City's Plan to Severely Cut Neighborhood Councils funding and Department's staffing- Forgetting about Charter Mandate.

Here is a press release on the urgent threat to Neighborhood Councils based on budget needs- The self-created problems of the city government have it looking to slash for cash any and all programs that it finds for quick money- and forgets about the REASONS there is a Neighborhood Council system in place.

City Council chanbers downtown at 1 pm on Monday will be where some personal presence will be important to demonstrate opposition to the planned changes here. When you have a city government travelling to Copenhagen, Denmark, in December for $1.2 million in costs, and only part of the whole bill, for a conference that was ENTIRELY optional (no laws required City people there) AND nothing came out of it in the end. (And a conference about a concept that is not a scientific certainty but more a theoretical concept.) That expenditure is OK with them; after all, it's a "city business" trip. r.g.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Contact: Stephen Box (323) 864-7586

Neighborhood Council Representatives
Deliver Statement to City Hall
"Honor the City Charter!"

LOS ANGELES – Neighborhood Council representatives from throughout the city are headed to City Hall to call on the Mayor and the City Council to honor the City Charter which established the neighborhood council system and which mandates appropriate funding. They take with them a BudgetLA Statement that says "At this time of financial crisis for the City, the solutions require a partnership between the elected officials at City Hall and the elected representatives of our 90 neighborhood councils."

Neighborhood Councils exist to advise the Mayor and the City Council on City Budget priorities, to monitor the delivery of services, and to involve the community in the governance of the City of Los Angeles. The Charter goes so far as to call for periodic meetings with responsible officials of City departments.

As the CAO's "City Restructuring Proposals" are considered by the Budget and Finance Committee on Monday afternoon, Neighborhood Council leaders will stand in defense of the neighborhood council system and will position the NC system as a Funding Solution, a Communication Solution, and as a Community Building Solution. Ultimately, the NC system is an ASSET, not a LIABILITY, and it is protected by the City Charter. To that end, neighborhood councils stand as partners with the Mayor, the City Council, and the City Staff in working together for "An LA that Works!"

BudgetLA has hosted two emergency workshops which have drawn 110 different members from 47 different neighborhood councils, all focused on working together to take on bankruptcy, pensions, the delivery of city services and the reorganization of the city system. The BudgetLA position starts with two basic premises, that "everything is on the table and must be considered as we work together to solve the budget crisis, and that neighborhood councils must be at that table as partners in the process.

The NC reps have taken a full-spectrum approach to the budget crisis and believe that it is essential that the community engage with our elected officials as well as city staff to pursue Revenue innovations along with Pension reform while maintaining prioritized delivery of City Services and the implementation of Organizational improvements, all of which work together to guarantee that Los Angeles take its place as a Great City.

This past Saturday, BudgetLA opened with Alex Rubalcava who addressed LA's future on "The Road to Bankruptcy." It also featured Department of Neighborhood Empowerment's GM, BongHwan Kim and his "Vision for Neighborhood Councils" presentation. Visit CityWatchLA for a details on Saturday's BudgetLA workshop. BudgetLA will meet again on Saturday, February 13 and on Saturday, February 27 at Hollywood City Hall. Both BudgetLA sessions will start at 10:00 am.

Press Conference
Monday, February 1, 2010
12:30 pm
City Hall Rotunda
200 Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Budget & Finance Committee
Monday, February 1, 2010
1:00 pm
City Council Chambers
200 Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

BudgetLA supports the activities of several neighborhood council groups, all working together to pursue solutions to LA's Budget Crisis. Participants include the Los Angeles Neighborhood Council Coalition, the Saving Los Angeles project, the Valley Alliance of Neighborhood Councils, the Mayor's Budget Advisory Committee and representatives from neighborhood councils throughout the city. For more information visit http://budgetla.org/ where you will find a Calendar of upcoming events, the Speakers Bureau, an archive of BudgetLA videos and links to individual neighborhood councils. Join BudgetLA on Facebook and follow BudgetLA on Twitter (@BudgetLA) To get involved, join BudgetLA on Saturday, February 13 at 10:00 am for "Look for the Union Label" at Hollywood City Hall, 6501 Fountain Ave., Hollywood 90028.

# # # "

Another area for enlightenment- Where State gets money and where it goes.

There's a story in the L.A. Times that puts some numbers on what I think is a part of the general unawareness about government that afflicts people. The part that the story addresses is "where" money comes from and "where" it is spent by the states. Maybe you will find some answers or corrections to what you thought were the responses.

"Ignorance bites California in the wallet - A new poll shows that the people want control of the state budget, but most don't know where the money comes from or where it goes. " By Cathleen Decker, January 31, 2010
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-week31-2010jan31,0,418529,full.story

Some of what I want to do with a lot of the things that I post on the blog are the revelations that will bring some accuracy to notions that politicians are doing "the right thing" for us, maybe assumed by many as something that happens automatically by being sworn in to office or just by the fact of winning the election. That's usually something that might make you feel good and put some anxieties about the mysteries of the political world to rest, but that's not the case and many times the problem begins with those very same electied officials.

