Hi everyone,

This is my new initiative and I need your help.

It’s an easy vote to help us win this contest to launch our Million Reusable Bag Giveaway. We are making a million reusable bags to distribute in the lower-income communities of Los Angeles, so that everyone can celebrate the upcoming finalization of our plastic bag ban.

Thank you!

-Andy Shrader

http://myla2050.maker.good.is/projects/MillionBagGiveaway#

Sometimes the news is so good, you print the press release…

LADWP Announces Negotiations to Sell and Divest from Navajo Generating Station and Board Approves Contract to Enable LADWP to Completely Transition Out of Coal from Intermountain Power Plant by 2025

LOS ANGELES— The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power took historic steps today towards eliminating coal from LA’s power supply when it announced that representatives of LADWP and Salt River Project have reached sufficient progress on the principle terms to sell its stake in Navajo Generating Station for the two utilities to move forward to negotiate a definitive agreement that would end LA’s use of coal-fired power from the plant by the end of 2015.  If a final agreement can be reached and approved by each party’s governing bodies, this will end LA’s role in NGS more than four years earlier than mandated by California state law.  On this same day, the LADWP’s Board of Water and Power Commissioners approved a contract that will enable LADWP to completely transition out of coal power from the Intermountain Power Plant in Delta, Utah by 2025 at the latest, with efforts to begin that transition no later than 2020.  The Navajo announcement and action on Intermountain Power Plant continues LADWP’s transformation of the city’s power supply to create a cleaner and more sustainable energy future. “The era of coal is over. Today we affirm our commitment to make Los Angeles a cleaner, greener, more sustainable city,” said Mayor Villaraigosa. “By divesting from coal and investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency, we reduce our carbon footprint and set a precedent for the national power market.” Thomas R. Sayles, President of the Board of Water and Power Commissioners, said, “Today we continued the Board’s efforts to meet environmental mandates efficiently and in a cost effective manner while maintaining a reliable power supply for our customers.” LADWP currently owns a 21% interest in the 2250 megawatt (MW) Navajo Generating Station, receiving 477 MW of coal-fired power from the plant.  Today, the Board directed staff to develop the final transaction agreement, which is expected to be approved by both parties later this summer, with consideration by the Los Angeles City Council thereafter. “We are very pleased that we have made progress  with Salt River Project to enable moving forward with the negotiation of the final agreements that would enable LADWP to fully divest of coal power from Navajo by the end of 2015,” said Ronald O. Nichols, LADWP General Manager.  “This will close a chapter on our reliance on coal-fired power in Los Angeles.  Our efforts to create a clear path to ending our use of coal-fired power from the Intermountain Power Project is also a major achievement for a complex arrangement involving 30 Utah public power utilities and 6 California municipal utilities who receive power from that project.  This allows us to focus on the new low-carbon future of Los Angeles.”   Eliminating coal power from Intermountain Power Plant (IPP) was more complex than negotiating the terms of sale of Navajo because LADWP does not own any part of IPP.  LADWP is one of six Southern California municipal utilities that purchase coal power from the 1,800-megawatt (MW) Intermountain Power Project located in Delta Utah under a long-term power purchase agreement that expires in 2027.  IPP is owned by 23 municipal utilities in Utah and supplies power to 30 utilities in Utah and six utilities in Southern California, including LADWP.  Under California law, SB 1368, electric utilities will not be allowed to import power into the state that exceeds a fossil fuel emissions cap after their current contracts expire. The emissions cap is set at the level of an efficient, combined cycle natural gas power plant. The Board’s action today approves LADWP’s portion of the amendment to the long-term power sales agreement to stop taking coal power from IPP earlier than 2027 and build a smaller natural gas plant that complies with California emission standards.  LADWP and other Southern California municipal utilities will continue to receive renewable energy from Southern Utah from the Milford Wind project; with power delivered over the same transmission line that presently also delivers power from the Intermountain Power Project.  The contract provides for beginning LADWP’s transition out of coal power from IPP with the commencement of engineering, design and construction of the smaller natural gas-fired generating plant by 2020 and completely eliminating coal power from IPP no later than 2025.  The smaller plant, estimated at between 600 – 1200 megawatts, will allow LADWP and the other local municipal customers to develop more renewables and bring it to Southern California along existing transmission lines. “Working with IPP and its other customers, we have developed a win-win-win solution that is good for Southern California and good for Utah,” said Aram Benyamin, LADWP Senior Assistant General Manager – Power.  “Siting and building a new power plant and the transmission lines to deliver replacement power to Los Angeles would have cost at least twice that of rebuilding at IPP.  By using an existing power plant site and existing DC Southern Transmission System  for delivery of power from the future project and transforming it we will save money, time, reduce emissions by over 2/3 that of the existing plant, be able to build more renewables and bring that power home to Los Angeles.  That’s a homerun.” The amendment is subject to approval by the Los Angeles City Council, will be considered by the other municipal purchasers and is currently being ratified by the 23 Utah owners. Today’s actions by the Board are the latest steps taken to transform LA’s energy supply and create a clean energy future.  Other major accomplishments include reaching 20% renewables in 2010, establishing and implementing a 150 MW Solar Feed-In Tariff program, approving the largest utility-scale solar developments of any municipal utility in the country, completing the utility-built Adelanto and Pine Tree Solar Plants and more than doubling the LADWP’s investment in energy efficiency, among others. The transformation of LADWP’s historic energy supply is well-underway. “Eliminating coal is one leg of our transformation, but we can’t stand on that leg alone – we have to replace that power supply,” said Ronald O. Nichols, LADWP General Manager. “That is why for several years now and for several more to come, LADWP has been taking steps to replace coal power with a combination of greatly increased commitment to energy efficiency, expanded renewable energy, and balancing that with a necessary amount of low-carbon natural gas power. “All of these elements will come together to ensure a reliable, cost effective power supply transformation.” ——————————————– Amen.

