Tag Cloud
Monday, May 21, 2012
Sacramento Democrats Oppose Anti-Scavenging Measure and the Big Business Supported Bill on Accounting Peer Review
by Devin Lavelle, published on July 15, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Storyline: Democratic Party of Sacramento County
Sacramento Democrats Oppose Anti-Scavenging Measure and the Big Business Supported Bill on Accounting Peer Review
In addition, the DPSC voted to urge the City Council to repeal Section 13.10.160 of City Ordinance No. 2009-012 banning scavenging from solid waste receptacles. Kipp Mueller of the Sacramento County Young Democrats gave a stirring presentation on the issue, noting that homelessness is up 14% and this ordinance does not save the city money. DPSC member Devin Lavelle said, “With the current conditions of our economy, criminalizing poverty is unconscionable. If any American with the motivation to go out and dig through garbage is forced to, the crime is not that they choose to – it is that they need to.”
The DPSC was proud to be joined by Gabriel Perez Puentes, the Executive Secretary of the Colombian General Federation of Labor, who updated the committee on deplorable state of labor relations in Columbia and the heartbreaking tale of Columbian workers who survive on less than $1/day.
The DPSC voted to oppose AB 138, unless amended, which would mandate that all accounting firms be subject to mandatory peer review. While the DPSC supports high accounting standards, this bill would overwhelmingly favor the largest accounting firms and put many small businesses at risk. DPSC Treasurer Guy Crouch noted, “This bill would put small accounting firms like mine in danger and hurt other small businesses and charitable organizations that depend on our services.”
Finally, the DPSC approved a resolution supported by Assemblymember Tom Ammiano to support majority vote for local revenue measures.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
The trash can diggers on our street have been the same people for years. It appears to support their lifestyle of choice.(dive in the morning, drunk by noon, theft at night)
Do the DPSC support the continued tresspass onto private property, to access the cans, as is done daily now?
The people who sort through Midtown trash bins for recyclables don't cause problems or "make a mess." If someone's trying to get by, by collecting redeemable cans that someone more privileged threw out, let them be.
I sort out the cans and bottles they're looking for and leave them in a separate bag in or near the recycling bin. It's my prerogative to give redeemables away to the struggling people looking to cash them in. Just as it is the prerogative of some privileged folks to view the poor and homeless as the scum of the earth.
Dismissing the state of the economy, ignoring that social and mental health services are first on the governmental budget chopping block and mocking the effects on real people -- that is "naive or in complete denial."
Your response is simply not an educated one. I would like to invite you to stoll the streets of my midtown neighborhood with us, or to just sit on our front porch and enjoy a cup of coffee to specifically see who we "privileged folks", (read: get up at 5:30 and go to work rain or shine, sick or well, every day for 40 years), while watching the same "struggling people" people, usually with stolen grocery carts, dig trough the trash cans on private property every morning, year after year. Then we can go to the park and watch them smoking and drinking and having a fun in the sun that same day. And the next morning, we can walk around the streets and see the broken booze bottles in the streets, the smash and grab broken car windowns, and watch the bums shift throu trash cans for recyclables, often spreading it across the lawn for sorting, and never quite putting it all back. Thus completing the circle of life for enabling crime and addiction. I have no denial or fantasy, I have eyes and ears and live in the reality of it all.These folks lead a selfish life of luxury, they are truely the privliged ones.
The other two respondents here have made some excellent comments providing more perspective. You have no idea who all of these people are or what they do with the money. I am not one of those who feel that with the gentrification of Midtown and downtown, the poor and homeless should just disappear.
Many of them are veterans and/or not able to receive needed social/health services. Having coexisted with folks recycling in alleys for 20+ years and not having major problems, I am not prepared to make the type of judgments and assumptions that you two are making.
I would also invite you to use your real name on Sac Press and perhaps tone down the hyperbolic accusations.
"Keep bagging up the bottles and cans Marion. You are CONTRIBUTING TO THEIR DEATH!"
That goes for Thsas as well:
"Your response is simply not an educated one."
Oh really. Because it's based on experience different from yours?
"These folks lead a selfish life of luxury, they are truely the privliged ones."
Oh really. You're kidding, right?
"Marion, you should do whatever YOU want to do, but please do not support telling ME what to do."
If you read Samantha Corbin's comment, it may help you understand no one is "telling YOU what to do."
With recent budget cuts, the first on the chopping block are the most needy. Previous budgetary decisions have dumped homeless and mentally ill people on the streets, creating a permanent population of "campers" for decades. We are in the midst of a severe recession.
It seems the wrong time to make something so petty an issue, depriving those who can use the money from having what others (less privileged according to "thsas") toss out. Enforcement of this law would consume more public resources than are available.
And you're rigtht. When I help people on the street with cash, water or food, I try to determine the most constructive way to do so.
" Then we can go to the park and watch them smoking and drinking and having a fun in the sun that same day. And the next morning, we can walk around the streets and see the broken booze bottles in the streets, the smash and grab broken car windowns, and watch the bums shift throu trash cans for recyclables, often spreading it across the lawn for sorting, and never quite putting it all back."
Yes that's very different than any of the Midtown neighborhoods I've lived in.
As a former midtown resident and the former manager of low income apartments, I understand where some of your frustration comes from. Yes, there are homeless people who are drug addicts. Some are alcoholics. By and large, however, this is not the case.
Many of our local homeless suffer from a variety of mental health ailments that prevent them from caring for themselves in the same manner that you and I can. As a result of the economic downturn, services for these individuals are drying up, forcing them to fend for themselves.
Additionally, prior to the economic downtown, roughly 1 in 50 American children were homeless. Those numbers have spiked up almost 20% percent with some estimating that as many as 30% of the homeless population in California is comprised of children.
All that said, keep in mind that once your garbage can is placed on the sidewalk for collection or in a communal bin, it is no longer your "private property." It is considered discarded or abandoned. Law enforcement, in particular, operates on this assumption when searching through trash receptacles for evidence.
The items we so often take for granted such as half-eaten food, old clothing, unused electronic equipment, well-worn household items....These items are vital resources to the families living on Sacramento's streets.
The assumption that any and all scavengers are drug and alcohol abusers is as short-sighted as the assumption that every person who works a 9-5 is not.
Of course we would all prefer that people stayed out of our trashcan. It is undesirable on a number of levels. The way to fight it, though, is not by banning the practice. Enforcing it would be tremendously inefficient, diverting critical public safety resources away from real public safety issues.
People who have adequate food to eat, shelter and productive ways to spend their time do not dig through garbage cans. There are serious problems here -- let's deal with those problems, not just cast their most obvious consequences from our line of sight.
It's time to redirect the $1.00 weekly fee assessed to residents directly to Homeless services, and end a process that encourages lawlessness and marginalization.