Sunday, May 31, 2009

Alum Kenneth Kahn, Attorney and "The Carny Kid" author dies at 66.

A Lincoln alum, Kenneth Kahn, died Wednesday in Peru, as reported today in the L.A. Times. Kenneth retired as a full-time attorney earlier this year and was in Peru as part if his desire to fulfill travel dreams to South America. The Times obituary states that he suffered massive injuries as a result of a fall while mountain climbing and died in a hospital. He was 66. "Kenneth Kahn dies at 66; L.A. defense attorney moonlighted as a comedian," L.A. Times, May 31, 2009. http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-kenneth-kahn31-2009may31,0,2040913.story

You can read the L.A. Times obituary by Dennis McLellan, linked above, for a very enlightening review of Kenneth’s past. He had represented several notable defendants during his career as a criminal defense attorney, including the real-life Andrew Daulton Lee, from the movie, “The Falcon and the Snowman," with Sean Penn as that character. The L.A. Times also noted that he was a comedian, too, which was a part of Kenneth's life that was completely unknown to me.

I did not know Kenneth while I was a student at Lincoln, since he was there many years before I ever came, a graduate of the '59 or '60 classes, I'd guess. I did not ever get to know him well on a personal level, but I remember meeting Kenneth from his participation a few years back while he was active in the Alumni Association activities. He returned to Lincoln on Career Days to tell students of his past that included attending Lincoln High and living in the Ramona Gardens housing project. Kenneth was very absorbed in that task and his goal was to affect students lives, many of whom might be the so-called “at risk” students, to motivate them to succeed. All this and more was related in the book he wrote, “The Carny Kid: The Survival of a Young Thief,” (2005). The title came from his experience working at a carnival for a time during his younger years.

I remember Kenneth one time during an address he made to the alumni, describing some of what he put into his book, a summary of his life that included a home life with troubled and missing parents and drug addiction. He said that he found some relief from the problems in his life by being in school and becoming involved in activities there. His obituary lists many details of his experiences. He mentioned one former LHS teacher, Raymond Lopez, as one big influence on his life, too. I remember Mr. Lopez at school in my days, too, with a pencil behind his ear, working with journalism or leadership classes. In later years, Mr. Lopez, also an LHS alum, came to alumni school events to share his experiences.

Kenneth returned to the LHS campus during that period to speak to students and show them that they could accomplish much for themselves regardless of their surrounding circumstances. He funded awards for Lincoln students and he was among the speakers during the graduation in June. That year was 2005, if I recall correctly. The other thing that I remember about that graduation was, and others in attendance probably remember, too, that he was particularly annoyed by the seated graduates who continued to produce and bat these "99-Cents Store" beach balls during his presentation, creating a notable distraction.

For the uninitiated, the beach ball item is an annoyance that has arisen at each of graduations that I have attended at Lincoln, and possibly at other schools, too. I don’t know anything about what the school effort has been at any year to deal with this prankish but rude behavior, other than to chase after the balls and deflate them. And this year, you can expect that to happen again. Well, Kenny didn’t take it too well since he had a lot of himself in that message he was giving. He managed to continue his speech and the graduation continued.

The whole story of Kenneth Kahn was very remarkable and I wondered what happened to him since I don’t remember if his alumni participation was dampened by the experience at graduation or if other things intervened. The news of his death came to me, as many news items do, from the L.A. Times today and it was a bit of a shock to see that a person that you know, whether very well or not, has died. Some of my former professors and classmates and other professionals have been among that group and it each time it just makes you think how short our time on Earth really is. The best I can say on that shortness here is that we should all try to make things better for others besides for ourselves. Doing what we can to help out, especially by sharing our experiences and knowledge is one way, and to do that for a young person is really one important thing most of us can do, starting with their own families. You don't need any degrees or certificates to make a difference. We will miss Kenneth, but he made his life matter and he helped many during that life.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

Lincoln High teacher speaks on hunger strike issues; Professional Development on a Saturday

HUNGER STRIKE PROTESTS LAYOFFS
Something that I heard about but I did not hear much about it -(think about that one) was the story on the teachers staging a hunger strike. It's really a small story, print-wise, but there's a comment explaining the action by Sean Leys, a Lincoln High School teacher. He says it's about demanding that there be a new budget that does not include teacher layoffs or class size increases. They want the stimulus funds that the District received to be used for this. "Teachers start hunger strike to protest layoffs," By Ruben Vives, May 28, 2009, L.A. Times http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-hunger-strike28-2009may28,0,2354830.story A protestlike this is really only effective when there is some conscience that is being addressed that feels that there is a wrong or guilt.

The LAUSD would not be a good subject now that they are getting slim with available cash as they continue to reduce the layoff numbers. From my observation, as these things progress and more money is "found" and "adjustments" made, it just fuels the critics and the Board loses credibility as to those "There-is-no-more money" statements. So the harder the Board works on the issues and produces results here, the more they are distrusted and blamed.

On the other hand, a hunger strike is usually more effective to cause OTHERS to feel guilt or sympathy so that THEY put on the pressure on the targetted entity. So if the public opinion is loud enough (and it doesn't have to be any majority of people, only a noisy-enough representation of people to bother the Board) then there might be some reaction. The Board, especially with Monica Garcia as President, seems to have its decision making saturated with political correctness. Here is where you can expect some reaction to a hunger strike protest. It seems a matter of caving in to pressure of opinion (and like I said, it's not even necessary to have it be a majority or public, only noisy and bothersome) or, addressing what the math calculations show them and then act accordingly.

The number of teachers that were subject to layoff has been gradually reduced by an assortment of measures taken from the 5,000 level down to about 2,000. That's quite a change. There's still more that can be done but I doubt that the hunger strike will do much for causing such things. In the end, if there is not enough money to pay to keep all the teachers, then some will have to go. But it your job is at stake, and the Board has a long tradition of position-changing, that history brings hope that the Board will vacillate again on its decisions.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON A SATURDAY
The District, through Supt. Cortines, announced last year, during local meetings, that it was doing some cost cutting measures and scaling back some of the expenses, like off campus professional development and meetings. I think there was mention of cutting back on the professional development but maybe not. Most of professional development is scheduled within the hours of the school day, so it's not changing anyone's pay. I see that there is one whole day, Saturday, May 30, 2009 that is on the Lincoln High calendar that is an additional day's pay that the District will incur above the regular work days:

Professional Development Day - Saturday, May 30, 2009 Lincoln faculty will meet on this Saturday to revisit the value of academic rigor and explore awesome resources online in technology from 8:00 - 3:00 p.m.


Sometimes I wonder where the District can and can't reduce expenses, but it's apparently not on this day added to a teacher's schedule. The matter could already be set by the union contract and thus not an item that can be withdrawn. So that could be a reason for not cutting down to the bare bones on operations, but instead, continue with plans for it to be held. There's really never much communication to the public on day-to-day operations from any LAUSD school, and this is no exception.

Friday, May 29, 2009

Today's Council Waste? Is there really any question of approval of Waivers?

Friday's are Presentations and Awards Day at City Council Chambers, and after all that is done, there's the special event/fee waivers to be approved. I think too much of this is a waste of the diminished levels of tax funds that the city continues to commit without any thought other than to buy votes.

Here's today's list if another batch of waivers, including the one I mentioned here in this blog before, a motion made by CD-14's CM, Jose Huizar, for the sum of $13,322.00 to be waived for the "3rd Annual Boyle Heights Technology Center Community Awards Gala on May 29, 2009," which is today. This is already a done deal. It's really not a good showing for the process that this works out like that. You know the approval is a formality and if anyone challenges it at the council meeting, it's too late to stop the unanimous "aye" vote.

THIS will be approved, like most motions introduced, there's only the questions at the most, but any denials are so rare that they make news. What-if Questions: What if this was NOT approved? Where would the money come from if there is no money available- which is why most of the requests are made? Does the City eat it? or do they chase payment as a collection item that has to be eaten ultimately? OR more unlikely, deducting the amount from any funding approved for the Center's operation? The City is on the one hand, outrageous in actions to impose steep increases in costs felt by most in the city, like parking fees and trash fees, but on the other hand, gives away money for activities that most residents know nothing about and will not be getting a benefit from.