There are blogs that present a problem, freak you out and leave you without a solution. This is not one of those blogs.

This is a blog that will show you exactly what you can do to help right now, today and make a difference not only across the entire County of Los Angeles, but in the essential water quality of our oceans (which, by the way, sustain us and all life on the planet).  And, to do so, you must act by this Tuesday, March 12!  

(Information to do so is at the bottom of the blog.)

The Problem

In 2011, the International Program on the State of the Ocean brought together experts and scientists from different ocean disciplines — including, coral reef ecologists, toxicologists and fisheries scientists — to compare notes on the health of the oceans.  What they found was troubling, to say the least.  Summing everything up, they warned that ocean life is “at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history.”

Unprecedented extinction.

They concluded that issues such as over-fishing, pollution and climate change are acting together in ways that have not previously been recognized (including: ocean acidification, coral reef die-offs, dead zones in the oceans… more…).  If you factor in that more than 70% of the oxygen we breathe comes from ocean organisms, you may begin to get that creeping feeling in your spine that you understand the urgency of the situation:  

As goes the health of the oceans, goes the health of the humans.

Fortunately, the U.S. Government hasn’t been sitting still on this one (see instead, “Climate Change,”  but I digress).  In 1972, Congress approved the Clean Water Act and established the basic structure for regulating pollutants discharged into the waters of the United States.

In California, water quality in waterways is regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board and, closer to home, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board.  These boards have one unanimous consensus: nearly all water bodies in Los Angeles County do not meet water quality standards.  They are, in fact, listed as “impaired” under the federal Clean Water Act.

Why is that?  

Us.  You and me, and that guy over there.  And her.  And him.

This will explain it better…

In its natural state, open space in the Los Angeles area used to absorb most rainfall into the ground, naturally filtering and cleansing this water as it percolated down. However urban development has introduced hard surfaces, such as asphalt and concrete, to the Los Angeles landscape that disrupt this natural process. Now rainwater rushes along streets, picking up trash and pollution as it flows, depositing this pollution into lakes, rivers, and eventually the ocean and beaches. During a typical storm, billions of gallons of water rush directly into the ocean.

The Polluted runoff has consequences

• The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health posts warning signs on beaches hundreds of times each year due to bacterial contamination. Swimming in this contaminated water can lead to gastroenteritis, ear, nose and throat infections, as well as cause other serious health problems.

• Every year, thousands of children and adults contract a gastrointestinal disease after swimming at a Los Angeles County beach or lake. 
  

• Hundreds of thousands of tons of trash from our streets wash up on Los Angeles County beaches every year.

• Every year hundreds of seals, sea lions, and dolphins along the California shoreline are found dead. These deaths are attributed to pollution and reduced food sources. 
  

• There is an oxygen-starved “dead zone” off the Los Angeles County coastline at the outlet of the San Gabriel River, according to NASA’s Goddard Earth Sciences Center. Excess fertilizers from our lawns and yards flow into the ocean and feed blooms of algae, which are decomposed by oxygen-sucking bacteria. Without enough oxygen, fish and shellfish suffocate. Only worms and jellyfish remain.  Click here for more info.

Hard, or impervious, surfaces in the Los Angeles area also keep storm water from percolating into the ground, and recharging ground water supplies. This limits the amount of locally available drinking water. We currently import two-thirds of our drinking water—spending billions every year. This amount will need to almost double in the next 10 years, which will cost ratepayers in water expenses and energy expenses; water-related energy use consumes 19 percent of the state’s electricity, 30 percent of its natural gas, and 88 billion gallons of diesel fuel every year – and this demand is growing.

The Regulatory Drivers

Since 1999, Cities and unincorporated areas in the Los Angeles region have been subject to a federal Consent Decree that established a 13-year schedule for figuring out how to clean up the water.  There are currently more than 30 different pollutant regulations (TMDLs) in Los Angeles County (for pollutants such as trash, bacteria, metals, pesticides and fertilizers).  These pollutants affect not only the ocean, but our regional water supply as well.

To safeguard public health and the environment, water quality standards and objectives are codified in a recently adopted stormwater permit which became effective December 28, 2012.
Violations of the permit expose the City to third party lawsuits and enforcement actions. Civil penalties of $2,500 – $25,000 per day or $10 – $25 per gallon per day can be assessed for contaminated stormwater and pollutant discharges.

Those fines and civil penalties come directly out of the taxes we pay as residents of our Cities and County.  In other words, we are already on the hook to pay to clean up our waterways.  Since we cause the problem in the first place, that actually seems fair.

To clean the City’s waters, the City of Los Angeles will need to spend an estimated $8 billion in the next 20 years, out of an already struggling budget.  The future of water in Los Angeles is a serious issue with serious consequences for all of us.  Fortunately, a local water movement is beginning to take hold and “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” is an essential component to make it happen here in Los Angeles County.

The Solution

The County of Los Angeles Flood Control District is proposing an integrated watershed approach that provides multi-benefit projects while complying with the water quality mandates. The solution is a proposed annual clean water fee, paid by property owners, to fund the “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” program.  A typical single-family home will only be asked to pay an extra $54 per year; condos would be $20; a typical convenience store would pay $250 and a box store would pay $11,000.  The fee is based upon the size of the property impacting water quality.

Cumulatively, “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” will raise $270 million to address our clean water needs.  The allocation of the fund will be 10% Administration, 40% Municipal Projects and Program, and 50% Watershed-wide Project and Programs. This means that 90% of the fee will pay for the water quality programs the City is obligated to implement.

The “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” measure will provide a dedicated funding source to cities to meet the regulations without having to take money from a city’s general fund.

Here are the specific proposed projects the measure will fund.

Fee Reduction/Incentives Possibilities

Property owners who reduce the amount of impervious area on their site will be eligible for a rate reduction.  In addition incentives will be provided to property owners to manage runoff on-site and reduce impervious area.

Strict Fiscal Safeguards in Place

• All funds by law must be spent on local water quality improvement projects.
• Funds cannot be diverted to Sacramento or be used for any other purpose.
• An Oversight Committee of scientists, property owners and residents reviews all expenditures.
• Fees cannot be raised for any reason without another vote of the people.

For further information, please see:

- “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” website.

- Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation website.

- Heal the Bay website.

Please take action to help get “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” approved and moved forward:

A simple email to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors will help enormously.

Sample email (feel free to cut and paste):

——————————————————————

Dear Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors,

I am a homeowner (or a renter and/or businessowner) residing in (your city) in greater Los Angeles County.  I understand the serious environmental challenges facing our waterways and oceans, as well as the serious fiscal challenges facing our Cities and Counties who need to help clean them up.  I am willing to do my part financially.  I fully support the “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” measure and urge you to move it swiftly forward on Tuesday, March 12, 2013.  To delay any longer would be irresponsible and dangerous to our Cities and to our environment.

Thank you for your leadership on these important watershed issues.

Sincerely,

(Your name and address)

——————————————————————

Email the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors here:

ExecutiveOffice@bos.lacounty.gov

Also, please cc: the LA County Supervisors and Staff:

molina@bos.lacounty.gov, tvillegas@bos.lacounty.gov, seconddistrict@bos.lacounty.gov, kkatona@bos.lacounty.gov,  zev@bos.lacounty.gov, snissman@bos.lacounty.gov, rvelasquez@lacbos.org, anevarez@lacbos.org, MAntonovich@lacbos.org, KBarger@lacbos.org, TBell@lacbos.org

Remember, it isn’t just up to your elected officials to lead us; it is up to us to lead them as well.

