide cable television service to area residents.”
Over the years, JPAs evolved from simple partnerships into highly complex entities that increasingly had more and more governing powers, previously only reserved for elected governing bodies, including the power to assess fees and sell bonds. In its latest iteration, a JPA’s increasing powers were codified in the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, SB 1350, Senate Local Government Committee, in 2000.
In the beginning, JPAs worked well. But like many simple ideas with noble goals, JPAs have morphed into something far beyond the intentions of their creators. Like the big banks, creative minds have used this vehicle to assemble shadow government agencies that operate pretty much off our radar and without public scrutiny. And more and more, it appears that’s become the real goal of creating them.
What started out as a way to provide more efficient and less expensive public services, has been seized upon by politicians as a method of eliminating public input and democratic process.
Again, noted by Cypher and Grinnell:
     “JPAs are different from other forms of government because they are the only type of government formed by mutual agreement. Unlike other governments, JPAs are not formed by signatures on petitions, and they’re not approved by a vote of the people.”
A key point to note is that JPAs can exercise all the powers that are common to their member agencies. The only power they lack is the power to pass real estate property taxes, though they’ve learned to get around that by calling them fees. But think about this for a moment: all the powers of whatever level of government they are formed out of. And all of those powers without any of the historic checks and balances that are the foundation of our democratic system.
Yes, in theory, JPAs are created and managed by agreement between local or regional governments or agencies (water, power, sewer, police, housing, or cities and county governments) under the supervision of our local elected representatives or at the least the staff members or appointees of those elected officials. However, the reality is that almost all JPAs are run by politically appointed executives who have no prior relationship with any of the JPAs member organizations. They go on to hire their own staff and consultants to create the team that will manage and make decisions for this new “quasi-governmental” agency on a day to day basis.
In practice, a JPA’s actions go largely unsupervised by anyone after their formation is approved. And the locally elected officials who approved it, who are often unpaid volunteers, can’t possibly analyze their complexities and potential unintended consequences of what they’ve created. So it’s pretty much all done on good faith and a cursory review of the JPA’s annual report.
At the risk of being cynical, in the sage words of Warren Buffet: “Only invest in things that a moron could run, because sooner or later, one will.”

JPAs - “Off the Books” Government
Entities like the Marin Energy Authority (MEA), the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART), and most notably the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), are all JPAs. None of the executives who make policy decisions or direct staff reports are elected.
Today, JPAs can take on debt (sell bonds, borrow money, etc.) without any vote by ratepayers or taxpayers or elected representatives, even though many provide critical public services or infrastructure.
In theory, JPAs are separate legal entities and their financial liabilities are not the public’s responsibility. But is that really true, in practice? If MEA or SMART or ABAG gets into financial trouble because of the debt they’ve issued or a construction project they’ve undertaken has cost overruns, or they default on debt and their project, that’s providing critical services to thousands of residents, is only half built, will we really say it’s not our problem to bail them out?
Let’s not forget that, “technically” under the law, we had no legal liability for all the defaults and losses of the banks in 2008. After all they weren’t even quasi-governmental entities. They were private for profit companies. Yet we were forced to bail them out with taxpayer money because they were deemed “too big to fail.”

Saturday Night Videos

Ladybug and the wolf - 'Under my chair' from Thomas Blanchard on Vimeo.

The Long Game Part 2: the missing chapter from Delve on Vimeo.

Raveyards // Stunts from Charles De Meyer on Vimeo.

"LILA" from Carlos Lascano on Vimeo.

Adam Carolla on Luck

Larkspur and the Transit Oriented Development Ponzi Scheme

Larkspur and the Transit Oriented Development Ponzi Scheme

originally published in www.planningforreality.org .


larkspur_trafficIf you ask the situational analysis question to anyone living in Larkspur or commuting through Larkspur “do you have traffic or parking issues?” the answer is likely to be a resounding “Yes – we need to sort out this mess”.
However Larkspur has got itself caught up in what can almost be described as a planning-Ponzi scheme. Is it intentional? I would argue many involved have good intentions, and many are hamstrung by state and regional mandates driven by flawed thinking that is pushing areas like Larkspur into an endless cycle of creating acute transportation issues, then offering funds to solve the issue that only compound it. It’s like a drug-deal.
Who benefits? Regional transportation agencies that gain more and more federal grants, grow in employees, executives get more responsibilities and higher salaries and grow in influence.