And these problems are magnified when they get together with their colleagues to make changes in the law that are misguided, unnecessary or just outright deceptive, and usually something that's done to get them votes or campaign contributions (money). And sometimes it very clearly action taken as a responsed to campaign "donations" already coughed up by special interests (including unions here, too).

Reading the story will give some examples of misconceptions about the source and destination of money for State government. This is but one part of what the public is not generally aware of and what could change things for the better as we try to increase the size of an "informed" public. I am just one of many trying to do this

Pasadena Playhouse to close; A destination for LHS drama fans in 2009

The Pasadena Playhouse is closing in February as reported by the L.A. Times. Last year alumni, teachers and students visited to attend the presentation of "Stormy Weather," a story about Lena Horne, played by Leslie Uggams. [Review from L.A. Times last February- http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2009/02/review-stormy-w.html ]

The Times story today by By Mike Boehm, January 30, 2010, goes into more details, and like most things today, it's all about money and the lack thereof. http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/arts/la-et-pasadena-playhouse30-2010jan30,0,673828,full.story

Some LHS alumni from back in our history trained and performed at the Pasadena Playhouse. See Johh Doucette,
http://www.glasshousepresents.com/hof_JDoucette.htm and http://www.jimnolt.com/johndoucetteP1.htm

L.A. City Council holds regular gushing session; advances RV parking bans

Well, the city council meeting today is underway as I checked by the coucilphone audio and they were still heaping praise upon praise of one person or another- the one name I recognized was Tavis Smiley, host of shows on KCET and an African-American political and air personality, and a millionaire, too, on top of everthing else.

Well, all that aside I did hear a quick action on agenda ITEM NO. (7)- 09-3036, that sounds like an innocent matter to clear up the visual landscape, but really will have an impact on the growing number of homeless. Lots of these vehicles ARE the home and enaction of the statute will undoubtedly impact this category of people. Not a very humane trend but that's happening without any solutions seen to try help this group who maybe would like to NOT be in this category.

The over-sized vehicles are the homes for many and areas for parking during normal sleeping hours is what is being banned more and more. You will see the city doing things like this for a way to push out people in this situation but not being a solution for them, displaced again, but by the city this time. There should be some better way to allow some space that doesn't conflict with residential neighborhoods.

The language in the agenda does not hint at any of this collateral impact- and it might actually be a directly designed impact, but you can't say that publicly and still be cosidered to be "a caring" person.

Here's in relevant part, is the Agenda Item (7):
========================================

"TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT relative to amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) regarding oversize vehicle parking.

Recommendation for Council action, pursuant to Motion (Rosendahl - LaBonge for Hahn):

REQUEST the City Attorney, with the assistance and cooperation of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT), to prepare and present an ordinance amending LAMC Chapter VIII, Sections 80.69.4, 80.76.2, and 89.60 that prohibits or limits parking of oversize vehicles on certain streets between 2 AM and 6 AM as follows:

a. Revise the definition of oversize vehicles.

b. Provide a process for a Councilmember to establish oversize vehicle restrictions if no permits are involved.

c. Allow the LADOT to install oversize vehicle parking restriction signs at the request of a Councilmember.

* * * ."

There is a comment submitted as an impact statement that gives the opposition point of view from one person that also applies to many others. It might be worth reading to see the downside of increassing this kind of regulation that you can envision will be applied to more areas than the ones here where the residents' complaints first arose and caused this to be created.

Please read the letter from Peggy Lee Kennedy that was submitted to the Council http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2009/09-3036_misc_1-13-10.pdf It shows the uneviable situation that many persons are find themselves in and maybe it can give you another view of the situation to consider.

Does Mayor Villaraigosa Ever Pay Attention to His Own Words?

The Mayor, for all his own blustering, seems to ignore what he's said in his speeches. As you might have noticed, President Obama just finished his first "State of the Union" speech the other day. It is something that each President delivers annually. The City of Los Angeles has it's own version of this in a fit of lofty self-righteousness that the Mayor gets to assemble each April. Villaraigosa has delivered four of these, each one finding the city in a worse condition than the one before it.

Maybe you heard the Mayor's speech when it was made or just heard about it afterwards, but reviewing it again now is probably something Antonio would not like you to do. It is a real demonstration of why Los Angeles Magazine put him on the cover and printed "FAILURE" across the picture a few months ago. This speech is reprinted in Ron Kaye's blog, "Ron Kaye LA" today under the title, " Words That Come Back to Haunt Antonio," By Ron Kaye, today, January 28, 2010, 9:20 AM. http://ronkayela.com/2010/01/words-that-come-back-to-haunt.html#comments

This "State of the City" speech was given in April, almost a year ago and even back that far, the Mayor appeared clearly to be aware of the direction that the city was headed towards- disaster.

According to the words spoken by the Mayor, there was a dire financial condition already well established in the City but he was loaded with "solutions" and recited facts and figures that all pointed out "urgent attention needed" and that was what we thought was going to happen. So reading through any of this will show you that BACK THEN the numbers were bad but they were LESS SEVERE than they are now. Who let that happen?

