City Issues and Political Philosophy

By Scott L. Levitt

This paper gives a brief overview of several key issues relating to the City, governing, and my stance on such issues.

Old Town Businesses:

Seal Beach receives much of its revenue from business taxes. And the City does not have much in terms of commerce compared with larger cities. Seal Beach, politically needs to embrace and support the businesses that we do have and encourage new businesses to enter the City. Like all evaluations, the proposed new businesses and expansion of those existing, need to be done in a balanced fashion to protect the community, the neighbors and the general public. It is time each proposed business is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Roughly, one year ago, a new restaurant on Main Street sought a beer and wine license. Councilmen Antos and Shanks voted against the license. They also stated they did not want to see anymore restaurants on Main Street. Antos, cited a shooting in Belmont Shore outside of bar to support his No vote. This type of example is deplorable. Fear is not the way to attempt to fool voters into supporting the political agenda of one person. Restaurants do not cause the problems these two councilmen cited. In fact, the Police Department publishes a public report addressing where the bulk of their calls originate from. This type of factual evidence should be used in making a decision, not scare tactics and personal agendas.

Zoning/Downzoning:

After four years of debating downzoning, the topic is still on the agenda of the Planning Commission and the City Council. The Planning Commission under the direction of the Chairperson has insisted upon putting downzoning into the current revision of our City planning code. Of course, again, they site no factual evidence to institute such changes, nor do they provide legal evidence to justify such. This topic will come up for vote at the October City Council meeting. Please come out and tell the Council you are against them striping you of your property rights. The City has failed to even present information on how much loss property tax revenue will occur over the next 25yrs because of the proposed downzoning. One Councilman has already admitted to the fact that he doesn't want any more big homes on the Hill as one was already built on one side of his home (ironically his home, was practically the biggest on the hill when he almost doubled his home size in the 1970′s, and he currently encroaches on the Hellman property behind his home) and doesn't want it to happen on the otherside as he can't "grow his tomatoes" because of the big home next to him. This is a deplorable way to govern and a misuse of the power of the office. The City has spent over $100,000.00 over the past year on an outside consultant (a former City employee) to re-write the zoning code at the request of the Council which really began as the personal agenda of Councilman Antos and the Planning Commission Chairperson when they both proclaimed they would "save" the City from bigger homes.

City Attorney:

Our city attorney and the law firm what employs him has received over $1,500,000.00 in legal fees from the City of Seal Beach in the past three years. It is time we end the contract with this firm, and bring in either an in-house city attorney who has no incentive to create litigation, and thus billable hours for his/her firm, or to separate out the city attorney job from a separate firm which handles all litigation matters.

DWP Property:

Again, this is private property and should be built out under the current zoning and requirements in place. The government needs to stop intruding on the rights of the citizens. If the land is zoned 70% open space, then that should be the requirement the owner has to live with. If the property is zoning residential or hotel, then that is what the City has to live with. Regarding the issue of eminent domain with this property, the City has absolutely offered too little per square foot to the Owners, and now we, the taxpayers of Seal Beach, are funding hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees for the lawsuit. This issue is a result of the poor decision made by the Council and the poor advice given by the City Attorney.

City Governance:

The City Council of Seal Beach is currently, and has been in the past filled with members of the community who were and are retired government employees. Their experience with practical business and governance is simply lacking. When an individual has received a paycheck funded by the taxpayers their entire life, it appears to be simpler for them to spend money and make decisions without realizing the unintended consequences that many of us in the private sector have had do deal with. The inefficiencies you as a common citizen experience at the government levels, whether at the DMV, the county assessor, the superior courts, etc. is the same as you will see in Seal Beach if you continue to elect individuals who worked for the government their entire lives.

It is also time that the City Council person for District One represent the needs and interests of the residents of Surfside. For the past eight years, it seems as if their voices and concerns have fallen on deaf ears.

I implore you to elect private sector experienced individuals who have practical experience in finance, accounting, and law to help guide Seal Beach to success rather than continuing bitter, foundationless debates stemming from personal, selfish agendas arising from the status-quo individuals who have been representing much of this City for several years.

GENERAL BELIEFS ON CURRENT TOPICS:

GOVERNMENT

Government was created primarily for the defense of the Nation. It has evolved into something drastically different. The government has now become the hundred-armed creature that has its tentacles stretched into every facet of business and personal life.

Government, in a general sense, should exist only to protect the Health, Safety, and Welfare of its citizens. We need to cut down the number of people employed by the government. The governmental agencies need to be working smarter, harder, leaner, and run with an emphasis on efficiencies.

Practically every time a new bill is passed, the subject matter of the bill pertains to some sort of rules, which in turn requires oversight, which in turn requires agencies to conduct the oversight. This non-stop practice over the past 50+ years, especially in the State of California must end. The number of employees of the various agencies of the State of California is staggering.

ECONOMICS

Overregulation will only hamper a growing economy. The government has rarely done a better job in maximizing resources than the private sector has. Only in a free marketplace can true innovation take place. If the government takes profit-motive away from business through over-regulation and taxing, businesses will cease to innovate and create, and jobs will be lost. It is only arrogance abound, when legislators decide that they know better than the millions in the common market place.

TAXES

Most people do not realize that until 1913, there was no true Federal Income tax. That is right, the United States somehow functioned without income tax. It relied mainly on tariffs, land sales, and excise taxes to fund its needs. That was less than 100 years ago. Now the U.S. and California can barely get by on the taxes it collects each year, some of which top 35% on the Federal level, over 10% on the state level and close to 10% on the local level. So what has changed over the past 85 years? Overspending has created the need for such astronomical tax rates.

Overtaxing will be the proverbial death of California. What California needs is greater GDP, and that cannot, and will not happen with businesses leaving the state at record pace to seek tax-friendly states in which to reside. California needs to cut its swollen social programs to an affordable, manageable, and realistic size, and concentrate on bringing businesses back to the State. It will not be easy to endure such cuts, and many will lose the programs and funding they depend on, but you can't force the tax payers to pay for programs that only help a select few.