Are we out of the "budget crisis" and city workers no longer considered for furloughs? I continue to make note of these expenses since they are voluntary ones on the City's part. Each CM has $100,000.00 available for spending on assorted things in the districts and so on. THIS is where that allotted money COULD be used to slow down general fund expense and STILL FUND events, should a CM think it's a worthy expense. They don't have to now, and they continue to generously approve the expenses as they are presented to them.


note: 09-0218 Also a Huizar motion, co-sponsored by CM LaBonge, an expense (unstated) for a union "rally" - relative to declaring the SEIU Rally on May 22, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = none submitted). If this is simply for noting it as some special affair, that's one thing. I do not think that's the case, and there's likely a cost generated for the public on the part of the "SEIU," the Service Employees International Union, that represents many government workers among its membership.

Why is a Union getting a waiver for it's own rally? If you didn't notice, the event was on May 22, 2009, so it's already done, and there's no notation of expense calculated since that time. Why? Too many expenses and automatic approvals are all that can reasonably be concluded from the way these are appearing on the agenda. Where does any input from the public come in to influence expense approval?

ON TODAY'S AGENDA:
"ITEM NO. (15)

09-1223
et al. MOTIONS relative to “Special Events” to be held in the various Council Districts.

Recommendations for Council action:

DECLARE the following community events as “Special Events”; APPROVE any temporary street closures as requested; and, INSTRUCT the involved City departments to perform such services as detailed the Council motions attached to the various listed Council files, including the waiver of fees, costs and requirements and other related issues, as specified:

09-1223
CD 3
a. MOTION (ZINE - PERRY) relative to declaring the Optimist Dads’ Day Dash on June 13, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $3,591).

07-0809-S1
CD 3
b. MOTION (ZINE - PERRY) relative to declaring the Walk for Darfur on June 7, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $3,860).

09-1224
CD 9
c. MOTION (PERRY - ZINE) relative to declaring the Swearing In Ceremony on June 4, 2009 a Special Event (the event organizer shall reimburse the City for all fees and costs associated with this event).

09-1225
CD 9
d. MOTION (PERRY - ZINE) relative to declaring the Father’s Day Affair on June 20, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $500).

08-0753-S1
CD 8
e. MOTION (PARKS - PERRY) relative to declaring the Sixth Annual City Lites Inner City Sports Event Bike Tour, 5K-Walk, and Health Fair & Festival on May 30, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $16,359).

08-1192-S1
CD 9
f. MOTION (PERRY - ZINE) relative to declaring the Celebration of Freedom on July 4, 2009 a Special Event (the event organizer shall reimburse the City for all fees and costs associated with this event).

09-1215
CD 10
g. MOTION (WESSON - SMITH) relative to declaring the Health Fair on May 16, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $2,262).

09-1217
CD 14
h. MOTION (HUIZAR - LABONGE) relative to declaring the Third Annual Boyle Heights Technology Center Community Awards Gala on May 29, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $13,322).

09-1218
CD 14
i. MOTION (HUIZAR - LABONGE) relative to declaring the SEIU Rally on May 22, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = none submitted)."

KCET on MMDs- Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Sprout In L.A. As Quickly As Their Products

"The Highest Paid City Council in the Nation" (and probably the planet) has let the Prop. 215 Medical Marijuana Dispensaries flourish in this city without any orderly regulation- that condition is something that is featured in "SoCal Connected," a KCET-TV production that is available online at http://kcet.org/socal/2009/05/marijuana-clinics-up-in-smoke.html. It's a very informative production that tells you about the numerous MMDs opening, but also a little bit of the in-fighting that's gone on at City Hall to let it get that way.

This video is nicely done as to be highly engaging (and entertaining but disturbing). It moves quickly so watch for the mentions of the fact that the Council was to have a moratorium for a year on the MMDs opening so that they would not grow in number. The moratorium was also to allow ample time for the Council to create a strict and appropriate regulation scheme, developed to prevent what we now have, I can only assume. They did nothing, according to the video.

Well, keep watching because there's lots of shifting of blame here. The law - the moratorium- has an "exemption" for 'hardship" and that's very ambiguous. What is that all about? No one seems to be able to pin it down exactly. The dysfunctional relations between the City Attorney, Rocky Delgadillo, and anybody else he should be working with in City government have had an impact- More MMDs opening in L.A. than anywhere else in the state. The idea of an "exemption" is odd since there has to be some hearing when that provision is inserted into laws, but that has to happen BEFORE the business can open up. Here in L.A., the "exemption" is used as a "foot in the door" to ENABLE OPENING which the city allows- and from there, things get worse.

"PLUM"- not a fruit, but the City Council committee on Planning and Land Use Management- is the one to decide the hardship exemptions. They should have called them simply "applications" to be more functional in how the forms should be handled, since the mere mention of exemption seems to give everyone the notion that it's a done deal and business can begin upon filing the forms.

The video program shows that PLUM has not heard a single application - part of the problem; now there is a growing backlog. And what happens when the burden of demonstrating facts to support the "hardship" cannot be met by the applicant? Fold up your tent and leave? I doubt that all will take that decision as the final outcome, so expect LITIGATION since that might bog down the city further,and the MMDs could continue operation pending a final decision. All this is about money now. Servicing the people that Prop. 215 had in mind is no longer the focus.

Council Members Huizar (CD-14), Ed Reyes (CD-1) and Jack Weiss (CD-5) are the committee members, with Ed Reyes as the chair to run the committee, and not "into the ground," as he seems to have done on this issue, another avoidance device of government, but with major consequences here. All of these guys don't need more negative history on their Council job performance. But don't expect their pay to be affected- and that topic comes up later- keep reading.

According to "SoCal Connected's" presentation, only CM Huizar and CM Zine would appear on camera. Where's the accountability and transparency in government now? I can see that Reyes has nothing to gain from this, so keeping himself scarce is a good move for now.

In the meanwhile, CM Huizar introduced a motion at a Council meeting early May to abolish the exemption. This done after hearing detailed complaints from the Eagle Rock Neighborhood Council of the problem of increasing MMDs in Eagle Rock. "SoCal Connected" noted that the "unintended consequence" of announcing his motion was to have a flurry of filings of the applieations for hardship exemptions. I think this could have been avoided if there was some strict application of a restrictive interpretation of what they have NOW for regulations. I think the new City Attorney, Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich, will probably more functional for the City as he replaces Franklin High alum, Rocky Delgadillo, on July 1. This could have been another matter of orderly business. Now, they strugle to get this under control- but Huizar's motion to end the "hardship exemption" still has to be approved by council and signed by the Mayor before it becomes effective.

Even if and when the hardship exemption provision of the law is ended, all currently filed applications still have a right to be decided. And unfortunately, the businesses are not being prevented from opening during the waiting process, but instead, they just open for business while waiting for their hardship exemption application to be processed. The law probably could be interpreted like common sense would have it- first apply, then if you are approved, you can open. Until approval is received, you can't open. Not in L.A.

"SoCal Connected" shows the actual statute involved on camera, and contradicts what some CMs say about what it's about and what it contains- and also, THEY wrote it. Actually, somebody was assigned to put it together and these CMs sign off on it and most don't know anything beyond what they get as a summary, not bothering to read all that they approve. With the pay they get (almost $15,000.00 a month each) and the staff of 20 authorized to each CM, you'd think they might get around to being responsible for each matter brought up. Too many? Then maybe there's too much unnecessary production of laws in the first place.
Like I said before the council is the highest paid in the nation- AND it's not just in cash salary since there's another $100,000.00 you can count in. I forgot that the L.A. Weekly has some revealing information on the pay for city council and how it stands compared to other cities. One of the latest articles is:

"L.A. City Council Clings to Stunning Perks and Pay;
They can't bear to give up those record-high $178,898 salaries,"
by
Paul Teetor, May 20, 2009. http://www.laweekly.com/2009-05-21/news/l-a-city-council-clings-to-stunning-perks-and-pay/

You really are not getting your money's worth here when you look at the MMDs getting out of control. The city council for all it's tax and fee gouging of residents, clearly missed a golden opportunity to charge some hefty fees for all the prospective work the MMDs would create- but it didn't. The fees for L.A. for MMDs? ZERO dollars. That's got to have the CMs kicking themselves for letting that slip through. Maybe they were too busy thinking of parking meter hikes they quadrupled, or the extended hours of restrictions, the "Districts" that they could create to bring in more money, and maybe their attention was taken up with thoughts of other fees to tack onto the DWP bill besides the trash collection fees that they tripled.

But look at this L.A. Weekly article- and there's more of these articles besides that one- to show you we are not getting A-1 performance from the premium pay they pull down. At the Council meeting this past Wednesday, Eric Garcetti replied to a speaker's criticism on their pay and performance during public comment segment on a matter. Council President Garcetti seems to be very defensive lately and spewed a Wikipedia's page-worth of "facts" that he must have had ready for such an occassion to defend their pay and performance. He sure can't claim poverty. Past items in the L.A. WEEKLY have examined this topic, too. See the especially revealing one that came out a week before the March 3rd city election,
"Los Angeles on $300,000 a year; Why next week's City Council "coronation" will cost you far more than money," By Patrick Range McDonald, Published on February 25, 2009, L.A. Weekly. http://www.laweekly.com/2009-02-26/news/los-angeles-on-300-000-a-year/


Garcetti is wasting his breath and like all of the CMs, is not honest about the situation.
Indeed, I'd say, since THE PAY is what lures them to "PUBLIC SERVICE" in City Hall. (If you lower the pay to about $90,000.00 to $95,000 and trim some CM benefits to realistic proportions, I am sure that alone would still be a healthy paycheck and would filter out a quite a few who claim they are "dedicated" to public service.

Garcetti's defense Wednesday was all very hollow (and annoying) since the AMOUNT of pay- scandalous in its own right- was laid off by Garcetti to be the fault of a 1990 City Charter amendment that sets pay. That City Charter amendment itself was a cleverly decptive device. The state court judges' pay is used as the control CMs pay rate- and when judges get raises, which is normally annually, then the Council gets raises. The part that Eric left out was that it was a charter amendment that was generated by City Council. City Council was responsible for the creation And it was purposely created JUST TO HAVE AN EXCUSE, the one Eric used here, "It's not within our control." It might have been done by THIS cast of Council members, but THESE ones there now could have fixed it. Sure, they could have put in an initiative to change the pay back to local control and be ACCOUNTABLE- they haven't been shy to create initiatives for the ballot before, but then why should they? They don't want a change and everyone falls for "We can't control it" story without challenging the basis.

Jose Huizar was going to have a press conference this morning at 9 a.m., set for "Friday morning to urge City leaders to quickly adopt a Control Ordinance to regulate and monitor Medical Marijuana facilities in the City of Los Angeles." That was cancelled at the last minute but then it was arranged at the last minute, too. Huizar has to follow through on trying to be responsive and fix this and he needs to have Ed Reyes, the Chair of the PLUM committee pull his own weight, too. Who else can Reyes blame for not hearing a single Exemption application since they were created? This is unique to government. Private sector would have replaced non-performers with others to get the job done. If they operated this like a private sector business, there might be some improvement, but I still believe the system can be twisted by these folks to still foul it all up. Meanwhile, they will make out well, financially speaking, of course.

See the video, at 11 minutes, it's packed with some things to think about- one might be "How can I open up my own MMD?" There's a company featured in the video that has classes on how to do that. Everybody's making money here it seems.

Stay tuned for more developments in the City Council on this topic. [And if you are interested in finding a MMD, the L.A. WEEKLY print edition is the place. The paper is available for free all over the city in stores, book stores, public libraries, and other public places.]

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Huizar in CD-14 fee waivers his way up for good P.R., then sends more funds out of CD-14 for a negative.

Jose Huizar CM for CD-14 is a topic today in "Mayor Sam's" blog, "Huizar and Hahn in Middle of Youth Center Funding Imbroglio " , https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8826939&postID=4714385781653050683,
He's shifting funds out of CD-14 and the "Boyle Heights Youth & Technology Center" to San Pedro for CM Janice Hahn to have apply for a Boys and Girls Club expense there.

Some very relevant language from the Agenda ITEM NO. (43) 09-1207 (Hahn'smotion #09-1207,) http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2009/09-1207_mot_5-20-09.pdf -

In order to expedite funding for the community center, the Community Development Department (CDD) is requesting authority to transfer $23,000 in UDAG savings from the Boyle Heights Youth & Technology Center in CD14 to support the establishment of the Cheryl Green Community Center in the Harbor Gateway. The proposed funding will be used to fund afterschool youth programs in the Harbor Gateway.
Jose's judgment and motivation is questioned by the shift of funds, $23,000.00, but maybe there's an good explanation, and then again, this IS politics.

Jose's own motion #09-1217 http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2009/09-1217_mot_5-22-09.pdf relative to the "Boyle Heights Technology Center" is for the fee waiver estimated to be $13,322.00 for an "Awards Gala," and the word "Gala" is sure the right label for a price tag attached to it, at least for the City's part, and that's over $13,000.00 shelled out by the City. The relevant descriptive language in the motion as follows -

Council District Fourteen has received a request that the City provide certain services and declare this function a Special Event. Approval of this request will mean that an estimated $13,322 in fees and salary costs will be absorbed by the City, Event Coordinator: Jasmine Alvarado - 323/526-0146),

I THEREFORE MOVE that the "3rd Annual Boyle Heights Technology Center Community Awards Gala" be declared a Special Event, and City departments be requested to waive all fees and costs, except insurance and application requirements.
Yes, it's Jose's signature on the motion, so there's no mistake. The Technology Center is a named entity in the two motions, losing funding from one, and getting a benefit from the other.

The way these decisions come up in council meetings is not in any order and the "batch" votes that they use work to have a lot of decisions made right before your eyes and you may not even be aware that a particular agenda number represented a certain set of actions, but nearly always you have "approval.' and rarely a "no" vote winning. The worst that most things have to face is a delay to another date for ultimate approval.

The comments about CM Huizar on Mayor Sam's blog are varied in intensity, but most are negative. You always have blogger comments who post lots of hate style comments that don't help address the issues, just getting attention without putting forward any constructive thought to the criticism.

There is just a lot not very clear and if all these actions were sorted out more clearly, we might have a different picture, but it just looks like there's a lot of things that are being disguised and done but not very openly.
====================================================
LATEST ITEMS ON SPECIAL EVENT/FEE WAIVERS
The Agenda item 37 from Wednesday, 5-27-09 Council Meeting shows where fee waivers are going, sponsor, and amount. The apparent need to tighten up the belt on city spending really looks like it hasn't reached this part of city spending. I still think some independent fundraising and trimming down expenses or changing events altogether need to happen if we are really suppposed to "share" any financial pain that the Council and Mayor are preaching. A big part of the funds go to "festivals," "fiestas" and "celebrations" or other matters of a celebratory nature- All are essential to city operation, correct?

Occasionally you do see "the event sponsor shall reimburse the City for all fees and costs associated with this event," but I WOULD like to see VERIFICATION that reimbursement for the FULL amount was ACTUALLY collected by the city. I am only doubting because of some monumental expense funds that the City "forgot" to collect- like it's share of parking tickets from the private firm collecting fines, and numerous cell phone charges for private usage of city purchased phones, as well as completely missing phones. So some verification of collection should be figured in so it's not "forgotten."

"ITEM NO. (37)

08-1564-S1
et al. MOTIONS relative to “Special Events” to be held in the various Council Districts.

Recommendations for Council action:
DECLARE the following community events as “Special Events”; APPROVE any temporary street closures as requested; and, INSTRUCT the involved City departments to perform such services as detailed the Council motions attached to the various listed Council files, including the waiver of fees, costs and requirements and other related issues, as specified:

08-1564-S1
CD 12
a. MOTION (SMITH - ROSENDAHL) relative to declaring the Our Savior’s First Lutheran Church and School Carnival on June 19-21, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $7,123).

09-1201
CD 15
b. MOTION (HAHN - LABONGE) relative to declaring the Essence K. Coprich Library Grand Opening on May 29, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $2,226).

08-2739-S1
CD 15
c. MOTION (HAHN - LABONGE) relative to declaring the Ascension Catholic Church Fiesta on May 29-31, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $2,226).

09-1202
CD 13
d. MOTION (PERRY for GARCETTI - LABONGE) relative to declaring the 97.1 Amp Launch on May 20, 2009 a Special Event (the event sponsor shall reimburse the City for all fees and costs associated with this event).

09-1203
CD 13
e. MOTION (PERRY for GARCETTI - LABONGE) relative to declaring the School Spring Festival on May 29-31, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $4,641).

09-1204
CD 9
f. MOTION (PERRY - PARKS) relative to declaring the E3 on June 2, 2009 a Special Event (the event sponsor shall reimburse the City for all fees and costs associated with this event).

09-1205
CD 9
g. MOTION (PERRY - PARKS) relative to declaring the Nintendo Event on May 30 - June 2, 2009 a Special Event (the event sponsor shall reimburse the City for all fees and costs associated with this event).

07-1637-S1
CD 11
h. MOTION (ROSENDAHL - SMITH) relative to declaring the Venice Japanese American Community Festival on June 20-21, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $5,444).
08-1359-S1
CD 11
i. MOTION (ROSENDAHL - SMITH) relative to declaring the West Los Angeles District Bureau of Sanitation Open House on June 27, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $2,472).

09-1206
CD 11
j. MOTION (ROSENDAHL - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the 33rd Annual Brentwood 5K & 10K Run and Kiddie K on June 7, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $5,580).

08-1363-S1
CD 11
k. MOTION (ROSENDAHL - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the St. Gerard Majella Family Festival on June 26-28, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $5,905).

07-1771-S1
CD 11
l. MOTION (ROSENDAHL - PARKS) relative to declaring the Boise Avenue Block Party on June 14, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $1,857).

08-1384-S1
CD 11
m. MOTION (ROSENDAHL - HAHN) relative to declaring the Carneval! Venice Beach on June 6, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $2,472).

09-1192
CD 11
n. MOTION (ROSENDAHL - HAHN) relative to declaring the Mar Vista Neighborhood Association Block Party on June 13, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $1,857)."
================================================

Dodgers' Bobby Castillo at ESPN Zone this afternoon for autographs

Lincoln High alum, Bobby Castillo, former Dodger relief pitcher and member of the 1981 World Series team, will be at the ESPN Zone at 5 p.m. today signing autographs. He will be accompanied by a few other groups for the promotion, and there's the all-you-can-eat buffet for $10. This is all reported from the "McIntyre in the Morning" show this morning on the Dodgers' flagship station, KABC-AM 790. Among those accompanying Bobby Castillo was one group that had "hotties" in the name, apparently females, but I make no representations on that (I never heard of this name before- Laker Girls? Yes, but not this group), if this is what will make the difference for you deciding to go or not to go.

If you want to see Bobby for an autograph, he's often at community events and at a few of the local parades such as the Highland Park Christmas Parade and Northeast L.A. Veteran's Day Parade. He might be much more accessible if you are at the end or start. (Another bit of info to help decide is the Yelp review page for the ESPN Zone with some recent comments: http://www.yelp.com/biz/espn-zone-los-angeles)

UPDATE:
[HERE'S A LINK that was emailed later to me by the KABC radio Insider with more details: http://www.kabc.com/Article.asp?id=1332729&spid=25417 ]

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Narbonne High All-City Football Senior Killed by Gang Shooter

"Narbonne High teammates mourn a life cut short by violence," http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-football-killing27-2009may27,0,3043581.story by raja.abdulrahim@latimes.com Dannie Farber Jr., an All-City wide receiver was shot and killed Sunday night in Compton while eating dinner at a Louisiana Fried Chicken establishment. (The original story High school football star shot to death in Compton restaurant , L.A. Times, May 25, 2009)

The loss of a young life is too often the case and there really seems to be another killing just when you think it might end. The criminals that do this need to be off the streets and the city council did have reward authorizations made today in other matters try to apprehend some killers in some very old cases that were especially heinous. In this story, the young athlete, a senior at Narbonne High, was days away from his June 19th graduation.

Sometimes the reward may prompt someone to do the right thing, but retaliation and lack of safety for the informant is always a hindrance to cooperation. Aside from the nature of the perpetrators of the crimes, what people might want to think about is the surrounding situation of these persons. And that does not mean to look for some personal trauma or tragic turn of events that others would find to serve as a reason or even justification for the deadly behavior. No, what I am thinking of here is that such perpetrators have siblings and possibly parents and other extended family who actually are condoning the actions, or giving tacit approval by acquiescience. In some cases, there may be definite support for these kind of actions, with a value system much different from most of us. If that's the case, then you actually have a lot more people that are morally, though not legally, culpable for these crimes.

City Council really needs to work on gang violence, but somehow the idea that they have works with one example being the principle of creating work for gang members in some cases, but then you have a "reward" for bad behavior as the method to put a dent in gang membership, and that doesn't sound right. To simplify the picture, maybe oversimplify it, this is a benefit to those who do bad, but doing good does not provide those non-criminal type individuals with the same city programs or job opportunities, or any such "reward."

The Mayor has a pet project that is referred to as midnight basketball, sort of a distraction for young people who would get into crime if they were not occupied by this alternative distraction. If that's all the program is about, it's of temporary effect, like a "pause" button for the problem and not a cure because when the diversion is over, so then is the "pause." And who would expect anything else if there's nothing built in to the program to actually change behavior to something acceptable.

The people need to be made employable and ideally this idea of doing what is "right" is something that should be seen as a natural thing, not needing a "program' to divert anybody from the path of crime, or some bribe to change their actions. But then in politics, the operation of most things could be seen as cause-and-effect, something given in order to get something back, the old campaing contribution operating like this. But that's a cynical view but stil one that I think is a point of reference for many politicians when it comes to controlling or influencing behavior, and doing "the right thing" is completely irrelevant.

I just am tired of seeing people, young people, killed with so much that they have to live for and possibly, with what may not be a perfect past, but many victims have really shown some good things in their accomplishments, things we like to see, and to have that ended just calls out for some action to end it and punish offenders firmly and decisively, and to deter future crimes. Even if the victims were themselves loaded with gang connections, the idea of the violence, especially the unprovked violence, that immediatley jumps to a deadly level to leave somebody wounded or dead is not acceptable at all.

The original story mentions in the reader comment about "being in wroing place at the wrong time." The people who make these statements when there is a killing are completely wrong. This is a wholly mistaken concept that assumes the victim should not be there where he was when killed. How does that make any sense? "The Wrong Place?" The victim here did nothing illegal or was violating any law in being where he was and eating. Does the statement mean that you have to be only inside your home? Does it mean that Everywhere is dangerous? What ever you say, the "wrong place" is not a valid term. The criminal is the winner if you say otherwise, and you have to stay away from where? Everywhere? It sounds that way if you give up the idea of freedom to such criminals.

And "the wrong time" implies being present at some barred moment in time that costs you your life. That's similarly ridiculous. Everywhere that you can lawfully be IS the right place, and intrusion by a homicidal criminal IS the WRONG thing. It is wrong to try to place any blame on the victims where you have this kind of shooting of an unarmed person, usually as here the outcome following the question and its variations, "Where you from?"

Having any sympathy for the killer(s) is an undeserved act, entirely misplaced. The thought should be, "Who will he kill next?" and "How can he be stopped?" Apprehension of the culprit is a start.

A Ron Kaye Blog entry sums up City Council performance; Any of your "Faith" on their wisdom and abilities is misplaced.

Ron Kaye, former Daily News editor and now blogger on http://www.ronkayela.com/ , continues to cut through the smoke and mirrors in City Hall and this current posting, "On Billboards, Busted Budgets and Bad Leadership," By Ron Kaye on May 27, 2009, http://ronkayela.com/2009/05/why-we-fight-city-hall-1.html continues the search for the elusive truths of issues before the Council.

There is a lot there in the blog post today to bring you up to date on the general state of what is happening in City Council chambers, and you can see past entries for views on other aspects of city "leadership" coming from elected officials. What they turn out to be "leading" is a continued and arguably literal looting of whatever funding sources they can find. And wherever they find funds, the end result hits home, ultimately reaching your own pocketbooks for a extraction of cash or a severe cut in services that are really priorities for a sustaining a productive society.

You can see and hear some of these examples on the video clips supplied on this website, RonKayesLA. If you really are ambitious, or happen to be a doubter, you can see the original cast in live performances, brought to you by assorted current technology: The city council meets again today at 10 a.m. on Ch. 35 for city cable viewers, replayed a couple of times each day, and available live and on-demand for older council meetings on the city website video and audio page, http://lacity.org/lacity/YourGovernment/CityCouncil/CouncilMeetings/LIVEandON-DEMANDVideo/index.htm All of the video are searchable and there is a built in "jump to" so you can zero in on specific agenda items. Agendas area also retrievable, usually in the video screen or by PDF files.

What you see in these Council meetings is usually is a lot of talkng in "code" so that you don't really know what is done that leads to the quick votes that are taken, usually coming at the early part of meetings (unless you read AND STUDY the accompanying "Agenda"). The Agenda is a document also written in the unhelpful "code" instead of any informative plain English. The meetings often include lots of rhetoric, the predictable preaching and self-serving statements by the Council Members who each can comment on any agenda matter- 15 potential sets of comments possible if all are there at one time, not the usual case.

"Public Comment," on the other hand, limits each speaker to 2 minutes apiece at the most to speak on non-agenda items of all sorts. Those comments can be a bit detached from the agenda matters and some handle the moment well and others run out of time in mid-topic. As for the Council side of speaking, any statements by the CMs tend largely to be purely fiction, without any opportunity for a meaningful challenge their exaggerations and misstatements uttered during their long time alottments to speak. And the CMs know that. The favorite phrase thrown around is "... the great leadership shown by ...." See what I mean about fictions?

That's politics and that's why you cannot rely on the Council (and Mayor, as well) to be allowed to run on "automatic pilot." Instead, watching them closely, as you would do with small children is the best choice, but unlike small children, they can make decisions that have profound effects on the city's well-being, and these moves are not taken innocently as you see with small children. Innocence is not any sort of a word to mix in with conversations about City Council actions.

Job Number One for them is usually pivoting around the notion of self-interest and looking out for Number One, above all else.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

LHS Alum, Hon. Carlos Moreno, Cal. Supreme Ct. Justice, close, but Obama's U.S. Supreme Court Nominee is Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

"President Obama has picked Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the Federal Appeals Court as his nominee for the Supreme Court. If her nomination is approved by the Senate, the 54-year-old Sotomayor will be the first Hispanic to serve on the High Court." And that's the way KABC AM 790 stated the outcome in their email. Carlos Moreno, Justice of the California Supreme Court, and LHS Cl. of 1966, was among the names on the short list for this nomination, noted as the only male of the contenders in that group.

At the time, I noted that President Obama was looking at the variouis considerations for this nomination, including party affiliation, gender, ethinic background, and of course, judicial experience and the types of decisions that were made. Judge Sotomayor is of Puerto Rican ethnicity, and had been on the federal bench in New York as a judge at various levels since 1992. She had been considered for nomination to this position when Sandra Day O'Conner retired.

The interesting thing ahout this picture, individual nominees and contenders aside for now, is that this is NOT a case where you have complete neutrality as to selection for the job. The idea of the law is that the judges will apply legal principles and weigh evidence, conduct proceedings and do all that a system is supposed to do under the law in an equal fashion without bias for any reason. Well, that's the general idea.

But this is the highest court in the nation and that idea of neutrality is something that has no real application in the selection process. You see that details are important as to a nominee. Since the appointments are for life, once they are in, they stay there. This process is as political as any election to public office ever could be. The nominee will have to go through the process of Senate confirmation and that could be an easy step or an ordeal, as history has shown.

The nominee, Judge Sotomayor satisfied two needs for President Obama: She was Latina ("Hispanic" in the government's language), and she was a female. That will cover two needs in a political context that help Obama. Experience and quality help, but all potential nominees are pretty much at or above the level to qualify for that.

Our alum, Carlos Moreno, met the need as to his ethnicity, but the female contenders had the edge and that was important. The selection process is not over and the nature of Sonia Sotomayor's decisions will be evaluated by the politicians to try to see how she will affect the future of the legal decisions to be made by the Court. Too much controversy is not good and there's lots more that can sway the choice on approval.

Getting to the nominee's personal background, you can see that education was a key to her achievement, a strong value in their family as she grew up. The Washington Post story includes the following,

Most importantly, at an early age, her mother instilled in Sotomayor and her brother a belief in the power of education. Driven by an indefatigable work
ethic, and rising to the challenge of managing a diagnosis of juvenile diabetes, Sotomayor excelled in school. Sotomayor graduated as valedictorian of her class at Blessed Sacrament and at Cardinal Spellman High School in New York. She first heard about the Ivy League from her high school debate coach, Ken Moy, who attended Princeton University, and she soon followed in his footsteps after winning a scholarship.

The above information is from the Washington Post's website 44 that presents the White House's presentation in "Primary Source, Sotomayor: The White House Story." http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/05/26/the_white_house_has_issued.html?wprss=44

In today's announcement, there's already criticism by some factions, but what did I say about this being a political process? A criticism of a case of "reverse discrimination" was raised that involved White firefighters challenging the invalidation of an exam that was said to be biased against a minority group.

Trying to say "reverse discrimination" is another kind of discrimination is an incorrect analysis. This identification itself handles the label of "discrimination" in what I think is wrong. There is really no "reverse" discrimination without assigning some fixed reference point to base your judgment on. Something that involves discrimination or unfair treatment based on some distinguishing factor, usually an unchangeable characteristic, IS "discrimination," and to apply a qualification of "reverse" here seeks to put one type of action as the primary set of facts or method that arises and then everything else is different or "reverse," implying subordinate. To me, that already loads the question and makes for a lot of prejudgment on the issue.

Something is discrimination or it is not. The label "reverse" feeds the common views. People have the stereotypes in their heads and being "unusual" or infrequently encountered makes "reverse discrimination" a catchy phrase to apply as a label, but no less offensive.

And on all that, we shall see, but the selection process for a nominee is an entirely political one with lots of planning involved. The confirmation phase will continue to be considering whatever elements or features that people can connect up with the suitability for the position as Supreme Court Justice.

No matter that this nomination went to another jurist, it still was a substantial accomplishment for Justice Moreno to be considered here. The thing that we should notice is that the family is often the source of giving education a high value as a factor for these people as noted by Judge Sotomayor and in other remarks of the past by Justice Moreno.

The idea that education is not valued by so many, both students and families, in LAUSD and in other districts, is what I think would be the most influential factor for producing the poor outcomes that we are having from the school systems. If that would change, a lot more improvement would follow. It's not the case for all of the students, but for many, too many. The family, as many already knew, is the most influential source of a person's knowledge and values from an early age.

Monday, May 25, 2009

City Council and Billboards- Where's the Enforcement? A new Plan.

The L.A. City council has some activity on it's poorly handled billboard managment in the city where there are large numbers of illegal billboards, coming from the poor settlement terms during the handling of litigation with some billboard companies. Rocky Delgadillo was the City Attorney in charge- or supposed to be in charge- of the office and the "settlement" was one that gave in to what defendant billboard companies wanted. There were so many concession that the "favored treatment" for defendants made the city's enforcement against the other billboard companies that were not involvled in the settlement agreement unenforceable. The court said the agreement was flawed as it treated similar situations differently, favoring those covered in the settlement agreement and then the whole thing got out of hand.