Thank you for making a difference!

.

.

.

Join us for:

The L.A. Green Machine’s Quarterly Gathering

A discussion on the merits and issues surrounding the “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” County Measure.

According to Heal the Bay, “The measure would provide $270 million in funding for… storm water projects that would create multiple economic and environmental benefits for the entire region.“

· What exactly would the Measure do?

· Why do we need it?

· Who pays for it and how much?

· What impact will fees have on businesses?

· How will the money and projects be managed?

Click here for more information on the measure.

When: Wednesday, March 6th, 7:00pm

Where: TreePeople’s Center for Community Forestry
12601 Mulholland Drive
Los Angeles, CA  90210

Please RSVP: paulawaxman@soronc.org

Panelists include:

· Andy Lipkis, Founder and President, TreePeople

· Shahram Kharaghani, Watershed Protection Program Manager, Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation

· Susan Nissman, Senior Lead, Watershed Management, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, (now confirmed)

Meeting Agenda:

I. 7:00 to 7:15 – Introductions

II. 7:15 to 7:30 – Best Practices. Six two-minute presentations on how to implement neighborhood programs such as a community tree-planting programs, zero-waste events, etc.

III. 7:30 to 8:30 – Discussion of “Clean Water, Clean Beaches” Measure

IV. 8:30 to 9:00 – Q and A

The L.A. Green Machine is a coalition of Angelenos committed to actively initiating and supporting green, sustainable and environmental justice education and advocacy in Los Angeles and California.

L.A. Green Machine organizers: Paula Waxman (South Robertson Neighborhood Council), Andy Shrader (Mar Vista Community Council Green Committee), Lisa Cahill (TreePeople), Carolyn Cassavan (San Fernando Valley Green Team), Torin Dunnavant (Atwater Village Neighborhood Council)

Do The Math: Los Angeles

This Fall, Bill McKibben and 350.org are going on tour across America to build the movement we need to face the crisis of climate change.

On Nov. 11th, Bill will be in Los Angeles to lay out the terrifying new math of climate change, explaining the incredible odds we  face, and the difficult path we must walk in the coming years to create a livable future for our planet.

Here are the details:

Where: Ackerman Ballroom at UCLA Student Union, 308 Westwood Plaze, (UCLA) Los Angeles, 90095

When: November 11th, 2012 – doors open at 6 PM, show starts at 7 PM

Bill will be joined by friends from across the climate movement and beyond to explain how together we can confront the fossil fuel industry, using lessons from the most successful movements of the past century and the past year of dramatic new actions against the industry across the country.

http://act.350.org/signup/la-do-the-math/

I will see you there!

Dear friends,

I’m dismayed to see that there’s any question whatsoever about voting YES on Proposition 37 (label GMOs).

There is a massive disinformation campaign going on from every outlet — TV, radio, mass mailings — being funded by the same folks who told us DDT, PCBs and Agent Orange are safe (they’re not), and none of what they’re saying is true.  Stanford University even forced them to take one commercial off the air because they represented the spokesperson as a Stanford professor, which he wasn’t.  That should tell you all you need to know about the opposition’s integrity.  And the latest, the opposition is falsely posing as the Democratic Party and making fake endorsements which the Democratic Party does NOT agree with.  Here are the real Democractic Party endorsements, including YES on PROP 37!  And all the overall Yes on 37 endorsements.

I’ve been working on Prop. 37 almost since its inception and would like to set the record straight:

Genetically-engineered food products (GMOS) defined: For one example, Bt-corn has the gene of a pesticide artificially inserted into it in a laboratory.  When an invading insect eats Bt-corn, its gut walls disintegrate until it dies from its own stomach bacteria.  Then they sell it to us as food.  The food folks at the FDA don’t regulate Bt-corn, but, here’s the best part, the Environmental Protection Agency DOES regulate it… as a pesticide.  And corn is in everything: corn chips, corn flakes, soda pop, candy, high-fructose corn syrup, and a massive list of additives that goes on and on.

I want the ability, through labeling, to choose not to eat a pesticide.