What Does Larkspur Really Need?

In normal circumstances whenever new development is added developers pay impact fees to expand the road system, pay for schools etc. However this money only pays for improvements in the immediate local area.
Larkspur is a focal point for transportation for Marin and Sonoma. While development in Larkspur has been limited, the town is affected by all development happening upstream. Sure each new development in Marin and Sonoma only adds a little traffic, but it adds up.
graton_casino
The massive Graton Casino in Rohnert Park which opened Nov 2013 has 5,700 parking spaces
Take for example the $820m Graton Casino which opened in Rohnert Park in November which provides no less than 5,700 parking spaces for it’s patrons. The casino will draw a significant amount of evening traffic passing through Larkspur. The casino is paying $12m per year in traffic mitigation fees – but this goes in its entirety to Rohnert Park and the county of Sonoma.
In other developments in Marin and Sonoma new housing is built but impact fees are limited to the immediate area affected – yet they end up placing cumulatively more burden on key choke-points like Larkspur.

Along Came MTC Resolution 3434 and the SMART Train

Then along came the “SMART” train. Ostensibly marketed to voters as helping alleviate 101 traffic issues the reality is now becoming starkly evident.
In July 2005 the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) enacted resolution 3434. This resolution tied transit-planning funding to housing development and land use in a $222m program. MTC for those unaware is the regional agency responsible for planning transportation for the Bay Area.
A little digging reveals in the MTC Resolution 3434 document the real agenda of MTCs funding Station Area Plans. This is covered in section 4 titled “Corridor Level Thresholds” and section 5 “Station Area Plans”:
“Each proposed physical transit extension project seeking funding through Resolution 3434 must demonstrate that the thresholds for the corridor are met through existing development and adopted station area plans that commit local jurisdictions to a level of housing that meets the threshold. This requirement may be met by existing station area plans accompanied by appropriate  zoning and implementation mechanisms. If new station area plans are needed to meet the corridor threshold, MTC will assist in funding the plans.” [emphasis added]
Table 3 on page 3 in the MTC resolution clearly shows that SMART must attain 2,200 housing units on average within a half mile radius, or it loses funding. This is the real reason for the Larkspur Station Area Plan. This is never openly talked about or referenced in station area plan documents or EIRs.

Larkspur’s Deal with the Devil

deal_with_devilThis is where transit-oriented developments money honey-pot drew Larkspur into the transit-oriented development Ponzi scheme. Larkspur councilors keenly wanted to obtain funding to plan to prepare for the SMART station, to address traffic and transportation issues. On 21st March 2012 Larkspur council unanimously entered into a grant contract with MTC in order to receive $480,000 of MTCs funding drawn from the $222m program tied to resolution 3434. This was to be used to develop the Larkspur Station Area Plan. Some smaller matches came in from other sources:
-       SMART
-       The Transportation Authority of Marin
-       The County of Marin
In Civic Center Station Area Plan the MTC grant contract was clear about it’s intent requiring that the plan “maximize housing potential” (see top of page 19). The grant contract went further to require that the plan be adopted by the council – this was not to be a free vote based on local representation. This was clarified not just by a specific deliverable (12b) but by grant monies only being released upon plan adoption. In both San Rafael and Larkspur these contracts were adopted with barely any outreach to residents f any of the obligations being taken on.

 MTC Measures Success on $Grants In (to SAP) Housing Out

MTCs intentions are further evidenced in their program summary chart. The chart shows for each station area plan / PDA plan (the chart ties the two together):
-       Grant award (the input)
-       Then the output measured as:
  • New housing units
  • New commercial development (sq ft)
  • New “potential” jobs
Consider as you read this chart that Sonoma County is planning Priority Development Areas around stations adding 24,010 housing units – adding a significant amount of traffic to 101 without any mitigation in Marin. The Santa Rosa Station Area Plan alone adds 3,409 housing units – dwarfing Larkspur’s 920 units, hotel and added retail.