The city has few inspectors for violations to be issued- and this could be a real source of revenue if the fines were more than wrist-slaps. The department head that manages it came to a city council meeting with an distinct attitude of indifference and lack of concern for getting the job done. This guy was quite guilty of failing to have any report ready as requested months earlier, and worse, had a projection of about a half a year longer to get one ready, making the usually ultra-composed Council President Eric Garcetti about as angry as I have ever seen him during a council meeting. Good for Eric. Now he sees how most of us feel about how the Council acts, or usually, fails to act

The council created a moratorium on new billboards but that's been another law ignored by the billboard companies quite boldly. Since they make loads of money for billboards, especially the digital and super-graphic ones, no matter what happens under the weak fine system in place, it's still more profitable to break the law than not to, at least as the city handles things now.

So the Council's now working on getting a handle on the problem with another ordinance and creation of "districts" to address control. I am wary of "districts", the designation of area for special treatment on a topic, as that usually means more costs to residents and businesses that didn't exist before. In other words, it's for "generating revenue" more than helping the people. So more is happening as the L.A. Times story on Saturday reports, "L.A. weighs changes in billboard law; The proposal, due for a vote Tuesday, would allow the City Council to create sign districts in up to 21 neighborhoods," By David Zahniser, May 24, 2009. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/valley/la-me-signs24-2009may24,0,1939732.story I expect the billboard lobbyists to be very active in cornering Council members about their vote. The City Attorney Rock Delgadillo, received campaign contributions from billboard companies when he ran for the office successfully. Does the phrase, "What's wrong with this picture?" come to mind?

Delgadillo pledged that he could maintain independent judgment and avoid any influence from those donations. I don't believe that happened, or else the settlement would not have been so flawed. I hope the new City Attorney, Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich, will do better- and it would be hard to do worse in office than Delgadillo did. For every step forward that he took, it seems that we went bacwards two steps. Well, come July 1, that will change and Rocky will be gone.

The story on the billboards has captured quite a bit of controversy involved, and mentions some key observations,
Garcetti and his colleagues moved to overhaul the city's sign law last year after facing voter outrage over a series of lawsuit settlements approved by the council in 2005 and 2006. Those agreements, approved unanimously, delivered a broad array of concessions to four outdoor advertising companies that had challenged the city's 2002 billboard law.

The settlements gave three of the four -- CBS Outdoor, Clear Channel Outdoor and Regency Outdoor -- permission to convert up to 900 billboards to digital formats, with illuminated images that change every few seconds. As new digital signs began going up, neighborhood groups in Silver Lake, Westwood and elsewhere lashed out at the council, saying it had granted the billboard industry carte blanche for hundreds of visually intrusive signs.
And you notice that the Council was involved in approving the deals, and the "unanimously" description is not unique- that's the rule, not the exception. They are like the 15 Musketeers, all for one and one for all. Some might think that the work generated is more like the "Mouseketeers" instead, but what do you expect? Look at how well they get paid. Getting $178,000 plus an estimated $100,000 in benefits can give one a pretty big head and make them think "royalty" more than "democracy."

Well, I don't like districts created since that's usually a ploy to squeeze out more money from us in a sneaky, shell-game fashion. Did I mention that on the whole, council is not to be trusted if you are thinking of things from the public's view. But the billboard companies are making out like bandits on the money scene, facing little enforcement and even less likely any significant penalties if actually caught.

The plan is to change all this, but the council leaned so far to favor billboard companies that the that the companies took advantage of them and are out of control. And don't think about First Amendment and Free Speech because this is all about "commercial speech," an entirely different animal that can be tamed with some better planning. So be forewarned that if you lean too far to favor someone, you might get yourself bent over, so to speak, as did the city with this mess.

More to be seen at Tuesday's Council Meeting.

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Sly Stone on KCRW-FM 89.9- Monday at 11 a.m

I was checking L.A. Radio.com www.laradio.com Friday column and see that Sly Stone, of the band, Sly and the Family Stone, the rock/r&b/funk star or whatever category he might fit, will be on the radio Monday morning. "Sly on Memorial Day. KCRW’s Chris Douridas interviews Sly Stone on Monday at 11 a.m." (link: Sly Stone on KCRW- during "Morning Becomes Eclectic" ) (Ed. note: this is now available as a podcast)

The interview of Sly will be about his personal history and career. I think it will be a recorded interview, but it might be live in the 11 a.m. hour. Here is a major talent that could have left a bigger mark in music history if he had been less of an artist and free spirit and more of a business man. That he did leave his mark as strongly as he did, even with his quirky bits of irresponsiblity speaks strongly to how talented a person he was in the music industry.

If you know about Sly Stone, you will know he has a reputation of being unreliable and missing shows and such for assorted reasons, and there was drug involvement affecting his life, as I recall. If you hear his music, you will see what his creative talent is about and hear that distintive sound. Sly and the Family Stone was a band with a powerful, very dynamic sound, that was an influence on many later groups. The band's songs often carried relevant social messages of the day.

KCRW FM from Santa Monica is at 89.9 on the FM dial. The home page is interesting as it doesn't show that frequency anywhere on the page, at least not very prominently so as to be noticed.

Rail Cars and Streetcars for Downtown?

After seeing the activity going on about more money to build rail cars in L.A. , I saw an item on Jose Huizar, my CM for CD-14 on a project for rebuilding downtown. I don't think I ever gave much attention to the idea as downtown has changed enourmously since the 60's that I remember it from and even still holding on in the 70's. The development of local shopping malls was what I think started the trend to take away retail business from downtown that began the slide downward. Well, CM Huizar's plan is not totally created in a vacuum, since there's that thing that when tax dollars are at work, SOMEBODY is making money- or will be- other than the intented purposes of a project.


Downtown looks like some parking and theatre issues are mixing to put Huizar in a position of acting for the benefit of the special interests. I read Zuma Dogg's Blog - whether you like him or not, he's constantly coming up with issues that have a ring of truth in them- this item was about some dissatisfied members of the public and a recall-Huizar orientation: the posting from Saturday, May 23, 2009: "A Letter About LA City's Broadway Trolley Project From "RECALL JOSE HUIZAR" Campaign: (Not to be confused with Recall Monica Garcia Campaign),"
http://ladailyblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/letter-about-la-citys-broadway-trolley.html
The idea is that Huizar is doing work to benefit a single interest that is out of line with the real desire and intent of the areas businesses. He appears to be planning a large parking structure to be built downtown that will mainly help one special interest. His work overall in the downtown project will work to squeeze out the current assortment of merchants that populate the storefronts of more notable predessor tenants who sold shoes, shirts, suits, and all the things that made people come to downtown for their shopping in days of old.

The new shopkeepers are usually small scale and often immigrants from Latina American countries, mainly Mexico. These folks will be left out of the big picture and whether it's good or bad for them or the overall public is a separate questions.

The other item that I finally am getting to is the Downtown Trolley. I first thought this was the bus dressed up like a trolley that is no big deal to do, but it looks like it's a full scale installation with rails and the whole to-do. That's not cheap and that's another pipe dream in my opinion if CM Huizar thinks this will be the key to revival of Downtown. Maybe it's San Diego that he's using a model, but you can't really use any city for a model since things never quite match here in Los Angeles, no matter how hard you try to press the puzzle piece in to fit.

Here's some history that I will have to come back to, but it's old in origing- back in 2008 in the L.A. Times in the Bottleneck blog focusing on traffic issues, where some comments are attached. Streetcar may get some funding in L.A.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/09/looks-like-the.html
It's $5 Million and there's more- it's the CRA involved. All bad signs.

I will get back to this later, but this is just a start on what's going downhill for L.A. and who is doing it.

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Rail Car Contractor and Sweetheart Deal? MTA Board heads it that way.

Do you see the Gold Line or Red Line cars in operation? That’s what this story in the L.A. Times is about and lots of dollars, too. “Italian rail company moves ahead in L.A.,” 7:29 AM May 22, 2009, by Maeve Reston. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/05/italian-rail-company-moves-ahead-in-la.html The Italian rail company, AnsaldoBreda, is the beneficiary of a really good deal- good deal from AnsaldoBreda's side of the contract. For L.A.? Another story.