You notice that the Mayor was talking then about moving with some speed and acting "now" before things could become worse. So guess what? Things got worse for one of the main reasons being that Antonio got nothing moving. About the only thing he got movign was himself as he travelled all around the country and into some other countries with some international travel. Taking trips out of the city is a hard habit to break for Antonio, after all, that's about all he did for his first four years in office as he collected campaign fund for himself and for Presidential candidates Clinton and later Obama. If there was a function somewhere for mayors or Latino leaders, Antonio was sure to be there and he must have accumulated a really impressive photo album along the way.

Compare the figures you hear in the news now and you can see how much worse things have become with the budget plunging further into a deficit condition since the Mayor gave that speech. The plans he spoke about last April to save the city just never became activated- and he even said that the need to act promptly was needed to address the problems.

Maybe some of those plans would have helped keep us from such a predicament as we have now, but we will never know for sure. I don't know about how we are saving any money while we manage to keep city jobs unaffected as to hours and layoffs since the city people stayed on their jobs. It is only now we have Early Retirement departures from city service being realized. All the time that passed until that happened meant running the city into more debt, neutralizing much of the impact that was designed to result from making these retirement packages a deal for employees. (And now many of the ERIP positions don't save money as they were positions not being paid of of general funds- so about 400 more costly retirements will need to be done.

The whole speech tells a story of a Mayor, acknowledging that he was informed of the situation, but nevertheless, he chose to leave the city regularly. He usually claimed it was a city business-need. That may have been true for a few of those trips, but most of the time it was his own choice to leave. Even after he was sworn in to the second term of office, pledging to be the "best Mayor" for the city, Antonio left L.A. the next day and actually, left the country with KTLA Channel 5 television's news person, Lu Parker as his travelling companion. Antonio was "missing in action" for lots of times that his "leadership" might have really been called for. Michael Jackson died during that first period of Antonio's absence. Remember that ensuing memorial service that sucked up thousands of hours of police and other city services that also followed, all happening while the Mayor continued to be out of the country.

During the rest of the year, trips to Iceland and then to Europe took away the Mayor's attention from Los Angeles and meanwhile all the ills mentioned in the State of the City speech became worse.

The Mayor has become out of touch with reality and was already co-opted by unions as he tried to curry favor with unions from Day 1 as he approved the DWP's IBEW union contract that provided it's members with premium pay and raises. The Mayor's political aspirations have taken priority over anything that the City of Los Angeles needed. It makes you wonder why he wanted to have a job that he never worked on, but then, all jobs were the stepping stones to higher office. Only a dismal showing by which he won his second term, with about 10 percent of the registered voters in the city coming to vote for him, shocked him (or more accurately, his advisors) that he was in a weak position so it would be futile for him to run for governor.

Antonio Villaraigosa will probably go down in history as the worst mayor that Los Angeles ever had. It would be hard to imagine a worse one, but Eric Garcetti and others on the City Council have their eyes on that office and would be good candidates for doing more damage to the city to satisfy their personal agendas at taxpayer expense. Garcetti especially is a threat as the smooth-talking social engineer who has not one bit of a problem with spending other peoples money for premium prices on untested actions, but he will convince you it all will work.

If you were an Antonio supporter you made a bad choice in re-electing him. I am just talking about the second term. I used to be an enthusiastic supporter of Villaraigosa when he lost his first race to Jim Hahn, but I changed my views because Antonio changed. He seemed to work against the well-being of the city and worked to make L.A. a sanctuary city and then denying it as he ignored the seriousness of the gang problems and violence. He explicitly denied the impact of illegal immigration on jobs, city services and other areas that were increasingly apparent to even the most staunch advocate of that component of the city's population. All in all, Antonio became an unequivocal liar and remains so to this day.

The Mayor now sees a worsened condition from the one he spoke of last April and he has himself to blame as a major reason for this. Since he is so self-deluded with his performance as mayor I doubt that he will be able to right the ship without the residents and businesses further suffering financially with more fee gouging and reductions of city services- but by making deals with the city's coalition of unions, he's created a monster that is threatening to bite back. That union coalition already says the city breached it's deal and the unions are not subject to any further reductions or job actions for that reason. It's becoming a vicious environment at city hall and I don't know if bankruptcy can be avoided. A bankruptcy could at least see all the city contracts wiped out like a shaken up Etch-A-Sketch to be started fresh as a bankruptcy judge begins deciding things for the city.

The Mayor did a lousy job so far and even by doubling his staff to about 193 persons (further boosting salaries paid out and maybe creating jobs for friends since he's not planned to cut HIS staff) he's still got no good plan produced to get us to safety without some heavy casualties all around.

Off-duty LAPD Officers attack man in Whittier

Bad news for LAPD image. Two officers got into fight outside what I think is an eating establishment of some sort in Whittier. They were off-duty and beat on a guy and pistol-whipped him. Whittier police came and arrested the cops and some reports say they were drinking. "LAPD officers involved in off-duty fight at Whittier bar on leave." Daily News Wire Services, Updated: 01/28/2010 08:09:25 AM PST - http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_14279387

These were officers were no rookies, on the job since 2002, and they were in the Metro division, termed "elite" in the reports. They brought no pride to their group by their actions. My question for law enforcement is and has been for about 20 years since the topic was brought up at a training session on use of deadly force, simply is, "Why should police be allowed carry firearms when they drink alcohol while they are off-duty?"

