Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

(Jerry) Brown drops controversial plan to sell state buildings

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Newsjock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 12:55 PM
Original message
(Jerry) Brown drops controversial plan to sell state buildings
Source: San Francisco Chronicle

California will not go through with its controversial plan to sell state buildings then lease them back to help plug the budget deficit, Gov. Jerry Brown announced this morning.

The proposed sale of the California Supreme Court headquarters in San Francisco and ten other buildings would have raised $1.2 billion for the state. But Brown said the plan was short-sighted and would have cost taxpayers billions lease back those buildings over a 35 year period.

... The deal was arranged by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and had been approved by the Legislature, but got caught up in the courts after three former state Building Authority members sued the state to block the sale. They claimed the state would illegally waste taxpayer dollars.

... The sale agreement includes a $50 million penalty against the state if it backs out of the deal. (Joseph Cotchett, lawyer for two of the plaintiffs) said the buyers, an investment group called California First, might go to court to try to force the state to proceed with the sale. But he said he and his clients would argue that the contract "was an unconstitutional act and therefore was void, and there should be no penalty."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/0...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CaliforniaPeggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm glad to hear this...
It was just too damn complicated to really work, IMHO...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. Not to mention more costly to the state than not doing it
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Go Jerry. He's got a lot of Arnold's mistakes to clean up.
Of course it would have cost the taxpayers more in the long run with such a short sighted plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mulsh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. He cleaned up lots of Reagan's mess the first time he was Gov.
I'm confident he will do the same with what Arnold and the legislature have left him. This is a very reassuring move on Brown's part. It almost makes up for his lack of effectiveness as mayor of my home town, Oakland. ( I have voted for Jerry Brown in every election he has run since I turned 18 in 1976 and have never regretted those votes.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. One of Arnie's worst ideas.
Sell of our assets, only to lease them back??? WTF?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomhayes Donating Member (476 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. This is how BUSINESS WORKS
When people try to run government like a business you see incredibly stupid ideas such as these.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Just Arnie?
The Legislature which is controlled by Democrats passed the measure 117-3. I don't know the financials of this plan but companies that use office buildings do this all of the time. They are able to offload maintenance and repair costs to the owner of the building. This is an important consideration with older office buildings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomhayes Donating Member (476 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. This makes sense for scumbag BUSINESSES
You know business where they can liquidate their assets, fire all employees, and sell to an off-shore company to make a buck.

We're talking about running a GOVERNMENT - one that needs buildings to take care of the people's business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. The buildings are not going to disappear.
They are still there. No one is shipping the buildings brick by brick to China. You DO know what a lease is DON'T you??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. yes but the state would be paying to stay in buildings that they currently own
it would make them money initially but very soon (do you know just how soon?) it would cost the state more in leasing than they made in selling.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Sell your car for $2000
then rent it back at $700/month.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Second Stone Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
5. Good for Jerry Brown
This was the second stupidest idea Schwarzenegger came up with, the first being running for governor. Of course neither were his ideas, but rather his Pete Wilson gang of cronies who have been ripping off the state for years and years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-09-11 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. Totally approve
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-10-11 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
14. (CA Gov.) Brown drops controversial plan to sell state buildings
Source: San Francisco Chronicle

(02-09) 14:44 PST Sacramento -- California will not go through with its controversial plan to sell state buildings then lease them back to help plug the budget deficit, Gov. Jerry Brown announced this morning.

The proposed sale of the California Supreme Court headquarters in San Francisco and ten other buildings would have raised $1.2 billion for the state. But Brown said the plan was short-sighted and would have cost taxpayers billions to lease back those buildings over a 35 year period.

"The sale of the buildings really didn't make much sense," Brown said at a news conference at the Capitol.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/0...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-10-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Good. Stupid idea Ahnuld and his cronies came up with to make a buck off the state. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Merlot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-10-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. That was a leftover arnie plan
anyone with half a brain could see what this plan was all about.

Fortunately, our new Gov. is smarter than most.

But will he take my advice? I have a three point plan to turn CA around:

1. reinstate the car fee for vehicles worth over $40K

2. fix the loophole in prop 13 that lets commercial building get the same tax break that homes get. (that was the whole purpose of prop 13 - to help business, it was never about helping the people).

3. create a single-payer plan and lead the nation.

Wo, what do you say, Gov. Brown?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetapogee Donating Member (449 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-10-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. this is what
Gov. Brown has to say:

"Brown's proposed spending plan for 2010-11 includes the $1.2 billion in anticipated revenue from the building sale. He said he will amend his plan to make up for that by borrowing against internal state funds."

Right there in the article is the answer to your question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
generalbetrayus Donating Member (27 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-10-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. When the Rethuglicans were in charge in Colorado,
they tore down a building in our state government office
complex and then sent hundreds of us across the street to
leased private office space, saying it would save the state
money.  Eight years later, just before the Rethug governor
was term-limited, they renovated another building in the
state government complex and moved us all back across the
street because the rent was KILLING our budget.  I'm glad
Jerry had the sense to see through Ah-nold's charade.
:crazy: 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-10-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. He proposed the idea to get street cred with the very gullible RWers, lol.
It worked, I suspect. But he never planned to actually do it. He knows better than to pull such a boneheaded RW move.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-10-11 02:03 AM
Response to Original message
20. Did Arnold get kickbacks for making these deals?
Brown should investigate that. The companies threatening to sue might not be so sure of themselves if they were being investigated for fraud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 30th 2014, 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC