Votes For Sale?

Editor’s Note: This agenda item has been postponed due to the absence of two Councilmembers at Tuesday’s upcoming City Council meeting.

 

There are many ways to get from Long Beach to Sacramento—the ones used by most of us are either up I-5 or via JetBlue out of Long Beach Airport.  For a select few, however, the way to Sacramento is via a vote on certain items before the City Council.  A proven method for free round trips between the two cities is to vote at City Council for items that are pro-union.  Regardless of the cost to the city or effects on the residents as a whole, this will ensure more than enough campaign financing to win election to a seat in the Senate or Assembly in Sacramento.

On Tuesday, several sitting council members who have their eye on statewide office will have the chance to ensure their trip from Ocean Avenue to L Street by voting the union line.  The council will vote on whether to rescind two ballot measures that, if passed, will rescind two ordinances voted on by the council several months ago.  Both ordinances were very pro-labor (one ordinance bans “big-box” stores from selling groceries; the other would mandate that employees of hotels on city-owned land must join a union) and were significant in the political future of then Councilwoman Laura Richardson—who rode the ensuing influx of labor cash to Sacramento for a few months, and then Washington D.C.  Now other council members have a chance to also cash in from the unions with votes on Tuesday.

A review of campaign donations from state and federal labor unions and electoral victories for Long Beach polls shows a clear connection: get cash from the unions and you will win.  Dee Andrews’ victory in the special election for Richardson’s old council district seat is the exception in which significant union funds did not buy a victory.  Other than that, for the past decade or more almost every city and statewide election in Long Beach has been won by the candidate with the most union financial support.  And this support has propelled Jenny Oropeza, Alan Lowenthal, and Laura Richardson to Sacramento.  Who’s next? With two Assembly seats up for grabs—due to Richardson’s Congressional victory and Betty Karnette’s term limit— I have heard that Bonnie Lowenthal, Tonya Uranga, and possibly Patrick O’Donnell are interested in those seats.  Coming up for re-election in the next cycle are Suja Lowenthal, O’Donnell and Rae Gabelich—all elections where financial backing from the coffers of statewide unions will probably ensure victory.  As seen by her involvement with the teachers’ unions and donations to her last campaign, Gerrie Schipske is pro-union, and given her past history of running for other offices may be banking on future financial support for other runs.  Which of these people is willing to risk future union support—and possible victory—in their next election and vote to rescind the ballot measures?

Given how quickly the petitions were filled to place the measures on the ballot to rescind the ordinances (as well as polls taken at that time), it seems very likely the measures will pass and reverse the City Council’s decision.  It will be difficult for even a huge sum of labor-backed financing to convince the people of Long Beach they should be restricted from the right to lower costs for groceries, more jobs and employment opportunities provided when businesses with “open” employment start operations in our city.

The council was recently presented a budget that is razor thin and in the words of the Mayor, “paycheck to paycheck.”  Last year this same council was presented a report from the City Auditor showing the police department $9 million over budget and pages of proposals to correct the deficit—none thus far enacted.  The police department once again appears to be approximately $7 million over budget due to overtime.  The council scraped together $70,000 to keep a child care program open for a few months. Funding for other programs is cut or abolished. The council has been unable to adequately budget for our infrastructure, future pensions and benefits or public safety.  But will it be fiscally responsible on Tuesday?

We are broke and the council has the opportunity to save the city $510,000—which is the cost of the election to rescind the big-box and mandated hotel union ordinances.  On Tuesday we will see which council members are more interested in serving the residents and voters who elected them to their current positions, and which council members are more interested in serving their financial backers for their next positions.  Vote to save $510,000 for the city of Long Beach and its residents, or vote to receive contributions to their personal political campaigns that may exceed $500,000.  Who is loyal to their neighbors and constituents?  Who is loyal to the outsiders purchasing their trips to higher office?

After Tuesday I do not want to hear any council member who votes in favor of keeping the measures on the ballot speak about our city’s financial condition, measures we need to take, cuts that must be made or how difficult it is to fix our streets, protect our kids or operate the city when we are financially challenged.  Prove to me, and my neighbors, you deserve to tell us about our city’s financial condition after you have voted to save $510,000 in February.

Your thoughts welcome, click here to email me or on “Leave A Comment” below for public response.