Most of the comments connected to the L.A. Times blog on this story are stock, p.r. and the "company-line" that happen to be self-serving. What a surprise. The real import of this deal is not yet explored since it has been handled quietly with little publicity.

This is another example of the thinly disguised move to pimp off resources of the city- city property. The sq. ft. rate is not stated here but other sources say it's about $2/sq.ft. earlier newspaper reports cited other rail manufacturer sources' view on the AnsaldoBreda projected employment as much more numerous than really needed from a commercial viewpoint; AnsaldoBreda's past track record is a big red flag, not meeting the existing contract terms in deadline and specification terms already.

The CRA is getting a reputation as a money waster, putting in cash into projects and coming up with little or no value for the dollar. The CRA affiliation for anything gives cause for further examination of the utility of the actions versus the expense that the city will bear. The CRA often seems not to be concerned with realities, only sales pitches.

Villaraigosa has loaded the MTA board with appointees, and his gubernatorial goal is making him reckless in getting there, making expensive deals for lump sum payments that he wants to use to "balance" the budget. Meanwhile, the public suffers from, 1. the wasted tax dollars for an uneconomical deals, 2. the "product" that comes back to bite you, as will happen with parking and perpetually rising rates, if Chicago-style long-term leaseholds of meters and lots for decades is approved, and 3, significantly, loss of city property that can generate income year-by-year at a better rate than fire-sale prices for a one-time, lump-sum return that Villaraigosa will use.

This technique to meet the cash deficit in the budget is a poor choice to handle the long-term health of the city, merely providing a quick fix for the Mayor and Council who feign concern for the residents. The loyalties of Council members have time and again been show to lie with the Mayor, not the residents and businesses of the city.

Looking at the continuously professed idea that we are in a financial crisis as a city, yet the land deal on the property is nowhere near market value and the anticipated result may not materialize, and further expense will be carried by the city (i.e., taxpayer). This happens too often.

A 50-year lease to get $15 million cash up front is all this is about. Well, that and the Mayor's view to being Governor of California. I think it's a bad deal that will be proven out in years to come as another bad deal by the city. The Convention Center site for billboards, digital ones at that, was conceived of in the early part of this decade and that was finally approved by the Council, fearful of lawsuits if any other action was made. That deal was another giveaway in today's pricing and market value, AND it entitles the business, AEG, to make a bundle of money while producing visual pollution of the area.

Council seemed to hang its collective head and approve the Convention Center billboard deal late last summer, blaming predecessors for the poor outcome. This current version of city council members will have it's own goofs to claim proper ownership of their transactional ineptitude. Remember when Magic Johnson got a "lifetime" contract deal for $25 million in the 80's? It seemed huge then. Now L.A. Dodger Manny Ramirez gets $25 million for one season (minus about a third for the suspension imposed on him). What seems "great" now could be a very bad deal later, or, as here, plainly bad on its' face. That Convention Center deal probably had that old Council thrilled at their contract skillfulness that looks so shortsighted and amateurish now.

This matter did not have competitive bidding in place. How efficient is that? The story says that the board "recommends opening up the contract to competitive bidding." That should have been standard operating procedure for these contracts, and not another supplemental step as merely an option and not the rule.

The story says,
" The tentative agreement approved by the CRA board Thursday set the terms for
the rail company to lease a prized parcel of city land -- a deal that would be
executed only if the MTA board agrees, as early as next Thursday, to let
AnsaldoBreda build the 100 cars."

So, I repeat, the City literally will pimp off property for a one-time cash benefit- with all the credit of the moment, naturally, going to be claimed by the Mayor. Of course it will. He wouldn't have it any other way, given the career-conscious mindset of his. We will see how bad this turns out- and that should show up before the 50-year lease later runs out. The Council members, many plainly rubber-stamps, are supportive of anything presented them by the Mayor. They will go through the public "show" of debate on this before they finally approve it. It would be a good time for Controller-elect Wendy Greuel to step forward to question the financial and product shortcomings inherent in this deal.

I doubt there will be any serious challenge in the City Council on this giveaway. If Tony wants it, they will bow to him. And if there's a bad deal to be seen here, the chances are that all of them will be long-gone, termed out by that time and it will be just a faint memory to most, but leaving an expensive footprint that shows it was there.

Tony has been very active in actually addressing city business. Except that the career-climbing jones of the Mayor is still there to have L.A. City interests treated as a secondary matter to getting to the "next office." And we might just have a Mayor that could help the City if he would focus on THAT job and not on any other elections and offices. To use one of his worn out phrase, "We can dream." Tony is, to take another of his oft-used terms, so "transparent."

City Council Squeezes in a long list of Special Event/Fee Waivers before the holiday exodus, and Rewards.

City Council can make all the fuss they want about the budget and how people will lose jobs and get days off, but the show must go on with special events and assorted fee waivers. There are some worthwhile events listed, but the problem is that the City Council seems obliged to pay out for whatever is presented for "costs to be absorbed by the city."

A lot of events should be handled by fundraising and not be dependent on the City for money to conduct the events. Trimming back might be the need if you give recognition to the bad economy or the real NEED for a particular event at all.

I do notice that some amounts are very small in some cases, and then others seem simply generous and in the party spirit for the associated party event- but SHOULD so much celebration be going on with tax dollars be used while people are given furlough days? The boat that is the City continues to spring money leaks that just don't get plugged, thanks to the split-personality council members.

This is part of the reason why it's hard to believe the positions that the Council members take in making pronouncments of urgency and using that to take measures that give a financial hit to residents and businesses in the city. If there is a crisis, and they want to "share the pain" as the Mayor termed it, then it certainly is not apparent with the "business as usual" in the Special Event/Fee Waiver area of Council action.

"The show must go on." might better serve as the slogan the Mayor and Council members use. In WW II, a shortage of many items was in evidence from the rationing of gas and food items. THAT got the message across that we were in desperate times.

There is no such message here, but maybe just that they are desperate to keep spending more money. What was it that the plants said in the movie, "The Little Shop of Horrors"? Wasn't it "Feed Me!" That's the way it is here- they just collect and can't save.



Here's today's agenda item for the usual approvals- (and Items 15 and 16 were lumped in for the 10 unanimous votes of the members present under "Items for Which Public Hearings Have Not Been Held - Items 9-18" - so you wouldn't know the details of what was going on if you didn't read the agendas today; all done very quietly and routinely):

"ITEM NO. (15)

07-1855-S1
et al. MOTIONS relative to “Special Events” to be held in the various Council Districts.

Recommendations for Council action:

DECLARE the following community events as “Special Events”; APPROVE any temporary street closures as requested; and, INSTRUCT the involved City departments to perform such services as detailed the Council motions attached to the various listed Council files, including the waiver of fees, costs and requirements and other related issues, as specified:

07-1855-S1
CD 4
a. MOTION (LABONGE - HAHN) relative to declaring the 11th Annual Fourth of July block party on July 4, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $1,043).

09-1147
CD 1
b. MOTION (REYES - ZINE) relative to declaring the Santacruzan on May 30, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $500).

08-1367-S1
CD 1
c. MOTION (REYES - ZINE) relative to declaring the Fourth Annual Lummis Day Festival on June 7, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $2,100).

07-1491-S1
CD 5
d. MOTION (WESSON for WEISS - SMITH) relative to declaring the It a SORO World festival on June 7, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $3,000).

08-1205-S1
CD 3
e. MOTION (ZINE- REYES) relative to declaring the 19th Annual Barry Wolfe Grand Prix on May 24, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $3,859).

09-0976-S1
CD 14
f. MOTION (HUIZAR - LABONGE) relative to declaring the Tri-Cultural Celebration on May 17, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $10,506).

09-1151
CD 6
g. MOTION (CARDENAS - HAHN) relative to declaring the Western L.A. County Council of the Boy Scouts of America’s Balboa Oaks District Camp-O-Ree on May 29-31, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $1,950).

07-2666-S2
CD 6
h. MOTION (CARDENAS - HAHN) relative to declaring the St. Bridget of Sweden School Carnival on September 25-27, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $200).