Health effects of GMOS – The companies who sell GMOs claim patent protection and will not allow long-term health studies to be performed by independent entities.  Beside, there is no control group.  We are all eating genetically-engineered food products without our knowledge.  The FDA and USDA have former GMO corporate execs at the helm, which is a major conflict of interest and why the federal government bureaucracies haven’t moved on labeling.

Proposition 37 is a well-written, well-researched proposition, put together by a diligent group of food industry, food policy, farm, science and health experts, several of whom I know and trust implicitly.

Proposition 37 specifically only addresses genetically-engineered crops sold whole or as ingredients in other food items, to make it as easy as possible for stores and companies to comply. These crops include: corn, soybeans, canola, sugar beets, cotton, Hawaiian papaya, some zucchini, and crookneck squash.  California law requires that ballot measures only address one state code at a time.  Items not included in Proposition 37 – alcohol, meat and restaurants (prepared food) – are covered by different state or federal codes and therefore do not apply.

There is a strong precedent to Proposition 37 in the U.S.:  The 2004 Food Allergen Labeling Act protects consumers by requiring labeling of possible allergens like peanuts, soy and dairy.  When Congress approved it, the same food companies objected and made the same claims, yet, when the Act went into force, stores and companies complied, prices remained stable, there was no excessive or abusive litigation, and consumers had more information with which to protect themselves (we have all seen the labels, “This product made on equipment which may have once touched peanuts”).

Proposition 37 offers no economic incentives for lawyers to sue.  The only new enforcement provision added by Prop. 37 allows a consumer to sue only for an order to force required labeling to take place – not to recover any money at all.  Consumers cannot file a class action without first giving notice, and if the defendant fixes the labels, then no class action is permitted.  Any penalties from a violation go only to the state, not the plaintiff or lawyer.

Proposition 37 does not include a “bounty hunter” provision like Proposition 65, which lets the plaintiff keep one-quarter of any civil penalty on top of an award of attorney’s fees.  The same chemical companies making claims about lawsuits are themselves suing farmers across the country for saving their own seeds.

Enforcement - The California State Department of Health would be responsible for regulating the labeling requirements as a part of their normal operating procedures.  The state Consumer Legal Remedies Act would cover individuals who bring suit on genetic engineering labeling violations.

Food prices remained stable when the European Union required the labeling of GMOs ten years ago.  Sixty-one countries across the globe either label GMOs or ban them completely, including Australia, Brazil, Japan, Peru, India, China and Russia.  Why on Earth do people in Russia and China have more rights to know what’s in their food than we do?  That’s not the country I grew up in.

Creates extra paperwork for retailers? As mentioned, there are only 8 GMO crops that retailers will have to label themselves.  Otherwise, it’s up to the company producing the processed food boxes.  Besides, they already label them on the produce they sell with the PLU codes developed by the Produce Marketing Association.  So-called “conventionally grown fruit” has a label with 4 numbers.  Anything organic or genetically-engineered has an extra number.  Organic starts with a “9″ and genetically-engineered starts with an “8.”  Organic bananas are 94011, for example.  It’s FOOD, they already keep tight paperwork.  That’s how they track an e-coli outbreak back to a certain corner of a certain field.  Anyone who believes farmers who use GMO seeds don’t already keep reams of paperwork to address the patent protection situation, aren’t paying attention.

The grassroots effort that became Proposition 37 was started by a fearless, feisty grandmother from Chico, Pamm Larry, who couldn’t believe that genetically-engineered foods weren’t already being labeled.  She called together some friend to help, those friends became a people’s movement which gathered nearly a million signatures to get her GMO labeling initiative on the ballot this Tuesday.

If you have other questions or concerns, I would be happy to address them.  This is one of the most important issues of our time and California has the opportunity to lead the way towards greater transparency and a more level playing field (organic farmers are not federally subsidized; GMO farmers are via the Farm Bill), which is what would make the most healthy free market system.

To summarize: VOTE YES ON PROP. 37!

To learn more:

Farmers support Prop 37

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DlPm6KfLmX4

or

http://truefoodnow.org/2012/10/17/california-newspaper-editorial-boards-spread-false-claims-and-faulty-logic-on-proposition-37/

or

NY Times editorial: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/15/g-m-o-s-lets-label-em/

or

http://www.carighttoknow.org/

For more progressive ballot endorsements for Tuesday, hit this page:

http://courage.3cdn.net/1134cd8e81036e735e_jkm6b5llc.pdf

Thanks for reading,

All the best,

Andy

Battleground Los Angeles is here and it’s a big one…

I don’t need to tell you how important this vote is to turn the tide against big chemical companies who produce genetically-engineered items the grocers sell as food.  These are the same companies who told us DDT, PCBs and Agent Orange were safe (they’re not).  Now they want us to believe them about GMOs…

Next Wednesday, October 24th, the full Los Angeles City Council will be hearing the resolution of support for Proposition 37, the initiative which will require the labeling of genetically-engineered items sold as food in California.  Prop 37 is on the November ballot and is considered the last stand in the United States for labeling GMOs.