City or County liability usually attaches when there's an off-duty bad shooting where an off-duty officer is involved. But sometimes that's a close call as to liability or a bad shooting. However, when you ALLOW or REQUIRE officers to be armed with a gun and you PERMIT (or do not prohibit) drinking off duty at the same time, it makes for a bad combination when something goes wrong. It may even be that it will BE A CAUSE of something going wrong. Past drinking and shooting cases have occurred so there is no shortage of examples.

The city here is on a cliff ready to fall into bankruptcy at any time as things are now. This is not a reasonable risk to take and allowing the condition creates a risk of more money down the drain in payouts for judgments and settlements that should not happen.

These cops will probably be out of the job before long and new recruits will have to fill the vacancies. A mess all around, but they did not help themselves out by jumping on this unarmed guy. Two against one? What did the guy do to get them P.O'd, you might wonder? Well, they blew it all around. Only the force needed to accomplish an arrest is permissible, if that's what they were trying to do. Beating the guy in the head with a gun just went over the top in terms of really bad judgment. They don't look like they were trying for an arrest as much as it looked like they wanted to do him some serious hurt. That they did. But win the battle and lose the war.

LAPD needs to work on a policy to cut liability with drinking and off duty guns. Cops may say that they need to be armed while off-duty- and so they should be allowed- but they don't have to be drinking at the same time. THAT is what should be prohibited. It's a choice that should be automatically made by the department, drink but put away your gun. Carry a gun while off duty but don't go into any bars or drink at a restaurant when you are doing that.

If police officers really want to do both, get an insurance policy for some heavy duty coverage and then the city will be off the hook- and that's still a "maybe"- that is, if they can afford the insurance premiums.

It's a simple thing to do- city council here in Los Angeles may find this above their ability to remedy, but then these days, most things seem to be just that. Meanwhile the cops are on Admin. leave, and getting paid. That's sounds wrong, but the presumption of innocence and the unproven allegations really need this condition to continue for now. Cutting off pay goes against these principles and would again be a different bad move by the employer, creating another liability for the city. It's a legal thing that's part of the whole package in employment law.

It brings to mind something said by Casey Stengel, former N.Y. Yankee manager when he managed the N.Y. Mets in 1962, their first year after the N.L. expansion, where losing (120 games) was a way of life for the Mets, "Can't anybody here play this game?" And for L.A. City government management, it appears they can't. Too bad there's no slaughter rule to save the city, and no pun remotely intended, considering the source story.

Retired LA Co. Asst. Fire Chief convicted of animal cruelty in puppy killing.

The story in the news today is about the conviction for animal cruelty of Glynn Johnson in a Riverside County court, a real slimster, who beat a neighbor's German Shepard puppy, Karley, in 2008 so savagely that the dog had to be euthanized. The defendant is a 55-year old retiree from the L.A. County Fire Dept. who has a history of really weird behavior towards others- a lot of hostility and anger type issues- even towards his own family. Sentencing in pending.


But this crime initially did not look like there was going to be anything done because of the reluctance of law enforcement to act against the defendant neighbor, Glynn Johnson, a retired assistant fire chief in the L.A.County Fire Department. It looked like there was a sort of professional courtesy or outright free pass operating here that was was holding up any serious consideration of prosecution. The public got word of the details of the crime and put pressure on officials not to ignore this case and then continued to follow the case. The public pressure to prosecute was considered crucial to accomplish action by the officials rather than let it go as a reduced charge or even not charged at all.

The felony charge carries a maximum four-year sentence. Meanwhile, this defendant is receiving a pension of $15,000.00 a month according to Jeff O'Toole, the neighbor whose dog was beaten. The pension, by the way, is not affected whether Johnson goes to prison or not.

The story gives more of details of the crime, "Fire Chief Found Guilty of Felony Animal Cruelty Charges Reports Last Chance for Animals (LCA)," January 26, 20010, . http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/fire-chief-found-guilty-of,1138077.shtmlb as it appears online in "Earth Times." You can see it was a seriouis matter by reading about it in this story. Most of the other reports in the news of this story don't cover the details of what Johnson did, apparently considering them not to be important enough.

Professional Development Day at LHS- a short day for your students-but is LAUSD changing anything?

Today, Tuesday, is the shortened day at Lincoln High for students who will get out at 1:34 p.m., following a shortened instructional schedule for a "Professional Development Day." The teachers will stay to just after 3:00 p.m. with their designated activity for today
If you are a parent of an LHS student, consider yourself informed on this so that you can put on your parental supervision hat a little earlier today. parents of a child at LHS be "in the know" and adjust your parental supervision
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AN OBSERVATION POSTED IN THE PAST ON THS:
From an earlier posting here on "What is 'Professional Development' anyway?" -

It might be many things to different people, but let me give a try to describing it. Conceptually, it's to make the current teachers better ones by providing instruction or activity to advance education or performance of the teacher. Sometimes it's just to get everybody on the same page, from a District standpoint. There could be new directives from the Beaudry headquarters that have to be explicitly pronounced so that a teacher can't say they didn't know. This could be something like reinforcing- or for some schools- introducing the policies against school bullying, harassment or other aspects of school life where teachers have been known to "drop the ball." Sometimes it covers health issues of various types or the teacher's career requirements that must be met, of which there always are more.

Another area that the "Professional Development" day includes is the planning within the particular school for anything, curriculum materials and approaches taken for teaching, departmental choices in what choices the LAUSD allows to be made. It's also an opportunity for training "on-site" without having teachers take school time off to go to training sessions, thus creating a vacuum that a substitute teacher is paid to fill, at the expense of interrupting any classroom routine or momentum. It also avoids having to do after-hours training for teachers to squeeze in. The "Professional Development Day" training could be considered as a consolidation of assorted trade-offs in the operation of a school program.

Effectively, the "Professional Development Day" is where 1-1/2 hours is open to fix, fill-in, enlighten, entertain, propagandize, mystify, demean or otherwise hold a captive audience of teachers on-site for things that have any arguable level of quality or utility. In my experience, some things of relative importance will wallow in a state of neglect, while there particular areas, "pet projects," if you will, that are given the spotlight.

But the opinions of this area are mine, and they do change with the specific focus of the contents for each of these days, since some items are good ideas but many just never really get to be applied, and others matters have the LAUSD quality of "dubious value" stamped all over them. And meanwhile, even though this might look at first glance to be a teacher's break from the students, they really aren't. Teachers still have to get back to make up any teaching such shortened days might have infringed upon. But that is just my view. Some teachers look at this as part of the scheduled day that's taken into account in lesson plans and pacing, and not as a loss of classroom time, or the "instructional minutes," that seem to be less and less over time.

Again, from the parent’s standpoint, your child or children will be home early- or let's just say, they will be "out" early. Where they will be is a separate matter. And from my observations at LHS, the school library is such a good resource that is so under-utilized, first due to "hours of operation" that did not extend much past 3 p.m., AND, second, because there is just a pervasive condition of inadequate English language skills, starting with reading itself. Most of LAUSD is pretty clearly in denial on this, not addressing the problem squarely.

Undeniably there are many students that do well and many excel. These are not the majority and these are not the students I discuss here. They will survive anyway, and that is why they also will excel. It's only the changes as to the degree of higher performance that their teachers will affect.

What I look at are the ones that DON'T have an ability to read up to grade level, and the ones who will someday get to the point where they just stop coming to school and become one of the many "Dropouts." Theses are the under-achievers and the ones that many teachers would prefer be put in someone else's class. The "problem students" or "trouble-makers" would not be the first or early picks if teachers could choose their students like two captains would choose up their softball teams on the playground. But then you don't want to make your job tougher by stacking the deck, or in this case, the classroom, with any problems if you can avoid it. It's human nature, or something of a self-preservation instinct that influences that attitude, I believe, leaving the "problem students" more firmly cast in that negative image they carry throughout the school career.

They are the "at risk" students, and the risk here is losing them altogether in the educational system. Many will be re-directed to or just accelerated on a path that includes low or no real job opportunities, criminal activity, dysfunctional family life and on and on. This is a consequence that happens from not getting even that level of education that LAUSD offers now. Of course it's a two-way street, and each student bears some responsibility for the results, but there are ways to guide and retain students in the system that improve the conditions instead of making "dropping out" the eventual outcome.

That eventuality is something that LAUSD cannot explain, but their highly touted, or should I say, highly self-touted, "A-G" curriculum that replaced all, or nearly all, of the on-campus vocational opportunities has something to do with it. The P.E. requirement reduction to 2 years out of the 4 years of high school also hurts both the students' performance and their health. Also affected by this minimal P.E. requirement but maybe not so obviously, is the school sports programs of today. The ones that still survive suffer from lack of involvement that the 4-year P.E. requirement created. Many students of old thought of going out for a sport instead of just taking the regular P.E. class that they would have to take anyway. There was more money, too, for handling sports programs, but the interest today is not as widespread as before, but the students who participate do so as intently as did any of their predecessors of days gone by. Everything that keeps a student in school and involved is something that should be viewed as a "positive" factor and should be enhanced, not reduced.

Until that realization happens, too many of your 9th graders entering Lincoln won't make the 4 years trip to their Graduation Day, regardless of how loudly LAUSD Board President Monica Garcia proclaims, "We will have a 100% graduation rate." Keep beating that drum, Ms. Garcia, and the only thing that you will do is lose your hearing, your vision apparently is already affected. There has not been ever an LAUSD 100% graduation rate, to my knowledge. Even during the Vietnam War era, when student deferments- based on being enrolled in school- were clung to tenaciously as a way to avoid being drafted, we still had a dropout problem.

First, maybe we should try for a 100% literacy rate- wouldn't that be something? And THAT change might lead to better graduation rates for LAUSD. Politicians are so full of themselves, and this is one instance of that, a truism, as far as I see it.

That all will be left as topics for another day here, just another regular development day on the blog, you might say.
-------------------------------------------------------
And most of this still seems to be as applicable today as it was in 2008 when I first posted it.