So What’s the Issue? The TOD Ponzi Scheme

The issue here is as follows:
-       Transportation funding presumes and mandates future substantial growth
-       To attain the targeted funding the SMART train has to increase development the length of the line to attain an average of 2,200 housing units within ½ mile of each station (hence the real agenda for “station area plans” where the title deceivingly doesn’t reference that they are really camouflaged plans to increase housing).
-       An area like Larkspur that experiences organic growth through development outside the immediate area cannot seek funding without committing to more growth
-       The transportation funding presumes that the new residents will take transit, however:
  • In Larkspur the ferries are at or near capacity, no more ferry crossings can be added due to a legal settlement to prevent wakes and protect the environment
  • in Larkspur few residents will use the train to go north; the nearest major employment center is San Francisco
  • Larkspur is in a suburban, not an urban setting whereby it is more likely that the new residents will drive to get to work, take their children to school or to go on a shopping trip with heavy shopping
Some might argue we entered into this Ponzi scheme when voters adopted SMART. But this was all cleverly concealed by slick marketing claiming that the train was the answer to 101 congestion.
And so by accepting the MTC grant money Larkspur has entered a TOD pyramid scheme where it will endlessly have to increase urbanization to catch up with and address transportation capacity issues. The new money will not be focused on Larkspur’s most acute problems – traffic and parking – but instead veinly hope that the new residents won’t drive.
Ultimately this is all about SMART and MTC get their grant money by ensuring there are 2,200 housing units within ½ mile of each SMART station. This is not about solving problems – it’s a Ponzi scheme all about money and regional agencies increasing the money they receive from federal grants that increases their influence, staff and executives paychecks.

Siemens Sustainable Cities-Welcome to your Corporate State Nightmare.


How ironic that Siemens AG, a german company, former Nazi collaborators are at the forefront of "sustainable cities" delivering all encompassing services to build power grid, transportation and smart design of our future megacities. The fascist ideal of marriage between corporations and government is now being realized.  No need to bother with the inconvenience and messiness of a democracy, small business and individual liberty a one size fits all  "corporate state" by Siemens, AG is all we need. It is the stuff of science fiction, a nightmarish future where the individual is lost in the grid of an all knowing, all seeing, all powerful government/corporation.

How selfish of me to want a garden, safe streets, good schools I now have in the place they call "sprawl" or suburbia.  The American dream is under real threat now.


For More information see: Siemens Sustainable Cities and The Crystal and Siemens and the Nazis



Wanted: 600 Jobs in Marinwood-Lucas Valley





Marinwood-Lucas Valley may need 600+ jobs for its new "workforce housing neighbors".

"Where are all our new neighbors going to work in Marinwood-Lucas Valley?",  I asked at the Housing Element Workshop at Marin City.     
I pointed out that we have virtually no jobs in the valley, save a few convenience stores,  house cleaning and yardwork.  Workers need jobs and will need to commute in/out the Valley like everyone else.  This will add to traffic and pollution and do nothing to improve our quality of life.  
"There are major employers close by such as Autodesk,  Kaiser,  Farmers Insurance and the County Government" cheerfully replied the planner.
Perhaps she hadn't heard.  All of these companies are losing jobs.   The skilled workers like engineers, medical professionals and finance personnel tend not to live in low income housing.  The workers in low income housing tend to be in low skilled professions.
Without jobs, why would anyone want to live here?  What will they do for food?

Good question.  I don't think anyone has an answer.  We are not in boom times. The commute to the city is congested and expensive. Right now Marin Housing Authority lures low income residents away from the East Bay and San Francisco to fill the income qualified vacancies. I know of a single mother with two children who was offered $2500 in Section 8 rental assistance if she would move from her loft in San Francisco to Marin.  That's what they call "economic justice and social equity".
Marinwood-Lucas Valley is a middle class bedroom community.  Most of us either work from the home or work in professions in San Francisco, East Bay or San Mateo County.  Our hours are long but we love the tranquil valley we call home.  Despite the reputation of Marin as being an exclusive rich enclave,  most of us are hard working professionals.  We don't hire servants and can't afford the luxuries of the rich.  There is no booming industry for butlers, maids, personal chefs and housekeeping staff.
Why is the Board of Supervisors targeting Marinwood-Lucas Valley for over 83% of all extremely low to low income housing in unincorporated Marin in the 2012 Housing Element?
Maybe the reason we are being targeted for all of this "growth" for government housing because we are peaceful and are more interested in tending our garden than following local politics.  We are easygoing and won't wake up until it is too late.
Now with the addition of a potential 280 more low income housing units on Luiz Ranch , it is becoming clear they want us to become their "urban utopia" social experiment.
It won't work.   People are waking up to the political mischief. Housing growth needs jobs growth first. We will fight back. 
On the other hand, maybe Big Rock Deli has room for 600 more clerks.

