Biden Praises ‘Civility’ of Two Arch Segregationists

Joe Biden is proud that he worked with vile segregationist in the U.S. Senate.  Progressive Democrats denounce him for working with them.  Please note that not a single story about Sen. Eastland of Mississippi or Talmadge of Georgia mention a key point—they were DEMOCRATS.  The same Party that founded the KKK, the same Party that supports the killing of 19 million black babies since 1973.  The same Party that created Jim Crow laws.

Currently the Democrats in Congress are holding hearings on “reparations”.  Yes, there should be reparations-the Democrat Party needs to pay for its historic role in promoting racism, hate and violence against black people in this nation.  The head of the Democrat Party needs to publicly apologize for HIS role in running a political Party based on racism,  Newsom apologized to Native Americans for something HE had nothing to do with—then Tom Perez needs to apologize for the death of freedom and black people caused by the policies of the Democrat Party.

Biden Praises ‘Civility’ of Two Arch Segregationists

HARIS ALIC, Breitbart, 6/19/19 

Former Vice President Joe Biden praised two arch segregationists that he served with in the Senate Democrat Conference for their “civility” on Tuesday.

Biden, the current 2020 Democrat front runner, told a group of donors gathered for a fundraiser at the Carlyle Hotel in New York City it was vital the next president “be able to reach consensus under our system.” To explain why he was the best candidate in that regard, Biden fondly cited his history of working with two of the Senate’s arch segregationists, the late-Sens. James Eastland (D-MS) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA).

“I was in a caucus with James O. Eastland,” Biden said with an attempted Southern drawl. “He never called me boy, he always called me son.”

“Well guess what?” the former vice president continued. “At least there was some civility. We got things done. We didn’t agree on much of anything. We got things done. We got it finished. But today you look at the other side and you’re the enemy. Not the opposition, the enemy. We don’t talk to each other anymore.”

Eastland, who served as senator from 1943 to 1978, was known as the “voice of the white South” for his stringent opposition to civil rights and integration. As chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Eastland attempted to derail both the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Thurgood Marshall’s appointment to the Supreme Court.

In his first Senate campaign, The New York Times wrote in Eastland’s obituary, “he often appeared in Mississippi courthouse squares, promising the crowds that if elected he would stop blacks and whites from eating together in Washington. He often spoke of blacks as ‘an inferior race.’”

Biden, who joined the Senate in 1972, missed most of those battles. He did, however, arrive just as busing to achieve school desegregation was coming to the forefront. Despite opposition from more liberal elements in the Democrat Party, especially the late-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Biden ended up leading the charge on the issue. Eastland, as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was a prominent ally in the fight against busing, according to the Delaware News Journal.

During his remarks on Tuesday, Biden also invoked his relationship with Talmadge, another ally in the anti-busing campaign. Talmadge, who served as governor of Georgia before being elected to the Senate in 1957, was another fierce opponent of civil rights and integration. In the wake of the Brown v. Board of Education decision, which struck down segregation in public schools, then-Gov. Talmadge promised to do everything in his power to protect “separation of the races.”

After Biden’s remarks about Talmadge and Eastland came to light, a former staffer for ex-Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) urged reporters to consider why Biden believes he’d be better at forming “consensus” than former President Barack Obama.

Other Democrats expressed equal concern about Biden’s comments.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, a fellow presidential candidate, was especially critical.

As he seeks the Democrat nomination, Biden’s long history with race has increasingly come under fire from the left. The New York Times recently reported that Biden was forced to abandon his initial bid for president in 1988 amid a slew of scandals including revelations he falsely claimed to have marched in the Civil Rights Movement. During that failed campaign Biden also praised the late-Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC), another prominent segregationist, as one of his “closest friends,” according to the Washington Examiner.

Breitbart News reported this month that Biden made a series of racially insensitive statements, including lecturing on what “was good for the Negro,” in the early 1970s. One of those remarks came at the funeral of his first wife, Neilia Biden.

“I was probably one of those phony liberals… the kind that go out of their way to be nice to a minority and she made me realize I was making a distinction,” Biden said in December 1972. “But in dealing with minorities, she made no subtle condescending gestures… she made no distinctions.”

California TAXPAYERS Spending Hundreds of Millions of $$–To Turn Cow Manure Into VERY Expensive Energy

This is what cow manure costs the ratepayers:

“Also, for all its environmental benefits, turning dairy methane into electricity is not yet price-competitive without state and federal supports. That means state and federal subsidies may have to continue longer than planned if they are to remain financially viable.

Biomethane currently costs 13 to 14 cents per kilowatt-hour to produce, while photovoltaic solar costs only about 5 to 6 cents, said Rizaldo Aldas, a supervisor with the California Energy Commission’s Energy Research and Development Division. The state doesn’t intend to help make up the difference indefinitely, he said.

“Somehow the cost issues need to go down in order (for biogas operations) to be self-sustaining,” he said.

Not mention is that in addition to that the STATE is subsidizing cow manure by almost $300 million—and that is just the start.  Why is California so expensive—government mandates it and steals from taxpayers to force them to leave or be very, very rich.  Corruption?  You bet.

With state’s help, Kern dairies turn cow manure into clean energy

BY JOHN COX, Bakersfield,  6/15/19 

Roy Dowd sniffed the air during a dairy tour he was leading last week on the edge of Bakersfield.

“That’s the smell of money,” joked the director of operations, maintenance and research at a Visalia company, California Bioenergy LLC, helping local dairies turn manure into a new revenue stream.

Don’t hold your nose: Methane from cow manure at local dairies has taken on new value as both a clean-burning fuel and a greenhouse gas to be harnessed.

Growing numbers of dairies are earning a percentage of sales from the electricity generated by combusting “biogas” produced on their property. Soon, some of the gas will be refined on site and injected for sale into natural gas pipelines.

The projects have attracted substantial public investment in expectation they will lead to cleaner air quality and lower greenhouse gas emissions. Besides being relatively clean-burning, methane is about 84 percent more potent at trapping heat, and therefore warming the planet, than carbon dioxide.

In some respects, though, California’s emerging biogas industry is not quite living up to expectations. The number of installations at dairies across the Central Valley would need to accelerate quickly if the state is to meet a major legislative deadline.

Also, for all its environmental benefits, turning dairy methane into electricity is not yet price-competitive without state and federal supports. That means state and federal subsidies may have to continue longer than planned if they are to remain financially viable.

