They include developers and corporate interests, including those allowed to buy city-owned properties at less than appraised value or under market value, receive sweet lease terms, obtain corporate welfare dubbed "sharing" sales tax revenue/hotel room tax revenue, or build increased density in and around downtown regardless of its parking, traffic and neighborhood impacts.

They've benefited from Mayoral appointments with Council approval of individuals to City Hall Commissions with ties to or supportive of corporate and development interests. An egregious example in our view was Mayor Garcia's appointment, with Council approval, of an individual holding a leadership position in a construction industry trade union whose political action committee gave sums to the "officeholder" or campaign accounts of LB incumbents including Garcia. He's been installed on LB's Planning Commission which votes on development plans and land use issues...although at his appointment he'd become a LB resident only weeks earlier.

Other beneficiaries include LB's public employee unions, nearly all of which have received generous raises with pension fattening impacts including city management members of LB's "$100,000 and $200,000 Clubs."

The Mayor and Council incumbents are clearly better off politically, having made a mockery of LB's voter-enacted campaign reform principles by changing LB law to triple the amounts they can amass in their "officeholder accounts." The incumbents can now dispense those fattened accounts to ingratiate themselves with politically useful groups, making it harder for reform-minded grassroots challengers to dislodge them, or use the sums to elect their friends and allies to other offices. With similar contempt, Mayor Garcia waited until after the recent election cycle had ended to publicly propose changing LB law to let incumbents to seek third terms without facing term limits.

So...are LB taxpayers better off?

[Scroll down for further.]

Robert Garcia holds the dubious distinction of being one of only two remaining elected incumbents (the other is Councilman Dee Andrews) who voted to erase the largest number of budgeted citywide deployable police officers in the more than 100 year history of the City of Long Beach. And no, other cities didn't erase 20% of their taxpayers' police levels to weather the "great recession."

LB taxpayers still don't have three fire engines that they previously had. That includes ELB Engine 17, not restored even after a multi-unit residence burned across the street Station 17 in late Jan. 2014. That also includes LBFD Engine 101, a second downtown engine maintained for years to deal with risks posed by previous downtown density and high rises...while the Mayor/Council have simultaneously invited even higher high rises and greater density.

LB taxpayers have one restored Belmont Shore fire engine, one restored NLB ambulance-paramedic unit, overdue street repairs and 17 restored citywide deployable police officers...while paying a record high sales tax rate. Not one incumbent has agendized a Council item to seriously examine why other cities manage to provide their basic services at less cost while LB can't provide police and fire levels it previously provided despite record imposing record high taxes and fees. And not one incumbent has publicly committed to restore any further police and firefighters for taxpayers in any specific number by any date certain.

When not tweeting about comic book characters, Mayor Garcia cites LB's record low unemployment rate, although the unemployment rate is officially calculated based on where one lives, not by where one works. In other words, LB's low unemployment is attributable at least in part to the large number of LB residents employed outside Long Beach.

City Hall recently had to retract an erroneous press release claiming LB's crime rate is down, which it isn't. LB murders last year were one fewer than a year earlier, but in recent months violent crimes have increased and neighborhood impacting crimes (some of which were formerly felonies) are visibly up, including hypodermic syringes risking the health of families and visitors on LB's beaches and in LB parks.

LB taxpayers today have dictated bicycle lanes and traffic-congesting "road diets" imposed over public objections. LB taxpayers also now have a 40+ year annual escalating cost burden for a profligate, unnecessary new Civic Center. This Taj Mahal for city officials (with a shrunken main library for the public) clearly benefits proximate downtown commercial realty interests. But beginning with promised on-time occupancy in 2019, LB taxpayers will see annual escalating sums (tied to an uncontrollable CPI escalator) sent to a private entity that might otherwise provide services to neighborhoods citywide.

The Mayor/Council approved this without seeking bids for a more affordable seismic retrofit, and engineered the transaction to avoid seeking voter approval. What a contrast, as the Mayor and some incumbents now want voters to eliminate LB term limits for incumbents seeking a third terms.

A little over four years ago, Mayoral candidate Garcia sought votes by boasting that he'd put his appointment calendar online. That disappeared soon after Mayor Garcia took office, perhaps because it might provide a glimpse of the corporate and development interests and their lobbyists ushered into his office.

In our opinion, in these respects LB taxpayers aren't better off now than they were four years ago. Robotic applause for what's taken place coupled with a lack of publicly spoken check and balance is toxic, basically unhealthy for the City and its taxpayers.

We believe incumbents who've demonstrated misplaced priorities shouldn't expect re-election or advancement to higher offices. We encourage reform-minded LB residents to begin organizing, raising funds and speaking too often-unspoken taxpayer truths well in advance of LB's next elections. These are prerequisites to waging and winning future elections that can bring overdue change and reform to Long Beach.

Opinions expressed by LBREPORT.com, our contributors and/or our readers are not necessarily those of our advertisers. We welcome our readers' comments/opinions 24/7 via Disqus, Facebook and moderate length letters and longer-form op-ed pieces submitted to us at mail@LBReport.com.

Sponsor

Sponsor

Sponsor

Sponsor

Sponsor

LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.