Letters to the Editor

Fake Town Hall

There is a rumor that some of the most dangerous places on earth are the areas between a politician and news cameras. Nothing exemplifies that more than the recent events of so-called town hall meetings and “diplomatic” trips to El Salvador by local politicians who jockey and compete for the most news coverage. Robert Garcia’s track record is little more than a litany of photo-ops de jour.

Do you, the voters of the Long Beach area, feel fully represented in governmental affairs? If so, think again. Through personal experience and interviews, a pattern has emerged for constituents of Robert Garcia’s Congressional District. If you don’t speak Spanish, if you have a disability, or if you are not an ardent supporter, you have no Congressional representation. You are not welcome or even given details of any “town hall” meetings that Robert Garcia holds. (The honorable title of “representative” has not been used as it would have constituted a misnomer.)

Citizens and bonafide local journalists who signed up were not given details and were essentially disregarded or told lies about capacity. Requests for (Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation were ignored. Supportive attendees were cherry picked to portray a skewed narrative. A town hall was even held in Orange County far away from his actual district. And these actions are just the tip of the iceberg.

The average citizen is generally afraid to speak out for fear of reprisals, so they don’t. And many news outlets are concerned about losing the almighty dollars that elections bring us sanctioned press releases that glorify the politicians.

One exception to this is the Associated Press that was recently banned from the White House for refusing to comply with a presidential order to call that body of water, formerly called the Gulf of Mexico, the Gulf of America.

According to the Associated Press (AP), a federal judge ordered White House to restore the AP full access to cover presidential events. He ruled on a case that touched at the heart of the First Amendment and affirmed that the government cannot punish a news organization for the content of its speech. The judge basically ruled that the government cannot bar its journalists. This applies to all government electees and members of Congress including the 42nd District Congressional Representative.

Diana Lejins

[Editor Note: Garcia is currently under investigation by the House Committee on Ethics and is facing possible censorship for inciting violence against a special government employee (H.Res.132). Author Diana Lejins is a 40+ year photographer/journalist serving news outlets throughout Los Angeles and Orange County.]

City Hall ‘Dwarfs’

How many mayors does it take to change a light bulb? And how many mayors does it take to notify citizens of a data breach? Despite our mayor having 12 assistants – three of whom are “deputy mayors” – it took one and a half years to have a letter sent to Long Beach citizens informing them of the November 14, 2023 data breach. This mayor has more assistants than Snow White had dwarfs. A lot of hi-ho, but nobody goes to work!

On April 21, 2025, I finally received a letter regarding the 2023 data breach – but the letter was unsigned, and beneath the City of Long Beach letterhead logo in the return address was a PO Box in Suwanee, Georgia. As it turns out, the city farmed out the whole mess – including, presumably, selling our data – to a for-profit processing company and call center, relieving the city of the burden of having to tell us nothing.

So, in a year and a half, we the people have still received no communication (other than, apparently, a few online posts) directly from the city about a data breach that involved the Social Security numbers, addresses, medical and health data, birth dates, etc., of (according to the LB Post) 305,847 citizens.

Isn’t it supposed to be the priority of city government to keep its citizens informed of potential dangers, especially in a situation like this one where time is of the essence when it comes to monitoring one’s credit and accounts for potential fraud? Somehow, the city encounters no such delays when it comes to sending letters to each household asking for money.

The letter from Georgia included an 888 number, which I immediately called, but the answer to each one of my questions was a generic, canned response of “these investigations take time” – until the call center representative lost his place in the script from which he was obviously reading and ended the call!

I then called the Long Beach mayor’s office: someone out of those three “deputy mayors” and nine other assistants hi-ho-ing in the mayoral “cottage” must know what this is all about, right? Wrong! Maybe Happy was busy, because the person with whom I spoke sure was Grumpy and had no time for me. (That “cottage” must be crowded and overcrowding can cause grumpiness.)

I then received the usual City of Long Beach runaround: I was switched to the 3rd District councilor’s office that ultimately passed me on to the city manager’s office, who told me to call the 888 call center number, which is where I had begun! Clearly, no one in City Hall knows anything about this situation or wants anything to do with it.

This is simply the latest and maybe one of the worst examples of the total lack of transparency in our city government, for which it has become increasingly infamous. The increase in the number of employees in this mayor’s office is paid for by our tax dollars but does absolutely nothing to serve the people. Snow White would have done better. Hi-ho, hi-ho.

Merry Colvin

Social Security History

The special correspondent’s info on the social security reporting [Beachcombing April 4] didn’t quite ring true to me, so I fact checked it. The statement in question contains several inaccuracies and misconceptions regarding the history and evolution of the Social Security program. Below is a fact-check and critique of each claim:

Social Security Cards and Identification – Claim: Social Security cards up until the 1980s expressly stated that the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Fact: The legend “For Social Security Purposes – Not For Identification” appeared on Social Security cards from 1946 until 1972. In 1972, this legend was removed from the cards.

Voluntary Participation in Social Security – Claim: Franklin Roosevelt promised that participation in the program would be completely voluntary. Fact: Participation in Social Security has never been voluntary. The 1935 Social Security Act mandated participation for eligible workers.

Initial Tax Rates and Income Caps – Claim: Participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the program. Fact: The original 1935 law set the tax rate at 1% each for employers and employees on the first $3,000 of earnings, with scheduled increases over time. The figure of $1,400 is incorrect.

Tax Deductibility of Contributions – Claim: Contributions to Social Security would be deductible from income for tax purposes. Fact: Social Security contributions have never been deductible from federal income taxes.

Use of Social Security Funds – Claim: Funds would go to an Independent Trust Fund and not be used for other government programs; under Johnson, the money was moved to the General Fund and spent. Fact: In 1968, President Lyndon Johnson’s administration began including Social Security Trust Funds in a “unified budget,” a presentation method that combined trust and general funds for display purposes. However, this did not change the legal status of the Social Security Trust Fund, and its monies were not moved to the General Fund.

Taxation of Social Security Benefits – Claim: Annuity payments to retirees would never be taxed as income; under Clinton and Gore, up to 85% of Social Security can be taxed. Fact: Initially, Social Security benefits were not taxed. The 1983 Amendments introduced taxation on up to 50% of benefits for higher-income beneficiaries. In 1993, this was increased to up to 85% for certain income brackets during the Clinton administration.

Benefits for Immigrants – Claim: Under Jimmy Carter, immigrants began to receive Social Security payments at age 65, even without contributing. Fact: Eligibility for Social Security benefits requires individuals to have paid into the system and earned sufficient work credits, regardless of immigration status. There is no evidence that immigrants have been granted benefits without contributions.

Conclusion – The Social Security program has undergone numerous changes since its inception in 1935. While some aspects have evolved, many of the claims regarding promises made by President Roosevelt are based on misunderstandings or misinformation. It’s essential to consult authoritative sources for accurate information on such critical topics.

Steve Downing

Budget Workshops

It is misleading to characterize the Long Beach Utilities “community budget workshops” as hosting “discussions on proposed water, sewage and gas rates.”

I too thought this would be the case until I received an email from Anatole Falagan, utilities general manager stating, “All public comment is limited to three  minutes, and the board may briefly acknowledge a comment, but neither the board or staff are obligated to respond.” 

If the Long Beach Utilities Department was really interested in public input, they would publish the proposed budget in advance of the meetings and hold the meetings in the field rather than at the small and intimidating venue on Wardlow.

Jennifer Langrand