Biomethane currently costs 13 to 14 cents per kilowatt-hour to produce, while photovoltaic solar costs only about 5 to 6 cents, said Rizaldo Aldas, a supervisor with the California Energy Commission’s Energy Research and Development Division. The state doesn’t intend to help make up the difference indefinitely, he said.

“Somehow the cost issues need to go down in order (for biogas operations) to be self-sustaining,” he said.

The situation is, to a large degree, a function of government support. State officials have spent years designing incentives to entice investment in biogas harvesting systems, which can cost several million dollars to build and millions more to form into cost-effective dairy clusters.

BIG INVESTMENTS

To date, the state Legislature has set aside at least $190 million to help pay for 60 digesters and about the same number of other dairy manure projects that reduce methane emissions without collecting the gas. Another $99 million in project grants is expected to be awarded later this year.

There is some concern that these subsidies, part of an elaborate system of incentives paid for by businesses and consumers, might not be enough to meet a legislative deadline that statewide annual methane emissions come in 40 percent below 2013 levels by 2030.

Industry estimates are that the current level of state funding will produce about 100 dairy digesters within the next five years. To meet the state deadline, however, air quality officials figure there will need to be five times that many in place in just 11 years.

Methane-producing dairies are “on their way, but additional ongoing support, we think, is needed for this to continue,” said Floyd Vergara, chief of the industrial strategies division at the California Air Resources Board.

STATE SUPPORT

Subsidies employed to date have been a mixture of direct financial contributions and market support.

One way biogas operations make money is by earning state credits through methane collection and other manure management practices. These credits can be bought on an open market by companies required to buy them, mainly air polluters and sellers of petroleum fuels.

The state also supports biogas production by requiring investor-owned utilities to buy at least 90 megawatts of electricity from agricultural products including dairy biogas. This requirement, overseen by the state Public Utilities Commission, has produced 14 dairy biogas electricity contracts. Three operations in Kern have reached such agreements.

Dairies and the biogas developers they work with may additionally receive money directly from the state.

The agency that has awarded the most biogas grants, the California Department of Food and Agriculture, gave 64 projects a total of $114.3 million in 2015, 2017 and 2018. (No biogas grants were awarded in 2016.)

Those grants covered an average of a little more than one-third of the projects’ total costs. Nine of the projects were in Kern; they received an average of $2.1 million each.

SETTLEMENT CONCERNS

While the oil industry often bristles at its added costs under the incentives system, the loudest criticism of California biogas subsidies came after a legal settlement over the massive 2015-16 Aliso Canyon natural gas leak. Southern California Gas Co., among other concessions, agreed in February to pay $26.5 million toward capturing, treating and transporting dairy methane.

Environmentalists and people in the Los Angeles County neighborhood directly affected by the leak called the deal a geographically misplaced remedy that only fueled consolidation and growth of an industry they see as harming air and groundwater quality.

But state officials say the combination of benefits offered by biogas harvesting make it a uniquely attractive public investment.

As measured by mass, methane makes up about 9 percent of the greenhouse gases emitted in California, according to state estimates. More than half of that is believed to originate with dairies and livestock, with the rest coming from landfills, the oil and gas industry and other sectors.

On top of the benefit of keeping it out of the atmosphere, regulators say, it is a renewable fuel that can be used in place of diesel, which causes considerably more pollution than methane.

CLEAN AND RENEWABLE

Using “biomethane” for transportation instead of diesel results in a 90 percent reductions in nitrogen oxides, the precursor to smog, and a near-complete removal of particulate emissions, said Dave Warner, deputy air pollution control officer with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.

Methane as a use of transportation fuel “is probably the best use of that gas, actually, because it not only is very low emitting, it also removes diesel emissions, which can be some of the most toxic emissions that are put into the air in the San Joaquin Valley,” Warner said.

Bakersfield-based Gazelle Transportation, a trucking company serving the local oil and gas industry, has received grant money from the air district that has helped it cover the cost of replacing seven diesel tractor-trailers with compressed natural gas trucks.

CEO Ron Lallo said he expects to spend state and federal biomethane credits to help pay to fuel the trucks. That should help the company become carbon-neutral within a few years, a goal he said is supported by some of his larger customers in the local oil industry.

There is a risk, he acknowledged, that prices could rise to the point that diesel would be more economical.

“It’s something we’re going into cautiously. We’re optimistic that there’s a sound business case with this,” he said before adding, “We’re super-excited with the contributions we’re making to clean the environment.”

Mayor Garcetti/Democrats Running Los Angeles Lie—by Hiding Facts—From Public

This is a simple story.  The corruption leaders of Los Angeles are concerned that the people of L.A. will revolt if they found out how much money public employees are being paid.  Those responsible for the human feces on the streets, the homelessness growth of 12% a year, the unaffordable housing, the traffic gridlock on main streets and side streets—Los Angeles is a Third World country—employees paid a fortune to further destroy what is left.

“The city of Los Angeles is disclosing its full employee compensation data for the first time in at least a decade, ending a long-standing practice of releasing only averages for health and benefits packages.

The practice violated a state law requiring public agencies to report the individual cost for each employee annually to the state controller’s office. The offices of City Controller Ron Galperin and state Controller Betty Yee pressured the city to make the changes following a Southern California News Group report earlier this year.

More proof—government lies and the people pay for the corruption.  How corrupt is Los Angeles and the Democrats running it?  This is another example of totalitarians thinking the people are too dumb to get the truth.

Los Angeles finally discloses how much it actually pays for each employee’s benefits

Photo courtesy of Eric Garcetti, Flickr.

For more than a decade, the city provided only averages until the Southern California News Group called out the practice

By Jason Henry,  Pasadena Star News, 6/14/19 

The city of Los Angeles is disclosing its full employee compensation data for the first time in at least a decade, ending a long-standing practice of releasing only averages for health and benefits packages.

The practice violated a state law requiring public agencies to report the individual cost for each employee annually to the state controller’s office. The offices of City Controller Ron Galperin and state Controller Betty Yee pressured the city to make the changes following a Southern California News Group report earlier this year.

In a statement, Galperin said his goal is to make the city’s financial data as open and transparent to the public as possible.

“I’m happy to report we are now updating our salary information quarterly and have added the actual cost of health benefits and pensions for each individual employee as well,” he said. “This has been a priority of mine for some time and I’m confident it will prove more helpful and useful to anyone seeking to dig deeply into L.A.’s government spending.”