5 consecutive years in the PI (Performance Improvement) status puts Lincoln in a perilous state if you are looking at this as a traditionalist and don't want to see operation as a charter school or other radical change as it appears to us, the older alums. And the tradition from "traditionalists" from bygone eras included being able to read and write, including a better "cursive," or 'handwriting" ability than currently produced, with so much less in technology to assist. This is but one part of a lot of things discarded in the name of "progress" and even with civil rights advances were achieved, the decline began in L.A. schools. General respect for teachers or maybe, the authority of the classroom teacher, is probably one glaring change. Parental involvement or lack thereof, is another external factor, too. A call to the student's home was once dreaded. Now, too often, there will be no answer or response, and if any, it may embody a lot of resentment or challenge. Not all parents, of course, but too many. So a lot is confined to what happens in the school itself..

The decline of the vocational classes available on campus began as the 60's ended. That was replaced with the direction towards the "all-college bound" choice for practically every student in LAUSD. Lincoln High saw that result just about completed last June for its campus as the very capable and respected Auto Shop teacher, Mr. Fong, was swept up by the Early Retirement program.

I don't know if anyone else has really connected the enourmous dropout rate achieved by the LAUSD that I think correlates with the ongoing elimination of on-campus vocational education. Technology, old and emerging, always requires people to create, run or repair things at all levels. Your most immediate levels of contact that demonstrated that are readily be seen in the field of plumbing, electrical and automotive, with incomes commensurate with the importance to us.

This trend away from vocational ed was institutionalized by LAUSD's adoption of the "A-G" college track that my CM, Jose Huizar (CD-14), used as campaign boast in his re-election to the City Council. Huizar used it as an example of his accomplishment during his tenure on the LAUSD Board as its President. Two thing wrong: The concept, no matter how well-intentioned, was based on a lot of unproven assumptions, and secondly, the LAUSD Board during that era, and continuing now with some of those results, did not produce much advancement in the laymen's view of things.

LAUSD Supt. Ramon Cortines even stated recently that "one size does not fit all" in the way the schools are run as a comment to the college track situation.

The ROP and Skills Center off-campus opportunities give some level of alternative to a complete rejection of vocational ed but a small one. At this point, there's so much that's slipped by LAUSD in its opportunities to fix things that I think the sheer enormity of the District keeps it from giving any response in both a timely and appropriate manner. The District takes too long to do most things- and see that the school construction program is continuing, displacing residents in many cases, for District with demonstrated shrinking enrollment. The schools already are announced to be up for other organizations than LAUSD to operate. And THAT makes no sense to me, although there will be many to make up some explanation to justify this condition.

THIS LEADS US TO ANOTHER RESULT
There are newly decided outcomes as of about a week ago for parents to begin entry into failing school operations, with 4 routes stated, but that's for another posting. There, however, is no distinct provision that educates parents to wield this authority to be certain that this will not be the blind leading the blind or replacing the deficient institution with well-intentioned but uneducated parents or parent groups.

For a different tiger, not the LHS mascot, see the details of Tiger Woods' Thanksgiving.

Time for a break from checking up on the local city leaders and their antics, maneuvers, deal-making and all around poor return on the taxpayers' dollars paid to them as salary.

Check "The Beast" blog for "Tiger's Thanksgiving Mystery — Solved," by Gerald Posner, with the details of Tiger Woods' memorable Thanksgiving. Posner gives a minute-by-minute account of some of the previously unclear aspects of that situation. Sad for Tiger, but his story has given people hours of entertainment, filled innumerable pages of magazines, newspapers and blogs, - and he's still a very wealthy guy after getting the biggest celebrity battering this side of Lionel Richie. http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-24/tigers-thanksgiving-mystery----solved/full/

We'll get back to the other side of things soon enough.

CD-14 CM Huizar Honoree at La Raza LSA , UCLA SOL Dinner; LHS Alum, Hon. Carlos Moreno a presenter.

UCLA LAW ALUMNI?- Just passing along the news as I see our CM Jose Huizar (CD-14) is one of the honored guests. I'll pass on this but, for anyone interested, it's produced as requested for others to partake.

LHS Alum, Hon. CARLOS MORENO, Justice of California Supreme Court is mentioned as a presenter here, too. I'll have to wait for another LHS Alumni event to see him again.

-------------------------------------------------------

"Dear Raza Alum,

Happy New Year! We hope you will attend our Annual Raza Alumni Dinner! You can register and purchase tickets at: https://www.law.ucla.edu/pay/laraza/

As many of you know, this is Raza's signature event for the year. We hope to bring together nearly 400 people for a night that recognizes Latino alumni and legal professionals who inspire and support Raza members.

Please help us spread the word by passing this invite along to your friends and fellow UCLAW Alums!

