June 23, 2016
City News Service
The Metro board of directors is scheduled to vote this morning on whether to move forward with a November ballot measure calling for a half-cent sales-tax hike to raise money for public transit projects and maintenance in Los Angeles County.
If the board approves, voters will be asked to increase Los Angeles County’s sales tax by another half-cent, and continue the existing Measure R half-cent tax indefinitely. Metro officials had originally planned to have the proposed tax increase sunset in 40 years — which would have raised $120 billion — but announced earlier this month that they plan to propose a tax without a sunset date.
The permanent total one-cent sales tax for transit would create a sustained funding source for construction and operation, and would allow the acceleration of nine projects, including a five-year acceleration in planned improvements on the Orange Line, an eight-year acceleration of the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX rail line to Hollywood and a five-year acceleration of the Green Line extension to the Norwalk Metrolink station.
Metro CEO Phil Washington said earlier this month that the tax plan “goes far beyond building and delivering projects” and will pay for operating and maintaining the transit system, as well as to help set up “a smarter system that takes full advantage of the technology that is out there today and technology of the future that has yet to be developed.”
Representatives of a coalition of Southeast Los Angeles-area cities are expected urge the Metro board tomorrow to include projects along a six-mile span of Interstate 5 between the 605 and 710 freeways. Downey Mayor Pro Tem Fernando Vasquez will be among the speakers from the I-5 Consortium of Cities Joint Powers Authority, which also includes Commerce, La Mirada, Santa Fe Springs and Norwalk.
State lawmakers are asking Metro to delay their vote, saying the public and legislators are not being given enough time to consider the tax plan, the details of which were released on June 10.
“Given the concerns raised by numerous stakeholders and the fact that the plan will not be able to be changed or modified for decades, we must ensure it is thoroughly reviewed and meeting the transportation needs of residents throughout all of Los Angeles County,” state Senator Tony Mendoza, D-Artesia, said.
Mendoza said the proposed measure fails to live up to what state lawmakers had asked for when they agreed that Metro should put a transit sales tax measure on the ballot. He also pointed to projects that were funded by Measure R that have yet to be completed.
“Many of these projects have been postponed for many years and bumped behind others despite the complete lack of project pre-planning done for these projects,” Mendoza said.
Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon sent a letter to the Metro board last week asking that the vote be postponed until after the state holds an oversight hearing on the issue that is scheduled for Friday.
June 23, 2016
By Hill Harper
NNPA News Wire Guest Columnist
The question, which came from a participant in a minority business empowerment seminar, quieted the room. The answer is simple: “They’re out there. But they don’t have a data plan.”
That seems glib. But truth comes best in a simple package. The digital divide is real. Millions of brilliant, creative thinkers are still left behind, because they don’t have affordable access to the Internet. So what can we do to change this paradigm? We can go mobile.
Mobile technology has changed our world. Those of us who are already part of the mobile revolution know this innately: to be without our smartphones is to be isolated. It’s standing in a field, watching the train flash by. It’s trying to find a book in the dark when others are holding flashlights.
But we’re not done yet – not until we’ve brought that change across the digital divide. We know what it means to be connected. And we know that to fully bring change, we have to bring that connection to the populations who today may not have access. Mobile tools don’t work when you can’t get to them.
This issue matters more than ever because being “unconnected” now means so much more than not having the chance to stream Netflix or send tweets. It means being unable to access the myriad of business and entrepreneurial opportunities that exist across today’s vibrant technological landscape. It means not having an on-ramp to healthcare and educational information that could transform or save a life. It means being stuck in the 20th century at a time when the 21st century economy is finally kicking into high gear.
Imagine someone who isn’t connected or someone that has a mobile device, but can’t access more online data because they exceeded their monthly allotment. For them, free data could be the key. Free data is an offering that allows you to use more mobile content without having to worry about exceeding your monthly data allotment. This leaves more data to use on other things like social media, and gives you the option of switching to a lower cost plan, if you have too much data left over, because the content you love is covered by free data program. It’s expanded opportunity at no cost. If you see that you can watch an unlimited amount of video as part of a plan, then that might just be enough to entice you to cross the digital divide. And once online, you’ll inevitably use your mobile device to explore the web, allowing your device to be the transformative tool that it can be.