In February, a spokesman for the city’s Personnel Department said the city would not release health benefit costs for individuals because the city attorney believed those records were exempt from disclosure.

Nearly every city in California provides this information to the state controller’s public pay database and third-party databases such as Transparent California. State law requires cities to submit “pay and benefit information for every compensated employee who received a W-2.”

The differences between the averages provided in 2017 and the full compensation released in 2018 is dramatic. The median pay and benefits for full-time city employees increased by nearly $50,000 as a result, according to data provided to Transparent California.

In 2017, the city released public information listing Mayor Eric Garcetti’s “retirement and health” compensation as $12,693, the exact same figure used for 25,330 other employees. Garcetti’s benefits jumped to $97,590 in 2018 as a result of the changes in reporting.

Fire Chief Ralph Terrazas’ benefits skyrocketed from $15,793 in 2017 to $168,788 — the most generous benefits package of any city employee — in 2018. As is the case almost every city, most of the top benefits packages in Los Angeles went to police and fire personnel.

Los Angeles did not disclose it was providing averages to Transparent California until last year, after nearly a decade of sending misleading pay data to the nonprofit organization. Robert Fellner, the executive director of Transparent California, said the change in reporting is a welcome development.

“They’re the biggest city, so it is nice to have them on board and providing us, and the public, with a full accounting of their single biggest expense, which is employee compensation,” Fellner said.

The state Controller’s Office notified Los Angeles it was out of compliance earlier this year. The Controller’s Office does not audit the data received from cities and was not aware of Los Angeles’ discrepancies until contacted by a reporter.

“Our team informed the City of L.A. staff that providing averages does not satisfy the requirement of our reporting instructions and they would need to report actual benefit amounts in order to be compliant,” said Taryn Kinney, Yee’s spokeswoman, in an email.

“The City of L.A.’s 2018 salary data (to be released on June 25) is in compliance and appears to provide benefit actuals.”

Data: Average of 124K Anchor Babies Born in U.S. This Year So Far

Why do illegal aliens get pregnant in other countries, but come here to give birth (they do not believe in abortion)?  Once birthing a baby, the parents get to stay.  How many illegal aliens got pregnant just to stay in the United States?

“In the first five months of 2019, about 124,000 children of illegal aliens were born on U.S. soil, thus solidifying their permanent American citizenship due to the nation’s birthright citizenship policy. The total derives from a Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) analysis of Census Bureau data, which reveals that, on average, about 300,000 anchor babies are born in the country every year, with nearly 25,000 anchor babies born every month.”

Thought you should know the size of the problem—since the Fake News media will not report these numbers or the facts.

Data: Average of 124K Anchor Babies Born in U.S. This Year So Far

JOHN BINDER, Breitbart,  6/6/19 

An average of about 124,000 children of illegal aliens, commonly referred to as “anchor babies,” have been born in the United States this year thus far, analysis of Census Bureau data concludes.

In the first five months of 2019, about 124,000 children of illegal aliens were born on U.S. soil, thus solidifying their permanent American citizenship due to the nation’s birthright citizenship policy. The total derives from a Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) analysis of Census Bureau data, which reveals that, on average, about 300,000 anchor babies are born in the country every year, with nearly 25,000 anchor babies born every month.

The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled that the children of illegal aliens must be granted birthright citizenship and many legal scholars dispute the idea.

The children of illegal aliens, after being granted birthright citizenship, are able to anchor their illegal alien and non-citizen parents in the U.S. and eventually are allowed to bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country through the legal immigration process known as “chain migration.”

Today, there are at least 4.5 million anchor babies in the U.S., exceeding the annual roughly four million American babies born every year and costing American taxpayers about $2.4 billion every year to subsidize hospital costs.

Though President Donald Trump has routinely denounced birthright citizenship, his promise in October 2018 to end the policy has yet to come to fruition.

The annual number of anchor babies born in the U.S. exceeds the number of births in 16 states plus the District of Colombia, combined. For example, there are more than 30 times as many anchor babies born every year than the total number of children born to native-born Americans in the state of Delaware.

Similarly, there are more than 22 times as many anchor babies born every year in the country than there are children born to native-born Americans in the state of South Dakota. The anchor baby population in the U.S. is almost twice the amount of residents living in the U.S. territory of Guam and more than double the population of the U.S. Virgin Islands, where a projected 107,000 residents live.

In total, there are now an unprecedented nearly 62 million immigrants and their U.S.-born children living across the country, as Breitbart News has previously reported. As of 2017, there were 17.1 million U.S.-born minor children of immigrants in the country.

The U.S. is nearly alone in granting birthright citizenship to the children of foreign nationals and, specifically, illegal aliens. For example, the U.S. and Canada are the only two developed nations with birthright citizenship. On the other hand, countries such as France, the United Kingdom, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, Italy, and Germany all have either outlawed birthright citizenship or never had such a policy to begin with.

While foreign nationals and illegal aliens continue to take advantage of the country’s birthright citizenship policy, the foreign-born population has boomed to a 108-year record high. In 1970, the total foreign-born population in the U.S. was 9.5 million.

Today, foreign-born residents account for nearly 14 percent of the total U.S. population, and by 2060, the Census Bureau projects that about one-in-six residents in the U.S. will be foreign-born if the country’s legal immigration policy continues.

The country’s legal immigration policy is already having widespread electoral implications. In the 2020 presidential election, Pew Research Center projects that about one-in-ten U.S. voters will have been born outside the country, and Hispanic Americans are set to outpace black Americans as the largest voting minority in the election for the first time in American history.

In the next two decades, should the country’s legal immigration policy go unchanged, the U.S. is set to import about 15 million new foreign-born voters. About eight million of these new foreign-born voters will have arrived through chain migration.

Foreign-born voters, as research by Axios, the New York Times, University of Maryland, College Park researcher James Gimpel, and Ronald Brownstein has confirmed, are more likely than native-born Americans to vote for Democrats.

Brownstein’s research concludes that Democrats win about 90 percent of congressional districts that have foreign-born populations above the national average. This suggests that any district with a foreign-born population larger than 14 percent has a 90 percent chance of electing a Democrat over a Republican.

The 2016 presidential election between then-candidate Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton revealed a similar trend.

For example, among native-born Americans, Trump won 49 percent to Clinton’s 45 percent, according to exit polling data. Among foreign-born residents, Clinton dominated against Trump, garnering 64 percent of the immigrant population’s vote compared to Trump’s mere 31 percent.