 

Be involved.  Learn about the County plan to Urbanize Marin.  Tell Others.  Speak your mind.  Vote.



 

 





Friday, April 11, 2014

Remember to Vote June 3rd


Friday Night Music-Arlo Guthrie








The Marin County Supervisor Debates for District One and Five sponsored by Democratic Central Committee.

District One Adams vs. Connolly District Five Arnold vs. Shroyer

How to urbanize Marinwood-Lucas Valley one bite at a time




""Question: "How do you eat an elephant?"

Answer: " One bite at a time ".

The Board of Supervisors are beginning to urbanize Marinwood-Lucas Valley by a series of small bites too.   It has already begun. 


Here is how they may "eat the elephant":

Stage One: (completed 2003-2010)
The previous private developer of Marinwood Plaza succeeded in getting the community to agree to a private housing development with 20% affordable housing with pictures of beautiful Mediterranean stylized plaza that would feature a fountain and a gathering spot reminiscent of a European city.  The nostalgic view of village life of a bygone era is appealing to anyone.  GOAL:  Change zoning designation to HOD (Housing Overlay District). Secure state and federal grant money by creating a Priority Development Zone for Marinwood.

Stage Two:  Secure property from Hoytt development. (Bridge Housing enters pre-sale agreement in 2012) Make them a deal they cannot refuse. Attract a Farmer's market and a neighborhood market with unusually attractive terms guaranteed with government funding and programs. .Bring in an affordable housing developer with government money to develop a plan.  Assemble of group of supporters and call them "neighborhood advisors" to create the illusion that the public supports the new development.  Meet privately, so controversial elements of the plan do not leak to the public to avoid opposition..

Stage Three:  Announce that the project will move forward (in progress) with the "full support" of the community by gathering consensus among "neighborhood advisors".  Keep the window of "public scrutiny" to a minimum to overwhelm any potential opposition.   Hide the full economic impact on the taxpayers to pay for new schools, police, fire, water, sewage and water infrastructure. Streamlined CEQA and design regulation will allow problems to go ahead unnoticed.

Stage Four:  Identify additional building sites(completed 2013) and zone them for multifamily housing. Keep full plan from public view as long as possible by holding meeting at obscure times, last minute agendas and hidden in other routine business.  Change single family zoning to multifamily zoning. Tighten restriction on single family zoning in Priority Development Area to discourage "wasteful" single family construction. (in progress)  Planning commissioner Erica Erickson says that such zoning changes are necessary to combat segregation. 

Stage Five:  Expand Priority Development Area (PDAs will be replaced by SB-1 eminent domain law in 2014 if passed) to adjoining neighborhoods.Expand multifamily housing and bus lines to make neighborhoods accessible to major transportation arteries.  New population of renters will change the voting base to make increases in government services and taxes from property owners easier further discouraging single family home ownership.

Stage Six:  A better, high density community (Marinwood City), or failed social experiment that kills a quiet suburban community living in the natural splendor of Lucas Valley?

What is the future YOU want?  Are you willing to learn more about the Housing Element? Are you willing to stand up for the community?   Get active.  Help us spread the word to our neighbors.  Join our growing movement to Save Marinwood-Lucas Valley.

Thursday, April 10, 2014

How Common Core testing is manipulating behavior change and achievement results. (6 minutes)

Interesting video about the use of computerized "adaptive testing" and its potential for manipulation of testing outcomes and personality profiling of your children.  What happened to learning skills, acquiring knowledge, and developing intellect?  What is the true purpose of Common Core? 

See this article in the Huffington Post about Pearson Company, a huge multi-national corporation that has been involved in every aspect of the Common Core curriculum.
HERE

Wednesday, April 9, 2014