Mil Gracias,

Matthew Barragan & Cynthia Gonzalez "

-----------------------

UCLA LA RAZA LAW STUDENTS ASSOCIATION
PRESENTS

ANNUAL ALUMNI DINNER

Honoring:
The Honorable Cruz Reynoso
The Honorable Kim McLane Wardlaw ‘79
Councilman Jose Huizar ‘97

Special Presentations by: UCLA Chancellor Gene Block and The Honorable Carlos Moreno

Friday, February 5, 2010
Reception: 6:00 p.m.
Dinner: 7:00 p.m.
UCLA Covel Commons, Grand Horizon Room
330 De Neve Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90095

City actions and "How does this help US?" questions

First, I want to lay off the mayor today- and I don't mean "employment-wise" even though, now that I think of it, it doesn't sound like a bad idea. No, I mean I won't put in my criticism of his activities in today's posting- and there's been a few in the last couple of days that I will leave that for others to present, and that crowd is an ever growing one. Instead, I will point out a few of the actions in city council by our CMs that might cause you wonder, "Why the big push over such things?"

LACTATION ROOMS IN CITY BUILDINGS
First, CM Tony Cardenas was into creating "Lactation Rooms" in city buildings- and I supposed either rented OR owned- where there are at least 250 occupants. I still don't know if this is about breast feeding babies by city employees at work, which I doubt. Or, is this for the public's benefit? And the idea seems to be to promote pumping of breast milk for later use for infants.

I mentioned this here in this blog when it came up in November and it was a bad itdea then when the city wasn't so heaving into treading water for financial survival. http://lincolnquicknotes.blogspot.com/search/label/tony%20cardenas It's now a worse idea.

On the agenda:

"ITEM NO. (18) - Motion Required - Two Reports on One File
09-1950

CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS and ARTS, PARKS, HEALTH AND AGING COMMITTEES’ REPORTS relative to the feasibility of creating lactation rooms for mothers with newborns in City facilities with 250 or more occupants."

There's more in print but this is the core of it.

No matter what, THIS is a bad time to even study it, which is what City Council approved during Wednesday's meeting. "Study the feasiblity of creation of lactation rooms" What is this? It can't happen without money and Cardenas voiced his idea that maybe a corporate sponsor would come forward for this. That's doubtful as well, since they would look as out of place with putting their money on this accessorizing the Titanic as it's going down. No, looking for contributions for flotation gear would be more appropriate if we are going anywhere with the metaphors.

You know there's less city employees by way of the Early Retirement Incentive Program. 2400 have chosen that as their manner of exiting city service. So the work remaining for all areas has to be covered by what or whoever is left. I need to ask, is this assignment of a study REALLY necessary? Does anyone think it ranks above, say, keeping library functions open, or police on the job? Why intentionally divert city "man-hours"- or as a gender-neutral observation, city "person hours"- to this task? What is the study going to tell us that would be really ABSOLUTELY USABLE NOW and worth whatever charges will be created for the task?

I say, CM Cardena, stop trying to gear up for the next Mayor's race with such thkngs when you see the city ready to be sold off, piece by piece to cover management mistakes.

NEXT- NO SMOKING IN RESTAURANTS AT ALL

The council on Wednesday banned smoking in the outdoor areas where it was the last place smokers could go publicly to puff on the tobacco goods. Does the city have to spend time on this kind of thing? A CM mentioned that this was the kind of law adopted by an adjacent city and that it was then predicted to cause a loss of business for restaurants, and it did.

You have now the city controlling pot, and none too well from the history as proof, and you have Jan Perry's ban on more fast food franchises in South L.A. (formerly "South-Central L.A." but what's in a name anyway) because those residents are not mature or educated enough to make proper decision on food to affect their health. So Jan Perry steps in to fix it. No new franchises opening? A business-friendly city, indeed, Mr. Council President Eric Garcetti. Garcetti last month chastised a critic - "Don't lecture me about being business friendly" and then cited what he deemed cleared him. And why do this when the people will just travel to whatever place has their desired fast food, making this kind of regulation very ineffective in the end and penalizing businesses that already have to deal with a bad economy, too? Does that kind of consideration ever cross paths with the thought processes of the Council Members? It surely seems not to happen all too regularly, much to the detriment of the quality of life in L.A.

"L.A. council extends smoking ban to outdoor cafes - Starting next year, restaurant patrons will be barred from lighting up within 10 feet of outdoor dining areas and within 40 feet of mobile food trucks. Violators faces fines of up to $250." By Maeve Reston, January 21, 2010 http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-smoking21-2010jan21,0,6071802.story

All this is an excursion in to Nanny Statehood where the public is too stupid to live life by their own choices so that the City is the new Nanny to take care of the care-needy folks. Tell us what to eat, and tell us now about running restaurants and smoking. If a restaurant is annoyingly smokey to patrons, they will not be eager to eat there, business dwindles and changes in the market place will occur. But now, regardless of the DEGREE of intrusion if any into passersby or patrons, the city says, "Can't smoke there anymore- bad for us passing by." CM Greig Smith from what I heard of the meeting was a real complainer and I really wonder how much scientific basis for any of his claims exists. OF COURSE, you know if smoke is annoying, but will you just fall over and die if you walk past any of these areas or do you have to stay for a certain time to be irrevocably harmed? Too many unchallenged assumptions with this, as with every item of city motions to affect free choice.