Every year, the U.S. admits about 1.2 million mostly low-skilled legal immigrants, who compete directly against at least 12 million working- and middle-class Americans that continue to be sidelined out of the labor market but who want a good-paying, full-time job.

Due to legal immigration driving most of the U.S. population growth, the country is on track to add nearly 80 million new residents to the population by 2060. This would tick the total resident population up from the current level of about 326 million to an unprecedented 404 million total residents.

Oakland Educators Took a Financial Hit After the Strike. Now This Teacher Is Leaving California

A strike never ends for those who have taken the picket lines to give up the trust of the parents, students and community.  A strike never ends when the strikers lose homes, cars and marriages due to the financial strains pf a strike.  The strike never ends when teachers watch good teachers being fired because the District could not afford the cost of the union extorted contract.

“Now, he and his family are leaving California and moving to northern Virginia next month.

“I’m gone. I put a good fight in,” he said. “I tried. I gave it all my all. And, Godspeed. That’s all I can say.”

Pulliam said the strike, and the disappointment with the deal teachers eventually received, played into that decision.

“All of the things that I experienced during the strike symbolized a microcosm of what’s happening across California,” Pulliam said. “You’re losing more than you’re gaining. We decided that we need to get out of this web and move to where things make more sense.”

This teacher needs to talk to those forced to join the grocery store unions in Southern California.  They are about to take a strike vote—which, if like the last one will take months on the picket line and a lose of lots of homes, cars and marriages.  They should know the REAL cost of being in a union.

Oakland Educators Took a Financial Hit After the Strike. Now This Teacher Is Leaving California

Lily Jamali, KQED,  6/13/19    

Three months after they went on strike, teachers in Oakland are finally learning how much the labor action cost them.

That’s because the Oakland Unified School District only recently processed their unauthorized absences.

Teachers had gone on strike in the effort to secure a new contract that would include better pay and more classroom support.

While their union, the Oakland Education Association, had invited teachers to apply for hardship funds during the strike, the union’s president told KQED it is no longer accepting applications.

But many teachers didn’t ask for help, including Raymond Pulliam, who teaches a third- and fourth-grade combination class at Parker Elementary School in Oakland.

He estimates he lost about a third of his earnings for one pay cycle, a few thousand dollars.

“There’s a problem, because all the efforts that were put into the situation, it seems that I really don’t know who came out on top.”

“I said, ‘I’m OK. I don’t need the funds.’ But what it turned out to be was actually a repayment. It was a payment for the loss that was incurred during the strike,” Pulliam said. “I felt like me applying was taking money away from somebody who really needed it.”

Pulliam was a strike captain who encouraged fellow teachers to go on strike in February. Now he says he has misgivings about that.

“I felt as if I was taking my soldiers into a winless fight,” he said. “Yes, we all took a financial hit. I feel so sorry about those who also took that hit, but may or may not have been prepared for the type of losses that they received.”

Now, he and his family are leaving California and moving to northern Virginia next month.

“I’m gone. I put a good fight in,” he said. “I tried. I gave it all my all. And, Godspeed. That’s all I can say.”

Pulliam said the strike, and the disappointment with the deal teachers eventually received, played into that decision.

“All of the things that I experienced during the strike symbolized a microcosm of what’s happening across California,” Pulliam said. “You’re losing more than you’re gaining. We decided that we need to get out of this web and move to where things make more sense.”

FLASHBACK: ABC’s ’08 Prediction: NYC Under Water from Climate Change By June 2015

More proof Al Gore is a scam master and the media are the tools of his care tactics.  The tactics are meant to control the population by government and for him to continue to make hundreds of millions from corporations and junk science think tanks.  Rachel Carson said get rid of DDT, which kills off the bugs that create malaria.  Thanks to her, the United Nations and other vendors of Every Day is Halloween, more than ten million Africans die on the altar of environmentalism.  Then you had the money greedy Paul Ehrlich claiming the world would be in a food war before the end of the last century.  He got rich, we got took.

Now we have more examples of scaremasters abusing the truth, using junk science, just to make a buck.

“New York City underwater? Gas over $9 a gallon? A carton of milk costs almost $13? Remember when that happened on June 12, 2015? No? This was the wildly-inaccurate world of 2015 predicted by ABC News 11 years ago this week. Appearing on Good Morning America in 2008, Bob Woodruff hyped Earth 2100, a special that pushed apocalyptic predictions of the then-futuristic 2015.

The segment included supposedly prophetic videos, such as a teenager declaring, “It’s June 8th, 2015. One carton of milk is $12.99.” (On the actual June 8, 2015, a gallon of milk cost, on average, $3.39.) Another clip featured this prediction for 2015 “Gas reached over $9 a gallon.” (In reality, gas cost an average of $2.75 four years ago.)  

Will ABC apologize for lying to the public, using junk science to get viewers and to promote radical Progressive policies that make life more difficult for all.

FLASHBACK: ABC’s ’08 Prediction: NYC Under Water from Climate Change By June 2015

By Scott Whitlock, MRC,  6/15/19 

New York City underwater? Gas over $9 a gallon? A carton of milk costs almost $13? Remember when that happened on June 12, 2015? No? This was the wildly-inaccurate world of 2015 predicted by ABC News 11 years ago this week. Appearing on Good Morning America in 2008, Bob Woodruff hyped Earth 2100, a special that pushed apocalyptic predictions of the then-futuristic 2015.

The segment included supposedly prophetic videos, such as a teenager declaring, “It’s June 8th, 2015. One carton of milk is $12.99.” (On the actual June 8, 2015, a gallon of milk cost, on average, $3.39.) Another clip featured this prediction for 2015 “Gas reached over $9 a gallon.” (In reality, gas cost an average of $2.75 four years ago.)  

On June 12, 2008, correspondent Bob Woodruff revealed that the program “puts participants in the future and asks them to report back about what it is like to live in this future world. The first stop is the year 2015.” 

One expert warned that in 2015 the sea level will rise quickly and a visual showed New York City being engulfed by water. The video montage included another unidentified person predicting that “flames cover hundreds of miles.” 

Then-GMA co-anchor Chris Cuomo appeared frightened by this future world. He wondered, “I think we’re familiar with some of these issues, but, boy, 2015? That’s seven years from now. Could it really be that bad?” 

