Same-sex proposal needs study

Glad to see the Press Telegram is reading my blog. In fact, if you read it at: www.gerrieschipske.com you'll note I said the very same thing yesterday.

It is not the business of local government to impose employee compensation requirements on private businesses. Government at all levels is currently displaying it's inability to properly handle the taxpayer's money. It should not attempt to make requirements about how private business handles their own revenue.

Robert J G Jackson Sr wrote:

It is not the business of local government to impose employee compensation requirements on private businesses.

No, but it IS the business of whacko fundies, religionists and bigots!
They have nothing of value to contribute.. only their hate..

Thank you comrade. This would serve to increase our City unemployment from the current 16% to 28% almost overnight.

All Hail the irrational actions of the Party Hacks who have proven to completely ignore the potential negative consequences of their constant stream of agenda driven tripe.

I was expecting so much more from Robert. I share his desire for fairness BUT can we get the City back on it's feet first PLEASE.

I am so sick and tired of the City and State Democratic Party being the proven enemies within.

IOU's Anyone?????

Yet another job killer by one with little or no meaningful experience in the business world.Clearly
it would send the Council on a fools errand.

Consider:

l.What if the best bid came from a company that did
not offer such benefits?Would Long Beach take an
inferior bid?

2.Would the novice Councilman tell China that Long
Beach will no longer do business with it unless
it abandons the doctrine it has subscribed to
(as has most of the world) for more than 2000
years?

3.Will Long Beach stop importing oil from countries
in the middle east,some of whom,like China might
arrest him even for advocating such a concept?

4.More telling:Will the Councilman and those that
would support the measure:

A.Give up driving their cars that are most
probably fueled by oil from the above?

B.Have they checked to see where their
bicycles are made if they do abandon their
cars?

C.If they turn to the Buster Brown Express-have
they checked to see where the shoes are made.

D.Has he with the well coiffed hair checked to
see where his hair dryer is manufactured.

No less interesting is the recent decision of the
United States Supreme Court in the case involving
the firefighters in New Haven relative to reverse
discrimination.

All of which toll to consider adopting a change in
City Charter to prohibit any first year Council
member from bringing forward any motion other than
that of fixing pot holes and or sidewalks.

Laurence B. Goodhue
Long Beach

WTF? Well-coiffed? Buster Brown Express? What the hell are you talking about!

Laurence Goodhue wrote:

Yet another job killer by one with little or no meaningful experience in the business world.Clearly
it would send the Council on a fools errand.
Consider:
l.What if the best bid came from a company that did
not offer such benefits?Would Long Beach take an
inferior bid?
2.Would the novice Councilman tell China that Long
Beach will no longer do business with it unless
it abandons the doctrine it has subscribed to
(as has most of the world) for more than 2000
years?
3.Will Long Beach stop importing oil from countries
in the middle east,some of whom,like China might
arrest him even for advocating such a concept?
4.More telling:Will the Councilman and those that
would support the measure:
A.Give up driving their cars that are most
probably fueled by oil from the above?
B.Have they checked to see where their
bicycles are made if they do abandon their
cars?
C.If they turn to the Buster Brown Express-have
they checked to see where the shoes are made.
D.Has he with the well coiffed hair checked to
see where his hair dryer is manufactured.
No less interesting is the recent decision of the
United States Supreme Court in the case involving
the firefighters in New Haven relative to reverse
discrimination.
All of which toll to consider adopting a change in
City Charter to prohibit any first year Council
member from bringing forward any motion other than
that of fixing pot holes and or sidewalks.
Laurence B. Goodhue
Long Beach

I love our decent Homosexual friends as much as anyone, after all, many of them are decent tobacco smokers, and the ones who are not are subject to paying a near 10% food tax penalty when they dine in local NO SMOKERS! restaurants.

On the other hand, shouldn't the city be contracting with those businesses that can do the best work at the lowest price, rather than wasting more hard earned tax moneys on schemes such as this?

Ronald

Any council person who votes for Garcia's measure should be booted out of office. First a Hispanic parade then a gay rights issue. He's more interested in social issues than working on the city budget or helping businesses employ people or helping city employees keep their jobs. Imagine the uproar if another elected official wanted to hold a White parade? These are examples why so many city employees are fed up with the city council. If the city council was doing its job there wouldn't be so many furloughs or threats of losing their jobs. Garcia is another in a long line of terrible first district council people.