09-1152
CD 6
i. MOTION (CARDENAS - HAHN) relative to declaring the Valley Japanese Community Center, Inc. Annual Carnival 2009. on June 27-29, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $600).

08-2471-S1
CD 15
j. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the Holy Family School Fiesta on October 16-18, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $2,226).

09-1153
CD 15
k. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the Hot Pedro Nights on August 22, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $5,924).

08-2350-S1
CD 15
l. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the 18th Annual Festival of Philippine Arts and Culture on September 12-13, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $5,260).

08-3322-S1
CD 15
m. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the 22nd Annual Harbor Holiday Parade on December 13, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $4,800).

08-2178-S1
CD 15
n. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the Fifth Annual Fiesta De Las Patrias on September 12-13, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $4,800).

07-1767-S1
CD 15
o. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the San Pedro Grand Prix on June 21, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $7,548).

09-1154
CD 15
p. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the ILWU 75th Commemoration Event on May 15, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $4,800).

07-0912-S1
CD 15
q. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the Labor Day Parade on September 7, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $4,880).

08-2105-S1
CD 15
r. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the 10th Annual Charity Downhill Race and Car Show on August 30, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $1,226).

09-1155
CD 15
s. MOTION (HAHN - PARKS) relative to declaring the Saint Peter’s Fishermen’s Fiesta on June 28, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $1,226).

09-1156
CD 4
t. MOTION (LABONGE - HAHN) relative to declaring the 20th Anniversary of the Fall of Berlin’s Wall on November 8, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = none submitted).

07-3108-S2
CD 15
u. MOTION (HAHN - PARKS) relative to declaring the Sportswalk Induction ceremony and awards luncheon on October 12, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $3,736).

08-2023-S1
CD 15
v. MOTION (HAHN - PARKS) relative to declaring the 43rd Annual Watts Summer Festival on August 7-9, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $6,340).

07-3246-S2
CD 15
w. MOTION (HAHN - PARKS) relative to declaring the 44th Annual Watts/Willowbrook Christmas Parade on December 5, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $8,250).

08-2032-S1
CD 15
x. MOTION (HAHN - CARDENAS) relative to declaring the America’s Night Out Against Crime on August 4, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $412).

09-1158
CD 4
y. MOTION (LABONGE - HAHN) relative to declaring the Larchmont Family Fair on October 25, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $3,567). "



SEPARATE ITEM: REWARDS- Do these really help? Are people only motivated by money to do the right thing? I don't know what the actual payout happens to be for all the rewards that the council has been approving and to me, it seems the rewards authorizations are on the increase. With all the conditions applied to eligibility for collecting the rewards, there might not be much paid out in the end anyway, but the amounts authorized and outstanding are pretty significant, $50,000.00 in the matter below.

If the city did a better job at handling gangs problems in the first place, and starting on it years ago instead of putting things on that slow track as they usually do, then maybe so many rewards would not be needed. That's another area for the "Public Safety Committee" to handle. And that's Jack Weiss as the Chair, with Ed Reyes also in there doing a bang up job to make Antonio say, "L.A. is the safest it's been since the 1950's." Split personalitites of the elected politicians, or maybe simply lying.

"ITEM NO. (16)

09-0010-S37
MOTION (WESSON - SMITH) relative to an offer of reward for information leading to the identification, apprehension, and conviction of the person(s) responsible for the death of Christopher Taylor on June 13, 2008.

Recommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR:

1. PROVIDE an offer of reward in the amount of $50,000 for information leading to the identification, apprehension, and conviction of the person(s) responsible for the death of Christopher Taylor on June 13, 2008.

2. FIND that the subject reward complies with the provisions of Chapter 12, Article 1, Division 19, of the Los Angeles Administrative Code.

3. DIRECT the City Clerk to publish the required notices and/or advertisements to effectuate this reward. "

Friday, May 22, 2009

Some pictures of protest and question of priorities

The protest photos in the L.A. Times today show some pictures of frustration and anger over layoffs. "Students walk out to protest budget cuts" http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0522-studentwalkout-pictures,0,6857643.photogallery?1

The other thing they show is that there is a desperate need of some proofreading or more student time spent studying in English class. And if a teacher wrote out the language, we are really in trouble.

If "repression" is meant, that correct print expression is being repressed. And "againts"? Come on, somebody either wasn't paying attention to their printing or they need to get back in class.


"Lincoln High School students march toward LAUSD headquarters Friday morning to protest possible cuts." L.A. Times, 5-22-09

"ReSend the Vote" - Send it where? "Rescinding" a layoff vote might be what they were looking for. (and this one view had to be from Lincoln High, of course.)

All this shows that either they were late for the bus (but then, it was a march), or some basic skills were already on summer vacation ahead of the students. Then again, I am just really fussy over spelling, correct spelling, and about language usage- as long as it's not mine, that is. Students, If you are going to get out in the street, at least don't carry a sign that makes it look like you shouldn't have left the classroom. Here, maybe they need to get back to school as fast as they can and do some diligent make-up study.

LAUSD Students Protest for Teachers; Why?

Today's L.A. Times online has some information on students protestiong the layoff of teachers. "Students converge on L.A. Unified heaquarters, threaten test boycott," 1:12 PM May 22, 2009, by Howard Blume. The students were from Santee and Manuel Arts and walked over to the Beaudry Ave. District headquarters. The apparent belief on the part of the students is that the teacher layoffs of any dimension can be avoided if the Board decides to stop it. I am not sure where the lack of money comes into this equation, but when continued last-minute solutions are found, partial or conditional, as they have in this matter, it's hard to be sure that all that they do is all that CAN be done.

The City Council is doing that last-minute fix lately and you wonder why they didn't think of all this before now, if it's a legitimate finding. Is somebody holding out? That seems to be the suspicion on the part of the students and certainly, on the part of the teachers union. Any "finding of a solution (money)" just works to make you more distrusted later. Again, it's the question of "Are you SURE you aren't holding out on us?"

There's only a certain amount of money that they will have that has to last for a while and using it all for preserving teacher jobs over other employee jobs will still get them to the end of the money sooner and with more of a deficit than now.

I am not in favor of students losing time in school for matters that belong to the adults to sort out. If there was not a conflict between losing school time and expressing student opinion, then I would not be so firmly against them acting. Teachers need to see the responsibility to have the students educated as much as they can, which many people believe is not happening even without the layoffs in the picture.

A part of the story demonstates the concerns that may not be apparent to students.
Santee student organizers threatened to boycott state testing next week. Most
testing has been completed at schools on a traditional calendar; Santee,
however, has a year-round schedule, and for two-thirds of the school, testing is
scheduled to begin Tuesday

Santee student organizers threatened to boycott state testing next week. Most testing has been completed at schools on a traditional calendar; Santee, however, has a year-round schedule, and for two-thirds of the school, testing is scheduled to begin Tuesday.

These tests help determine a school’s academic ranking, and schools are rated on the participation rate as well as the results.

“I don’t know that our parents are going to condone a boycott,” said Principal Richard Chavez. “The test results that come back reflect on the students, the school and the community.”

Student performance on tests is already in the dumps and this does nothing to show what productivity if any is coming from the particular school, and with that poor performance, the teachers will also take heat for that. It just makes for one negative domino hitting another negative domino in the line for a chain reaction to more disappointing performance at the end.

The actual benefit to students is not a very apparent element here, and it looks like a source of more poor performance. You might notice in the story that the students do not appear to be kept in school, but allowed to go to Beaudry. If they were going anywhere just to get out of school, would the District condone this? Where does it draw the line.

And what about harm coming to the students out of school? If there was any traffic accident that nailed a student out of class on the way to the Beaudry headquarters with the District allowing or even chaperoning this, you could imagine some liability falling in the lap of the Board for allowing students to be exposed unnecessarily to the risk. With so many odd driving habits in the news, you might think it should be a risk not taken, at least not without some sort of release signed by parents or guardians beforehand- but like most things, the Board just hopes for the best and goes on about it's business, reacting instead of acting.