Ultimately, ABC delayed the air-date for Earth 2100 and the one-hour show didn’t debut until June 2, 2009. The program showcased the terrible impact of global warming from 2015 through 2100. In the special, a “storm of the century” wiped out Miami. Other highlights included a destroyed New York City and an abandoned Las Vegas. By 2084, Earth’s population will apparently be just 2.7 billion. 

On June 13, 2008, ABCNews.com promoted the special by hyperventilating, “Are we living in the last century of our civilization?” Unlike the 2015 predictions, that suggestion hasn’t (yet) been proven wrong.

Eleven years later, the network has quietly ignored its horribly inaccurate predictions about 2015. When it comes to global warming claims, apparently results don’t matter for ABC.  

For more examples from our weekly flashback series, which we call NewsBusters Time Machine, go here.

A partial transcript of the June 12, 2008 GMA segment is below. Click “expand” to read more. 

Good Morning America
6/12/08
8:34am

CHRIS CUOMO: Now, we will have a dramatic preview for you of an unprecedented ABC News event called “Earth 2100.” We’re asking you to help create a story that is yet to unfold: What our world will look like in 100 years if we don’t save our troubled planet. Your reports will actually help form the backbone of a two-hour special airing this fall. ABC’s Bob Woodruff will be the host. He joins us now. Pleasure, Bob. 

BOB WOODRUFF: You too, Chris. You know, this show is a countdown through the next century and shows what scientists say might very well happen if we do not change our current path. As part of the show, today, we are launching an interactive web game which puts participants in the future and asks them to report back about what it is like to live in this future world. The first stop is the year 2015. 

[NOTE: ABC provides no graphics or identification for any of the following individuals/activists featured. Identifications taken discerned from web article.]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE #1: The public is sleepwalking into the future. You know, sort of going through the motions of daily life and really not paying attention. 

JAMES HANSEN (NASA/AL GORE SCIENCE ADVISOR): We can see what the prospects are and we can see that we could solve the problem but we’re not doing it. 

 [Graphic: Welcome to 2015]

PETER GLEICK (SCIENTIST/PACIFIC INSTITUTE): In 2015, we’ve still failed to address the climate problem. 

JOHN HOLDREN (PROFESSOR/HARVARD UNIVERSITY): We’re going to see more floods, more droughts, more wildfires. 

UNIDENTIFIED “REPORTER:” Flames cover hundreds of square miles. 

UNIDENTIFIED VOICE: We expect more intense hurricanes. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE #5: Well, how warm is it going to get? How much will sea level rise? We don’t know really know where the end is. 

UNIDENTIFIED VOICE #2: Temperatures have hit dangerous levels.

UNIDENTIFIED VOICE #3: Agriculture production is dropping because temperatures are 
rising. 

HEIDI CULLEN (WEATHER CHANNEL/CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERT): There’s about one billion people who are malnourished. That number just continually grows. 

CUOMO: I think we’re familiar with some of these issues, but, boy, 2015? That’s seven years from now. Could it really be that bad? 

WOODRUFF: It’s very soon, you know. But all you have to do is look at the world today right today. You know, you’ve got gas prices going up. You got food prices going up. You’ve got extreme weather. The scientists have studied this for decades. They say if you connect the dots, you can actually see that we’re approaching maybe even a perfect storm. Or you have got shrinking resources, population growth. Climate change. So, the idea now is to look at it, wake up about it and then try to do something to fix it. …

WOODRUFF: But the best of these regular reports that come from people that are watching, we’re going to put those on, all of this on our two-hour production that’s going to happen in the fall. And we just want more of these people to watch. And we’ve gotten already some remarkable interviews from these people. And just take a quick look. 

UNIDENTIFIED TEENAGER: It’s June 8th, 2015. One carton of milk is $12.99. 

SECOND UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Gas reached over $9 a gallon. 

THIRD UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I’m scared

[bleeped]

right now, but I have to get this out. 

WOODRUFF: So the producers actually work with those people that send in their ideas into the website. And then we’re just hoping that the goal is ultimately get these ideas very soon. 

CUOMO: Lovely. Bob Woodruff. Thank you very much. You can find out much more about how you can be part of this exciting and important show. You can go to Earth2100.tv. Earth2100.tv or you can go to ABCNews.com.

San Diego Tax on Vacant Homes/Apartments a PAYOFF to Unions—Open Corruption

How do you get the funds to payoff unions to get them to continue to support your campaigns?  Easy—tax vacant homes and apartments, claim it is going to “affordable” housing”, then make sure the only workers are those that pay bribes in order to work.  That is what San Diego is considering—a way to finish unions that steal from workers and the public.

“At a Friday meeting of the agency’s board of directors, Stefanie Benvenuto, the board’s chairwoman, asked staff to study a potential vacancy tax.

The city has a low reported vacancy rate, as expected in a market where demand is high. But Benvenuto said she wanted to see whether the city’s vacancies were actually higher than reported, with units kept off the market as investment properties, second homes or for short-term vacation rentals.

“People see downtown buildings that are dark at night,” she said in an interview. “I can appreciate that we have a low vacancy rate, but I want to know what our vacancy rate is in practice.”

All of this is based on building that are dark at night.  Note she did not say office buildings, trying to imply it is homes.  Also note the city has a low vacancy rate—this is about financing corrupt unions with corrupt government.  Why is California so expensive?  Why do people lack trust or respect for government?  Look for the union label.

Politics Report: A New Tax Is on the Table

Andrew Keatts and Scott Lewis, Voice of San Diego,  6/15/19 

The San Diego Housing Commission is looking to combat the region’s housing crisis by taxing owners of vacant apartments.

At a Friday meeting of the agency’s board of directors, Stefanie Benvenuto, the board’s chairwoman, asked staff to study a potential vacancy tax.

The city has a low reported vacancy rate, as expected in a market where demand is high. But Benvenuto said she wanted to see whether the city’s vacancies were actually higher than reported, with units kept off the market as investment properties, second homes or for short-term vacation rentals.

“People see downtown buildings that are dark at night,” she said in an interview. “I can appreciate that we have a low vacancy rate, but I want to know what our vacancy rate is in practice.”

The request comes days after the Los Angeles City Council raised the prospect of a 2020 ballot measure to penalize property owners who let homes sit empty.

Like any tax or fee, a vacancy tax could prove controversial. But a vacancy tax, unlike other ways of funding low-income housing, has the benefit of doing two things at once. Property owners could avoid the fee by renting out their unoccupied homes— returning them to the market so people can live in them– or they can pay the fee, generating revenue for low-income housing programs.