Laurence Goodhue wrote:

Yet another job killer by one with little or no meaningful experience in the business world.Clearly
it would send the Council on a fools errand.
Consider:
l.What if the best bid came from a company that did
not offer such benefits?Would Long Beach take an
inferior bid?
2.Would the novice Councilman tell China that Long
Beach will no longer do business with it unless
it abandons the doctrine it has subscribed to
(as has most of the world) for more than 2000
years?
3.Will Long Beach stop importing oil from countries
in the middle east,some of whom,like China might
arrest him even for advocating such a concept?
4.More telling:Will the Councilman and those that
would support the measure:
A.Give up driving their cars that are most
probably fueled by oil from the above?
B.Have they checked to see where their
bicycles are made if they do abandon their
cars?
C.If they turn to the Buster Brown Express-have
they checked to see where the shoes are made.
D.Has he with the well coiffed hair checked to
see where his hair dryer is manufactured.
No less interesting is the recent decision of the
United States Supreme Court in the case involving
the firefighters in New Haven relative to reverse
discrimination.
All of which toll to consider adopting a change in
City Charter to prohibit any first year Council
member from bringing forward any motion other than
that of fixing pot holes and or sidewalks.
Laurence B. Goodhue
Long Beach

Ask Tide.

Tartuffe wrote:

****? Well-coiffed? Buster Brown Express? What the hell are you talking about!
<quoted text>

Ask Tide

Robert J G Jackson Sr wrote:

It is not the business of local government to impose employee compensation requirements on private businesses. Government at all levels is currently displaying it's inability to properly handle the taxpayer's money. It should not attempt to make requirements about how private business handles their own revenue.

I agree. That's why this ordinance isn't "imposing" anything on anyone, nor making "requirements". This is simply the City choosing how to spend its own money; the City isn't "required" to do business with anyone.

I hope this POV is helpful to you.

Laurence Goodhue wrote:

Yet another job killer by one with little or no meaningful experience in the business world.Clearly
it would send the Council on a fools errand.
Consider:
l.What if the best bid came from a company that did
not offer such benefits?Would Long Beach take an
inferior bid?
2.Would the novice Councilman tell China that Long
Beach will no longer do business with it unless
it abandons the doctrine it has subscribed to
(as has most of the world) for more than 2000
years?
3.Will Long Beach stop importing oil from countries
in the middle east,some of whom,like China might
arrest him even for advocating such a concept?
4.More telling:Will the Councilman and those that
would support the measure:
A.Give up driving their cars that are most
probably fueled by oil from the above?
B.Have they checked to see where their
bicycles are made if they do abandon their
cars?
C.If they turn to the Buster Brown Express-have
they checked to see where the shoes are made.
D.Has he with the well coiffed hair checked to
see where his hair dryer is manufactured.
No less interesting is the recent decision of the
United States Supreme Court in the case involving
the firefighters in New Haven relative to reverse
discrimination.
All of which toll to consider adopting a change in
City Charter to prohibit any first year Council
member from bringing forward any motion other than
that of fixing pot holes and or sidewalks.
Laurence B. Goodhue
Long Beach

Sir,

Like all EBO's, Long Beach's will almost surely contain exceptions for government entities with which the City does business.

Thank you for your comments.

d

Susan Lusk wrote:

Thank you comrade. This would serve to increase our City unemployment from the current 16% to 28% almost overnight.
All Hail the irrational actions of the Party Hacks who have proven to completely ignore the potential negative consequences of their constant stream of agenda driven tripe.
I was expecting so much more from Robert. I share his desire for fairness BUT can we get the City back on it's feet first PLEASE.
I am so sick and tired of the City and State Democratic Party being the proven enemies within.
IOU's Anyone?????

"This would serve to increase our City unemployment from the current 16% to 28% almost overnight."

I'm not sure how you arrived at this figure. Having extensively researched the implementation of EBO's in many other cities, I find no evidence for such a claim.

"I share his desire for fairness BUT can we get the City back on it's feet first PLEASE."

If we wait for the City to be in great financial shape before taking action on other matters, nothing will get done for the next year, or two, or more. Addressing budgetary concerns is an ongoing project in no way derailed or mitigated by the Equal Benefits Ordinance. IN fact, ensuring that people have health care and other important benefits is all the more important in bad economic times.

