Give Assemblymember Holly Mitchell (D-Culver City) a measure of credit this afternoon.
Through Ms. Mitchell’s ace senior deputy Sydney Kamlager, we have an almost 200-word explanation (below) of why she voted last year to eliminate Redevelopment Agencies.
My interpretation:
I was swept along by the tide of my colleagues.
I still am searching, and I won’t quit, for one legislator — hopefully Ms. Mitchell or state Sen. Curren Price (D-Culver City) — to say the following:
“I voted to kill Redevelopment Agencies because researchers found 154 instances of felony-level abuse among the 400 Agencies.”
C’mon, guys. Is there one serious person in the house? My nose tells me this looks like the Los Angeles (We Don’t Do Nothin’ We Don’t Wanna Do) City Council.
I can drop by my neighborhood 99 Cent Store, purchase a windup doll and teach the wooden thing to say “I dunno, Mr. Noonan, why I voted that way, and now I have to go get a drink.”
In the second paragraph of Ms. Mitchell’s explanation, she mentions childcare.
Childcare?
Boob Obama is cutting our military — the only job of government — down to the size of Herb Wesson’s waistline, and my tax dollars are going to childcare?
Let us briefly inspect the four paragraphs of Ms. Mitchell’s answer:
• The first paragraph is why I love crooked labor unions — a superfluous phrase. Mob rule, baby. This is a stickup.
• The second sentence in the second paragraph is the most important, the most illuminating.
• The third paragraph is the most encouraging if it is a serious statement — sounding as if redevelopment agencies will be brought back close to present form, based on her description.
• The fourth paragraph is as false as saying today is the 20th of July. That kind of idiotic Democrat thinking plunged us into this mess and will keep us there as long as Gov. Flat Tire breathes in Sacramento and President Boob has his slimy finger on the trigger in the White House. What else would you expect from Angry Lefties? Any Sacramento nincompoop who believes that statement should be recalled before the weekend.
As a friend says, however, Ms. Mitchell is a standup person to reply this stoutly after taking a battering here earlier this week for a non-response on the State Supreme Court ruling.
“Assemblymember Mitchell, along with almost every other member of the Democratic Caucus, voted for a budget bill that closed the deficit and was constitutionally on-time.
“The budget included a number of cuts, including cuts to ADHC, Medi-Cal, child care and redevelopment. The budget bill is an inclusive bill that members must vote on wholly or not at all.
“As a result of the budget, she was asked by the Speaker (John Perez) to join other leadership members on a working group on redevelopment. She accepted because of the concerns she heard from the district, especially Culver City, and because she recognizes that redevelopment agencies can serve a vital purpose when it comes to addressing low-income housing and economic resurgence in blighted communities.
“Now, however, Assemblymember Mitchell is tackling a $9.2 billion budget shortfall, that will result in more drastic cuts to critical programs and services, if additional revenues are not found. This is California in which we are currently living. We need revenues and we need to stop operating under the illusion that we can solely cut our way out of these deficits.”