Benvenuto requested a study of units that have been vacant for six months or longer, meaning it wouldn’t apply to routine vacancies between when someone moves out and someone else moves in. The study wouldn’t just inform a potential policy; it would be a legal necessity before the city could adopt anything. By law, the city needs to draw a connection between the thing it is levying a fee against and whatever that money is spent on.

“Until I know whether it’s worth talking about this more, I don’t know what a policy would be,” Benvenuto said. “If we get information that says this would make things worse for renters and would-be home-buyers, I would not pursue it.”

During the meeting, Ryan Clumpner, another Housing Commission board member, cited the need for the study and referenced Vancouver, British Columbia, where a similar fee brought in $38 million for housing programs in its first year.

“If someone from another city wants to own a condo here and visit a couple months out of the year, I welcome them, I think that’s fantastic,” Clumpner said. “But they should also be willing to chip in to offset the impact they have on the cost of housing in this city. Every dollar they contribute is a dollar less that has to come from us and our neighbors.”

A Promised Opposition for Future Tax Increases

There’s a high bar for tax increases in California. For increases spent on specific purposes, two-thirds of voters need to sign off. In practice, that’s generally meant that any form of organized or well-financed opposition can sink a tax measure.

Well, a group of non-union contractors is now promising opposition to any tax increase in San Diego that carries with it a union-friendly contract, known as a project labor agreement.

A coalition of elected officials, including San Marcos Mayor Rebecca Jones and advocacy groups led by non-union contractors, is announcing their demands next week. The group aims to raise $100,000 to campaign against any tax measure that includes a project labor agreement.

There are three measures already headed to the ballot in 2020 or hoping to do so that could be in trouble if financed opposition materializes. One is the city’s measure to raise hotel taxes to expand the Convention Center. The Metropolitan Transit System is also pursuing a measure to raise sales taxes to expand transit. The San Diego Housing Federation, a nonprofit advocacy group, is looking to pass a bond to build homes for low-income residents.

Now, each could be between a rock and a hard place: They could all be imperiled by an organized opposition with money to spend. But each could just as easily find passing a measure without the support of organized labor nearly impossible as well.

“All of these measures require voter approval and any opposition to any of them means their defeat,” said Eric Christen, director of the Coalition for Fair Employment in Construction.

Unions OPPOSE Dept. of Agriculture Saving $300 Million—Move Closer to Farms Instead of Beltway.

Should agencies of the Department of Agriculture be near the White House, the Smithsonian, the world famous monuments of Washington, D.C.?  Or should they be near the farms and ranchers that they set policy for?  Trump has decided to put them near farms, in Kansas City and get them out of the Swamp.  The unions are going crazy with rational government.

“Government employees turned their backs on Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue during a meeting Thursday as a silent protest over the decision to relocate the Economic Research Service (ERS) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA).

The ERS and NIFA are currently located in Washington, D.C., and are research agencies within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA plans to move the agencies, including their 550 research jobs, to Kansas City, in a move to save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, according to CNN.

Many of the employees, however, feel that the change is due to politics and only serves as a platform to interrupt climate research. Perdue announced the decision Thursday morning after both agencies previously voted to unionize in order to stop the move.

Here is something the unions forgot—the government belongs to the people, not the unions.

Employees Turn Their Backs On Ag Secretary In Silent Protest

Shelby Talcott, Daily Caller,   6/14/19   

Government employees turned their backs on Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue during a meeting Thursday as a silent protest over the decision to relocate the Economic Research Service (ERS) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA).

The ERS and NIFA are currently located in Washington, D.C., and are research agencies within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA plans to move the agencies, including their 550 research jobs, to Kansas City, in a move to save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, according to CNN.

Many of the employees, however, feel that the change is due to politics and only serves as a platform to interrupt climate research. Perdue announced the decision Thursday morning after both agencies previously voted to unionize in order to stop the move.

ERS and NIFA employees continued to disagree with the decision and showed this by silently turning their backs on Perdue during Thursday’s meeting where he discussed the decision. He didn’t take any questions from employees afterwards, CNN reported. “I want you all to know that this decision was not entered into lightly,” Perdue wrote in a letter to the agencies’ employees. “And having recently undergone a major relocation of my own, I understand that this decision creates personal disruption for some of our colleagues and their families.”

Acting vice president of the ERS Union, Kevin Hunt, said moving was “cold-hearted,” CNN reported. Some House Democrats and members of Congress have also been against the move. The inspector general for the USDA is investigating to see whether the decision to move the two agencies is legally allowed.

“Secretary Perdue continually speaks of transparency and communicating to employees but has failed on both fronts,” Hunt said according to CNN.

Perdue told reporters Thursday that “Congress can do what Congress does, and we will respect that.” He also said that they have tried to convince Congress that the move is a good decision, CNN reported.

“Finally, taxpayers stand to receive significant savings as we will generate nearly $300 million nominally over a 15-year lease term on employment costs and rent,” Perdue announced in his letter to employees. “This will allow us to redirect more funding for our research of critical needs like rural prosperity and agricultural competitiveness, and for programs and employees to be retained in the long run, even in the face of tightening budgets.”

The USDA did not immediately respond to request for comment.

Twelve DEAD Due to Democrat Party Hatred of Second Amendment/Protection of human life.

This is all you need to know:

“The night before 12 people were killed in Virginia Beach on May 31, one victim, Kate Nixon, told her husband she wanted to carry a gun to work because she feared her would-be attacker, but decided against it because of the city’s no-gun policy, according to the family’s lawyer.

The next day, the shooter, who had worked as a city public utilities engineer for nine years, fired at his defenseless colleagues in the city’s Municipal Center.

“Kate expressed to her husband concerns about this individual in particular as well as one other person,” the Nixon family attorney, Kevin Martingayle, told host Cathy Lewis. “In fact, they had a discussion the night before about whether or not she should take a pistol and hide it in her handbag and decided not to, ultimately, because there is a policy, apparently, against having any kind of weapons that are concealed in these buildings.”

Like at Borderline, Parkland HS and other places, employees, students and customers are sitting ducks to the whims and hatred of those who value life so little.  Thanks to them millions of people are potential victims of gun violence, because companies or government will not allow people to protect themselves.  Now, in another example, twelve more are dead thanks to the Newson’s, Obama’s and Bidens of the world.  Will they at least apologize for their role in the murders?

Photo courtesy of krazydad/jbum, Flickr.