GMOs include, for one example, Bt corn, which has the gene of a pesticide inserted into it at a genetic level.  When an invading insect eats the corn, the pesticide breaks down the insect’s stomach walls until it dies from its own stomach bacteria.  And here’s the best part… then they sell it to us as food.  The USDA — the food people — don’t regulate Bt corn.  But the Environmental Protection Agency does… as a pesticide.  Is that what you want to feed your children?  Me neither.

Sixty-one countries across the globe either label GMOs or ban them completely, including Australia, Brazil, Japan, Peru, the entire European Union and a couple countries which might surprise you: China and Russia.  How is it that China and Russia have more rights to know what is in the food they eat than we do in the United States of America?

The opposition to Prop 37 is spending tens of millions of dollars on a disinformation campaign spreading fear, lies and confusion from every possible radio and television in California.  And their assertions are patently false.  When the European Union required the labeling of GMOs ten years ago, for example, food prices remained stable.  There is a strong precedent to Prop 37 in the U.S., the 2004 Food Allergen Labeling Act.  When Congress approved it, the same companies spread the same wild fears.  Yet, when it went into affect, stores and companies complied, prices remained stable, there was no excessive or abusive litigation, and consumers had more information with which to protect themselves and their families.  We all see those signs everywhere: “This product made on equipment that may have once touched peanuts, or soy, or dairy.”  

Proposition 37 was well-research and well-written by a team of food industry, farm, science and health experts, and a grandmother from Chico, Pamm Larry, who started the whole movement in California.  It was written specifically to address one state code and to allow easy compliance by businesses large and small.  Food companies are already required by law to label for ingredients, calories, etc, and there have been few violations.  The only person liable is the person who puts the label on and any lawsuit allows a consumer to sue only for an order to force labeling to take place — not to recover any money at all.  

WE NEED YOUR HELP! 

We need people to either come give public comments in person on Wednesday (preferable), or to contact the LA City Councilmembers BEFORE the hearing and let them know how important it is for Los Angeles to say Yes on 37!

Details:

LA City Council resolution of support for Proposition 37
Wednesday, October 24th

9am – Food Day event (http://goodfoodla.org/calendar_readmore.php?id=26)

10am – City Council Meeting
Los Angeles City Hall
200 N. Spring Street 
City Council Chambers, Room 340
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Every speaker needs to fill out a speaker card.  1 minute speaking time.

Here’s the LA City Council resolution they’ll be voting on:

http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=12-0002-S67

____________________________________________________________________

Here’s where to find out more info about Prop. 37 and where to find talking points: http://www.carighttoknow.org/facts.

Here’s contact info for the Councilmembers, if you want to call ahead of time:

Councilmember Ed Reyes (213) 473-7001

Councilmember Paul Krekorian (213) 473-7002

Councilmember Dennis Zine (213) 473-7003

Councilmember Tom LaBonge (213) 473-7004

Councilmember Tony Cardenas (213) 473-7006

Councilmember Richard Alarcon (213) 473-7007

Councilmember Bernard Parks (213) 473-7008

Councilmember Jan Perry (213) 473-7009

Councilmember Herb Wesson (213) 473-7010

Councilmember Bill Rosendahl (213) 473-7011

Councilmember Mitch Englander (213) 473-7012

Councilmember Eric Garcetti (213) 473-7013

Councilmember Jose Huizar (213) 473-7014

Councilmember Joe Buscaino (213) 473-7015
________________________________________________

Here is additional contact information for all Councilmembers: http://lacity.org/YourGovernment/CityCouncil/index.htm

And here’s where you find out who represents you specifically: http://neighborhoodinfo.lacity.org/

We need to fill the room to win the day.

Please pass this along to your interested email lists.

Would love to see you there!!

Should have published this before.

The LA City Council Committee decided to continue the resolution supporting Prop. 37 for the second time.  Because they heard from so many people the previous several days, they have realized what an enormous issue this is and want to take a closer look.

I’ll let you know what happens next.