Comments on: Arnold: It’d be easier if you’d just do what I say.

By: Yikes123

Yikes123 — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 20:45:34 +0000

First 5 has $2 BILLION+ because it took 2 years+ for most of them to do their strategic plan and so they could not spend the funds coming in. It was NOT due to good planning, it was a pure and simple FLUKE! It was because they were not allowed to spend it without a plan – so please let’s not misinform people further with this notion that they planned it this way.

First 5 funds are supposed to be used for children 0 to 5, not to pay for a lobbyist of ANY KIND!

IMO, there needs to be an investigation into whether or not laws were broken by the First 5 Counties when paying dues to a lobbying group.

Ms. Novick received over 40% of the total revenues of First 5 Association from 2004 – 2007. And guess who is on that Board of Directors of the First 5 Association: ALL OF THEM ARE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS of county First 5′s. All of them approved her paycheck and benefits. All of them are legally liable for doing so.

As to being successful – show us the beef ! ! ! !

Why is not First 5 claiming successful program outcomes? Perhaps it’s because in Riverside it really cost about $1130 per child, not the $185 per client that’s suggested by their 07/08 evaluation report.

In Contra Costa, according to published evaluation reports, in FY 04/05 First 5 spent nearly $14,000 for each ONE hour class in the Family Centers. It dropped to $3600 in 06/07, but by God, How is that any measure of “successful”? THAT IS WASTE!

YIKES, just for the record, is as in, oh my bleeping gosh, how could we be trusting our tax dollars with these whackos?

Prop 1D is only a couple points in the error range of going either way. I am doing this for my civic conscience, but thanks for bringing up these issues, you’ve given me an opportunity to flesh out some details.

VOTE YES on 1D!

By: StopYikes

StopYikes — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:19:54 +0000

Hey Yikes, did you ever stop to think why First 5 is sitting on that money? It’s called good planning. Every year the tobacco tax decreases. First 5 is growing an endowment of sorts to allow it to continue to operate at a constant level.

The fact is that Republicans have wanted to kill First 5 from the day it started. This is why First 5 has needed a lobbyist, because it is constantly under attack because it is the one California program that has been fiscally successful.

Californians supported Prop 10 to create First 5 because the Republicans would not raise the revenue for these valuable programs. Well the people of California have said enough is enough with the GOP constant anti-tax mantra. And on May 19, they will say the same thing again by rejecting Prop 1D along with Props 1A-E.

By the way Yikes, did you see the recent polling? Perhaps that’s why you are saying Yikes? Props 1A-E all down big.

http://cbs5.com/local/cbs.5.poll.2.991872.html

By: Yikes123

Yikes123 — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:04:44 +0000

First 5s are sitting on over $2 BILLION dollars, funds they can use over the next 5 years while they help the rest of California. It’s a total misstatement for them to say that those monies are already committed to certain programs because with one vote their commissions can direct those reserves to whatever they choose to. So, who’s to be trusted?

Well, IMO, it’s not First 5. They are run by Commissioners who vote for budgets that direct cash to their own departments and organizations AND they are misstating facts about how 1D would affect their daily work over the 5 year span of it. Prop 1D puts the County Auditor on the Commission to stop these abuses.

If that does not bother you then this should: the First 5 lobbyist has received $1 million of First 5 funds – about $200K of that went straight to her pension plan – IRS forms say so! Prop 1D stops her from taking any new First 5 funds!

Vote YES on 1D !