‘Gun-Free Zone’ Policy Stopped Virginia Beach Victim From Carrying Her Gun To Work

By Madeline Osburn, The Federalist,  6/14/19 

The night before 12 people were killed in Virginia Beach on May 31, one victim, Kate Nixon, told her husband she wanted to carry a gun to work because she feared her would-be attacker, but decided against it because of the city’s no-gun policy, according to the family’s lawyer.

The next day, the shooter, who had worked as a city public utilities engineer for nine years, fired at his defenseless colleagues in the city’s Municipal Center.

“Kate expressed to her husband concerns about this individual in particular as well as one other person,” the Nixon family attorney, Kevin Martingayle, told host Cathy Lewis. “In fact, they had a discussion the night before about whether or not she should take a pistol and hide it in her handbag and decided not to, ultimately, because there is a policy, apparently, against having any kind of weapons that are concealed in these buildings.”

“But they were so concerned they had that conversation,” Lewis said.

“The night before it happened, they had that discussion,” Martingayle said. “So, there was obviously something big going on. I don’t know all the ins and outs of that and I don’t know that Kate ever expressed, even to her husband, the full range of what her concerns were.”

Jason Nixon, the victim’s husband, and his attorney have asked the city to release all records about the gunman. According to The New York Times, the shooter had been previously involved in physical “scuffles” at work, and disciplinary measures had been taken.

The city of Virginia Beach enforces a “gun-free zone” policy on all city properties, even if the employee is licensed to carry a concealed weapon. “Employees who violate this policy will be subject to discipline, up to and including dismissal,” the city policy states.

With everyone on site disarmed by this policy, the shooter had no opposition and was able to gun down defenseless victims until police were able to force their way into the building.

Trillion $$ APPLE Rips Off Cupertino Taxpayer for $70 Million a Year.

Apple is a Trillion dollar company.  Yet, it still rips off the people and businesses of Cupertino, a wealthy town, for $70 million a tear in tax credits—and will continue this till 2033!  This is why you do not bribe firms to come or stay in your town.  The butcher, the baker and candlestick maker, all pay so there shareholders and the Executives can get richer.  It is time to end these tax credits—Apple should give back the money it already has taken as a sign of good faith.

“Apple Inc.’s hometown of Cupertino, California, has given almost $70 million in sales-tax collections back to the company over the past 20 years, with the amounts sharply increasing in recent years, public records show.

The payments have been made under a little-known tax incentive deal struck in 1997, when Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy, and that’s likely to endure until at least 2033. Payments to Apple have continued as the iPhone maker has passed $1 trillion in market value, and reached a high of $6 million in the most recent fiscal year, according to the records.

End the bribes to corporations—return the money to the people.  C4ony capitalism hurts everybody.

Apple’s Hometown Pays $70 Million, and Counting, to Keep HQ

Bloomberg,  6/13/19 

Apple Inc.’s hometown of Cupertino, California, has given almost $70 million in sales-tax collections back to the company over the past 20 years, with the amounts sharply increasing in recent years, public records show.

The payments have been made under a little-known tax incentive deal struck in 1997, when Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy, and that’s likely to endure until at least 2033. Payments to Apple have continued as the iPhone maker has passed $1 trillion in market value, and reached a high of $6 million in the most recent fiscal year, according to the records.

Dozens of small California cities have since followed Cupertino’s example in sharing local sales taxes generated if the companies build a headquarters or distribution center within city boundaries, or designate an existing facility as its point of sales made in the state. Apple, for example, gets 35 percent of the local sales taxes collected on sales of its products to businesses in California and at its two retail stores in Cupertino, and similar deals benefit electronics retailer Best Buy Co Inc. and online shopping site QVC Inc.

“I defy anyone to attempt to argue that $70 million from Cupertino has had anything to do with Apple’s success,” said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First, a watchdog group for local and state economic incentive deals. “It’s just a windfall Apple figured it could extract from its headquarters city.”

Bloomberg Tax first detailed the agreements in a story published April 24. At that time, Cupertino refused to provide records of its payments to Apple, saying they were confidential. The city in May provided payment records including more than 6,000 pages of check registers dating to 1998, in response to a formal request under the California Public Records Act.

Apple didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Bills to Ban, Force Disclosure

The cities see the payments, which can last for decades, as a tool to lure or keep e-commerce jobs and bring in new revenue to pay for vital services, since cities keep half or more of the sales taxes generated. Cupertino Mayor Steven Scharf said some of the city’s 64,000 residents may complain about the payments but officials worry Apple would designate its sales elsewhere if the agreement ended.

“The optics of the agreement are not great due to Apple’s spectacular turnaround,” Scharf said. “But ending the agreement would have negative consequences so it is something that the city needs to accept.”

California lawmakers are now weighing bills to ban such deals or require more disclosures about them, concerned they pit one city against another with an unclear benefit to local economies and that they benefit companies that don’t need the money. Existing deals wouldn’t be affected.

Both bills have passed their respective first houses in the California Legislature, and must pass the opposite house by Sept. 13 to reach Gov. Gavin Newsom (D). He hasn’t taken a position on the bills.

The iPhone Impact

The payments to companies come out of the 1 percentage point local increment of California’s 7.25 percent sales tax.

When Cupertino’s payments started in 1998, the city agreed to rebate up to 50% of sales tax revenue the company generated from sales to California businesses. The company’s share dropped to 35% in 2013 as part of a broad agreement with by Apple to construct the 2.8-million square foot Apple Park campus. Apple now has about 12,000 employees in the iconic, circular building in addition to those at its original Infinite Loop address nearby.

Cupertino is heavily reliant on the sales tax revenue from Apple. Overall, sales to other businesses in California account for 67% of the city’s annual sales tax revenue, and Apple’s sales are most of that, according to budget documents.

Meanwhile, Cupertino’s general fund has more than doubled, adjusted for inflation, since 1997. The city is projecting $87 million in its general fund for the fiscal year that starts July 1, compared to $26 million ($41 million in inflation-adjusted dollars) in the first year of its deal with Apple.

As much as Apple’s growth has helped Cupertino, it can be argued that the payments to the company took away millions the city could have used to benefit residents and other local businesses.

In the years before the iPhone was introduced, Apple’s payments were equivalent to 1.9% to 5.9% of the city’s annual revenue, according to a Bloomberg Tax analysis. After the iPhone hit the market in June 2007, Apple’s payments as a percentage of the city’s general fund revenue increased from 7.6% in fiscal year 2007-08 to 10.5% to 2011-12, and was 10% in 2012-13.

