What: LACYD Legislative Committee MeetingWhen: Thursday, June 18, 2009 7 pmWhere: 1337 S. Bundy Dr. Apt. 201 Los Angeles, CA 90025Contact: David Graham-Caso, LACYDlegislative@gmail.comAs a result of the May 19 special election, California lawmakers have been forced to return to a bargaining table that must seem all too familiar by now, to hammer out a deal that closes an unfathomable $24.3 billion state budget gap. They are going to have to negotiate a compromise that is tolerable to Republicans who are frequently threatened by their own party if they appear to be amenable to even the slightest rational increase in revenue generating taxes. They are going to have to strike a deal that is tolerable to Democrats, who were sent to Sacramento to protect (and hopefully improve) the services government provides for Californians. They are going to have to agree on a budget, which in the past has proven, shall we say... difficult. They are going to have to do this absent any lucid direction from voters.
In addition to the recent special election kicking our budget crisis from the frying pan directly into the fire, the message sent by the few voters who actually showed up to vote is dangerously ambiguous. Because of the confusing and occasionally counter-intuitive nature of the ballot measures, voters were not able to send a clear message to legislators regarding how they want them to approach the daunting task of resolving this unending budget fiasco. For instance, a voter who voted "no" on the measures because they were displeased with the way the initiatives were placed on the ballot, could have their "no" vote interpreted as a vote against the extension of tax increases. A voter who was voting to protect money set aside for First Five Commissions and Proposition 63 Mental Health services could have their vote interpreted as a vote in favor of cutting state-funded services across the board. The rejection of these convoluted and complex initiatives allows legislators to manipulate the "message" they were supposed to be receiving into whatever mandate they would like, in order to justify the actions they are about to take to deal with the budget deficit. As confusing as the text of the ballot measures was, the unclear message sent by the overwhelming denial of the initiatives is equally baffling. Worse, it is dangerously malleable.
The challenge now confronting organizations such as LACYD is combating this vacuum of a coherent message and informing our representatives in the legislature how we would be best represented as they make the difficult decisions necessary to closing the budget gap. We need to clearly identify not only areas of the budget that our organization strongly believes are necessary to the future of our state and therefore should be spared deep cuts, but also those areas where we would find cuts acceptable. This is a difficult situation, but retreating into fiscal NIMBY-ism would do nothing to solve the problem and is advocacy not worthy of any serious political organization.
This is why I am asking everybody who plans on attending the June LACYD legislative committee meeting to be prepared to debate what areas of the budget our organization should stand up to defend and what areas of the budget LACYD should inform our legislators are expendable, given the current circumstances.
I would like each member of the committee to attend the meeting prepared with at least one suggestion for an item in the budget they believe should not be cut and one suggestion of an item in the budget that should be scaled back. We do not need to offer solutions for the entire $24.3 billion deficit, but it would irresponsible to demand programs be saved while offering no simultaneous solutions.
While most Democrats would obviously prefer to close the budget gap by increasing revenues, the political reality of the situation does not effectively allow for the legislature to increase taxes substantially. This is why I would like proposals offered by members of the committee to focus on areas of the budget should be cut. Please also be prepared to defend your suggestion- I will be encouraging members of the committee to debate each proposal so that we can reach a consensus through active participation.
As a result of the debate and collaboration that I hope will take place at this meeting, I would like to be able to draft a letter which clearly identifies our organization’s priorities in the current budget negotiations. With the approval of the committee, I will ask the LACYD Executive Board to approve the submission of the letter to our area's representatives in Sacramento so that our organization’s opinion is a matter of public record. The timing is tight on this- the goal established by the legislative leadership is to have the conference committee finish its work by mid-June and put out proposals to the floor to amend the 2009-10 budget package, and to get those passed and in law prior to the start of the fiscal year (July 1).
If you plan on attending the meeting, please RSVP on
this event page and additionally send me an e-mail at LACYDlegislative@gmail.com so I can be sure you receive the meeting agenda and materials when they become available.
Thank you.