Thank you for your comments.

d

Ronald wrote:

I love our decent Homosexual friends as much as anyone, after all, many of them are decent tobacco smokers, and the ones who are not are subject to paying a near 10% food tax penalty when they dine in local NO SMOKERS! restaurants.
On the other hand, shouldn't the city be contracting with those businesses that can do the best work at the lowest price, rather than wasting more hard earned tax moneys on schemes such as this?
Ronald

Sir,

Would you want the city to contract with the lowest bidder if that business had racist hiring policies? What if it gave money to terrorist states? Or used illegal child labor?

I do not mean to equate denying gay partners benefits with any of these actions. I only mean to establish whether you agree that ethical and moral concerns are at least sometimes as important or more important than fiscal concerns.

Then the only question is, is this one of those times?

We believe it is.

-d

Long Time Resident wrote:

Any council person who votes for Garcia's measure should be booted out of office. First a Hispanic parade then a gay rights issue. He's more interested in social issues than working on the city budget or helping businesses employ people or helping city employees keep their jobs. Imagine the uproar if another elected official wanted to hold a White parade? These are examples why so many city employees are fed up with the city council. If the city council was doing its job there wouldn't be so many furloughs or threats of losing their jobs. Garcia is another in a long line of terrible first district council people.

I think a white parade is a great idea. But let's be a little more accurate. How about a "European" pride parade, or an "English-Irish-German-Fre nch" reconciliation parade?

Of course, "Latino" refers to a language group; "White" is fairly vague. Do you mean caucasian? Also a rather unscientific term. Includes Persians, Turks, and Moors, you know? Did you mean them when you said "white"

maybe the reason a White parade would offend is that "white" has always been used to contrast with "nonwhite" (or colored, black, hispanic, etc) and has always meant legal privileges for the "white" and exclusion for the rest.

Latino has no such nasty connotation.

What would be your intent in organizing such a parade? Would it be to uplift and celebrate - clearly the intent of Senor Garcia - or would it be divisiveness and power struggle?

Just something to think about.

Look, I'm 100% for gay marriage. But, I'm not for a City dictating whether a company should offer benefits. To whomever. Stop it, Mr. Garcia. Concentrate on the budget.

Ronald wrote:

I love our decent Homosexual friends as much as anyone, after all, many of them are decent tobacco smokers, and the ones who are not are subject to paying a near 10% food tax penalty when they dine in local NO SMOKERS! restaurants.
On the other hand, shouldn't the city be contracting with those businesses that can do the best work at the lowest price, rather than wasting more hard earned tax moneys on schemes such as this?
Ronald

Ronald
It's just part of the 'nonexistant' gay agenda.

It is simply not the business of local government, in this case the city of Long Beach, to dictate employee compensation at private businesses. You will note the many exceptions to the requirement listed in the article. It's a complex, complicated formula which picks and chooses among contractors on bases other than the normal good work, completed on time, for the least amount of taxpayer dollars. This proposal would force larger businesses to increase their costs per employee, or reduce the number of such employees. And then, someone will have to choose between those larger contractors as opposed to those who fall within the excepted businesses, or in some cases hire a contractor who fails to comply, due to the listed exceptions. None of it makes any sense.

Magggie wrote:

Look, I'm 100% for gay marriage. But, I'm not for a City dictating whether a company should offer benefits. To whomever. Stop it, Mr. Garcia. Concentrate on the budget.

I think it's important to make a distinction here: The City is not dictating anything to anybody; companies can do whatever they want; it's their right to offer some benefits, same benefits, or no benefits at all, and the City has nothing to do with it.

By the same token, it's the City's right, just as it is an individual's right, to decide with whom we do business. This ordinance simply says, we're not doing business with you if you discriminate against gay partnerships, period. There is no coercion, no force, no imposition; it's just a choice the City makes.

As to the budget, I'd again point out that this ordinance in no way detracts from the ongoing efforts to cut expenses. Mr Garcia, like all the Councilmembers, is closely involved and working hard every day with the budget, and with the work of improving our fiscal situation. Meanwhile, the City must continue to take care of business, including contracts, issues of justice, constituent concerns, etc. The truth is, the Council continues to do *all it can* to address fiscal issues. This ordinance does not change that.

Thank you for your concerns. I hope you will visit robertgarcia.com for more information.

Kindly,

Daniel Brezenoff,
legislative director - CD1

daniel brezenoff wrote:

<quoted text>
Sir,
Would you want the city to contract with the lowest bidder if that business had racist hiring policies? What if it gave money to terrorist states? Or used illegal child labor?

I do not mean to equate denying gay partners benefits with any of these actions.-d

You just did.