Since the city and Apple agreed to cut the company’s share of the revenue as of 2014, Apple’s payments as a percentage of city revenue have varied from 4.8% to 6.4%.

Public or Private Records?

Records provided by the cities of Dinuba and Corona, in response to public-record requests similar to the one made to Cupertino, show their payments to Best Buy and clothing retailer LuLaRoe Inc., respectively.

Dinuba, in the economically struggling Central Valley, has paid or owes Best Buy $9.5 million for its share of revenue from 2016 through 2018.

Corona, in southern California, paid LuLaRoe about $1 million as the company’s share of sales taxes generated from July 2017 through December 2018.

The city of Ontario, in the Inland Empire, denied verbal and written requests for records of its payments since 2015 to QVC and an outside consultant who brokered the deal. It cited state laws that prohibit the release of information that could violate taxpayer confidentiality or result in an unfair competitive disadvantage. QVC didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The city’s information about payments to QVC would allow for extrapolation that would disclose protected taxpayer information, said Ruben Duran, an attorney with Best, Best & Krieger in Los Angeles, representing Ontario.

“If the legislature gave us a tool to protect their private information, we’re going to use that tool,” he said.

David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, said the cities that provided the records realize the information is public. “Ontario is an outlier, and they’ve tried to concoct arguments as to why they can keep this information from the public that do not pass muster under state law,” Snyder said.

Tax Deal Dependence

Dinuba, an agricultural community of 25,000 people about 200 miles southeast of Cupertino, has little in common with the Silicon Valley hub except how its tax base depends on a single big employer.

In 2017, Dinuba’s median household income was one-fourth that of Cupertino’s $153,449, according to the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data. Dinuba’s unemployment rate was six times higher than Cupertino’s 2.1 percent in April 2019, according to the California Employment Development Department.

The 40-year agreement Dinuba reached with Best Buy in 2015 ensured a warehouse there since 2009—and its 200-300 jobs—would stay put. It also has created a gush of new revenue because all online sales to California customers are now assigned to the city.

Dinuba projects $4.5 million in revenue from the agreement in fiscal year 2019-20, representing almost one-third of its total general fund revenue of $15.5 million.

Under the agreement, the city kept 55 percent of its share of sales tax from Best Buy’s 1.2-million square foot sales center and gave 45 percent back to the company in 2016, the first year it was in effect. The split changed to 50-50 in 2017. Another 20 percent of what the city keeps goes to an outside consultant who brokered the deal, as Bloomberg Tax explained in a story published May 8.

The deal helps support public safety, critical infrastructure improvements, parks, and youth programs, Daniel James, assistant city manager, said in a prepared statement. Dinuba would face severe cuts if it lost the deal, he said.

Surprise Savior

Best Buy is also bailing Dinuba out of a surprise budget crunch with its share of the amount the city and the company are supposed to split under the deal.

When the state agency that administers the sales tax told city officials in 2017 its revenue would be about $2 million less than it was expecting due to miscalculations, Best Buy agreed to defer up to $5 million of its payments, according to city budget reports. Dinuba plugged its budget with the Best Buy deferral, and will pay $1.8 million it still owes to the company for past years in five installments, starting in the next fiscal year.

Dinuba is opposed to the bills to rein in the agreements, breaking from the California League of Cities, which supports the bills as the umbrella organization that lobbies on behalf of California’s 482 cities.

Cities that face high unemployment and poverty rates shouldn’t be penalized for pursuing the deals, James said.

“Dinuba did what any city in California would do to attract a business that has the potential to bring in jobs or revenues—providing incentives that facilitate economic development,” James said.

Neighbors Are Losers

Dinuba and other cities with the sharing deals point out that even after they give a percentage of the revenue to the companies, they still see a net gain in their tax revenue.

The losers are most likely their neighboring communities that didn’t get a slice of the sales tax their residents paid on purchases because the money went into another city’s coffers, said Michael Coleman, a consultant to the California League of Cities and founder of the California Local Government Finance Almanac. It’s difficult to quantify that impact.

LeRoy, of Good Jobs First, said Dinuba’s deal with Best Buy is especially troubling because the city is financially fragile. Both Cupertino and Dinuba are dangerously reliant on one source of revenue while they give some money back to corporate giants, he said.

Not Going Anywhere

Despite Apple’s meteoric rise since the deal with Cupertino was reached in 1997, it will likely continue. The city council has renewed the agreement at least three times, and the 2013 update allows it to renew automatically for up to 20 years as long as the company completes its construction projects, which are on track.

An expiration date would have been a good idea in 1997, Scharf said. To Apple’s credit, Scharf said, the company hasn’t asked for more favors and readily paid all expenses related to construction of its new campus.

The company is currently offering $9.7 million to fund bike and pedestrian transportation projects to head off a potential city proposal to impose a per-employee tax on employers.

Vice Mayor Liang Chao said at the council’s April 2 meeting she is frustrated the money Apple is offering for the five projects is far less than the $10 million the city would get each year if it enacted a per-employee tax, and the projects aren’t all priorities for the city.

“Three of them are what Apple wants,” she said. “I wish the city can negotiate a little better going forward.”

But it’s clear who is in charge of the relationship. Steve Jobs, Apple co-founder and former chief executive officer, let the city council know that when he presented the proposal for the new campus in June 2011, a few months before his death.

“We’re the largest taxpayer in Cupertino, so we’d like to continue to stay here and pay taxes,” Jobs told the council. “If we can’t then we have to go somewhere like Mountain View and we take our current people with us and we give up and over years sell the land here and the largest tax base would go away.”

How We Did It


Bloomberg Tax made written requests under the California Public Records Act to four cities for records of local sales-tax revenues they paid to companies with which they had incentives agreements.
Cupertino’s payments to Apple Inc. from 1998 through the first quarter of 2019 were totaled from documents that included more than 6,000 pages of check registers. The city provided the documents in May after initially refusing to disclose the information.
Dinuba provided emails between city staff and Best Buy Co.’s senior tax manager, memos summarizing quarterly sales and the payment calculations, and copies of checks issued to Best Buy.
Corona provided copies of forms used to issue checks to clothier LuLaRoe Inc.
Ontario denied a request for records of payments made to retailer QVC Inc. It cited state laws that prohibit the release of information about a taxpayer that could be confidential or result in an unfair competitive disadvantage. It also said the public interest in withholding the information outweighs that of disclosing it.