Until we get people online, they may not know the resources on which they’ll build. Creators and innovators need access to the Web to connect with others and to expand their world. Indeed, our embrace of mobile innovations like streaming media and free data can serve as the light we use to illuminate the world around those who remain in the digital dark. Dr. King’s vision of a “world-wide brotherhood” comes from those connections, those ties that grow a fully empowered and engaged community that refuses to let any more opportunities pass us by.
Our vigilance and advocacy will build the momentum we need to close the digital divide once and for all. Join me in this monumental task and be #MobileLikeMe.
Hill Harper is an American Film, Television and Stage Actor, and Author.
June 16, 2016
City New Service
Thanks primarily to residents’ conservation efforts, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California announced this week that it has sufficient supplies to meet the water demands of its member agencies for the next three years.
MWD officials said the analysis of its water supplies was mandated by the State Water Resources Control Board, which ended its mandatory conservation program last month and asked agencies throughout the state to review their supplies for the next three years. If agencies project a shortfall, they must reduce water use by that amount over the next six months.
“This so-called ‘stress test’ asked if we can provide water for our members agencies for the next three years, and our answer is yes,” MWD General Manager Jeffrey Kightlinger said. “To provide that assurance, we have invested to diversify our water portfolio with some of the nation’s largest conservation programs, more storage and ongoing efforts to improve reliability of imported water supplies.”
MWD officials stressed, however, that while the three-year outlook looks good, residents still need to conserve to ensure even longer-term supply. The water wholesaler began a $2.2 million advertising effort in May to encourage residents to continue conserving.
The MWD board plans to spend $100 million over the next two years on conservation and rebate programs for the installation of water-saving devices.
“Metropolitan is focused on supporting long-term water conservation and moving toward a more sustainable lifestyle,” said Brandon Goshi, manager of water policy and strategy. “Rather than look to water rationing as a solution in dry years, we are focused on how to be reliable every year.”
June 09, 2016
By Eugene E. Vollucci
director of The Center for Real Estate Studies
With many states increasing the minimum wage, a demand for labor plays an important part to real estate investors. Why is this so important for these investors?
Consider the following scenarios: Let us assume that the labor share and the profit margins remain constant at current levels of around 44% and 10% respectively, labor productivity growth continues to be weak at 0.5% and policymakers manage to push wage growth to levels of around 4%. The sum of the labor share of output and inflation has to grow at 3.5% per year.
Now we have reached the crux of the matter for real estate investors. Given that the labor share of output remains nearly unchanged, this implies that inflation rate would have to rise to 3.5%, drastically reducing returns, given that current inflation expectations for the next five years are barely over 1%. Such an outcome would be harmful to the economy and, hence lowering the outlook for the real estate market.
Secondly, higher wage costs given a maximum inflation rate of 2% and steady labor productivity growth of around 0.5% would lead to a much higher contribution of labor to output, and thus to lower profit margins. In such a scenario, the labor share of output would need to grow by 1.5% yearly, and as evidence shows profit margins would be compressed by nearly 1.3% per annum from their present level of 10%.
Currently levels do not suggest that real estate investors are prepared for profit margins to halve over the next three to four years.
The hypothetical scenario of nominal wage growth accelerating to pre-crisis levels with productivity growth still stuck at current levels is just one potential outcome analyzed here to highlight the debilitating effects for real estate investors.
The actual outturn might deviate from this scenario on a number of parameters. Productivity growth could start to rise again based on the reasoning described above, or wages might fail to rise to pre-crisis levels. Alternatively, the burden of labor’s rising share of output might be spread among various real estate investments. However, and investors should bear this in mind when forming their assessment of possible future outcomes, someone has to foot the bill for the cost of lower productivity growth.
Increasing the minimum wage would have two principal effects on low-wage workers. Most of them would receive higher pay that would increase their family’s income, and some of those families would see their income rise above the federal poverty threshold. However, some jobs for low-wage workers would probably be eliminated, the income of most workers who became jobless would fall substantially, and the share of low-wage workers who were employed would probably fall slightly affecting low-income rentals.
Rather than pursuing policies such as minimum wage increases that create winners and losers, policymakers should focus on policies that generate faster economic growth to benefit all workers. While minimum wages may be a well-meaning attempt to help workers, economic research clearly shows that somebody must pay the price for any increase, and it is usually the least skilled and least fortunate among us.