And if the FIXED areas were enough of an intrusion, THE TACO TRUCKS aka "MOBILE FOOD KITCHENS" will have a buffer zone of smoking-prohibited for a 40-foot radius. So if you are out in the street and light up, look around to see if there's a mobile food truck that's pulled up to withing 40 feet of you. If so, you are in violation. All city council continues to do is put the real problems on the back burner. There are some books that have as the theme, "Don't Sweat the Small Stuff" that talks about what's important to worry about and what's not so important. Such lack of prioritizing has been the curse of City Council for years and continues to be the ongoing practice. (Incidentally, the author of those books died a few years ago but I imagine he did not create his own demons out of nothing while he lived and maybe helped some people to live a better life by seeing a bigger picture).

Nanny State- or Nanny City- as the case may be. We don't need it. It's representative of a government that disregards the choices of its populace and their right to make their own mistakes or successes. As for businesses, all the rules are burying business. Yesterday's L.A. Times had a story about auto repair shops in Glassell Park and Cypress Park and the desire of some to cull the herd of some of them to spruce up the area. Whether this is a move toward gentrification, I don't know, but it does seem that uses that were there for a long time and that provide a livelihood are being rejected more easily in these days where you want to at least not eliminate jobs since the city is very bad at creating jobs in the private sector. The city IS GOOD however with public jobs, creating a lot that they now have to cut due to "no money."

Any way you look at it, the Council is out of touch with things and what is important to a coucil member is what gets the attention, regardless of the real utility, cost or need. Business as usual.

Replacements will be needed when the next elections come around. Think about changing the status quo. And one thing to consider, a lot of this candidates for any office are just the aides and staff chiefs who move up to "take over the family business" so to speak. It's constantly the product for L.A. that you can see by tracing the paths in most council districts. We need DIFFERENT people, not "family members."

Is Today's State of City Finances Any Surprise? Question the Failings of the City's "Leadership"

Ron Kaye, former editor of the LOS ANGELES DAILY NEWS, again is the guy to go-to for some especially painful but pointed enlightenment about the predicament that the City of Los Angeles finds itself in. It is the product of the city "leadership" - meaning the elected officials who were entrusted to run the city.

Here they have done just that: They have run Los Angeles into the ground while warning signs and calls for urgent and swift action continued to be presented for months and years. So the leadership is a word that has to carry quotation marks around it- "Leadership"- as something special since it identifies the only the roles but not the successful accomplishments that the players pretend to produce.

Ron Kaye's blog http://www.ronkayela.com/ has two new items today. The first one posted is entitled, "This Is No Way to Run a City." By Ron Kaye on January 21, 2010 6:29 AM. http://ronkayela.com/2010/01/this-is-no-way-to.html

This is a capsule summary of the conditions and reasons that we have been subjected to as an inept management of the city continues to victimize the businesses and residents. They do it shamelessly and they do it continuously. They lie to the people directly as in the failed Measure B's solar energy ballot item that was produced with a tilted playing field in operation to favor the goals of the DWP's union, the IBEW. The city propositions S and R were about a phone tax of 9% that would have been Zero percent through an ongoing court case if voters were not fooled to institute that tax upon themselves, and the "term limits/ ethics" combo that EXTENDED terms of council members so that we get another four years of the same bad representation by the same connected groups working for special interests (when they aren't working simply for increasing their own power and influence to later use for trading with the special interests). That was supposed to make for more ethical regulations to be giving us better government; that was purely the distractor that was used to slide in that extension of another term.

Please continue and see that column in the Ron Kaye's L.A. blog.

The second posting for today is, "Bankrupting LA -- Who's Fault Is It?" By Ron Kaye on January 21, 2010 10:24 AM. http://ronkayela.com/2010/01/dont-blame-the-bureaucrats-for.html Here is a rundown of the series of revelations, acknowledgments and warnings that should have been heeded earlier. Even earlier than these events, there were warnings of the impending disasters that the city was headed for by the actions of the council and mayor. The activist most loudly chastising Council Members and Mayor Villaraigosa was Zuma Dogg who was both theatrical but usually right with his predictions that were usually met with resentment and, often, ridicule. And that would be funny except that the doom and gloom consequences were the real thing. And I have to say that through all the years of Zuma Dogg's antics and burning of bridges, the words spoken carried the truth more often than not.

Ron Kaye gives some highlights, or lowlights, of the failings over the last year for you to see and to consider yourself. We went from Mayor Hahn who was very unnoticed and was the low profile mayor during his time in office, and then we went to Mayor Villaraigosa who cannot stay away from cameras and who sees no boundaries for his office, going into national and international events that serve himself first and occasionally, the city. His administration was the one that took on L.A. schools when it was outside his jurisdiction. His office had no authority to act since it was under the LAUSD's Board of Education, but still he meddled and diverted his already-sparse time available as the City continued to slide downhill with neglectful or bad management in plentiful supply. The Mayor's absence from the city and lack of attention to local issues over the years has come at price to bring L.A. to the brink of bankruptcy. Even to today when he's given up on seeking higher office (for now), namely the Governor of California, there's lots of distractions that he obviously enjoys over just staying put in City Hall for any extended time.

Recent example: Antonio's appearance on the television soap opera, "All My Children," gets his attention- justified by the production relocating to L.A. from N.Y. Eric Garcetti gets into this, too, as both will play themselves. Eric is a mayoral hopeful and bad news for L.A. He was pushing a lot of the deceptive measures mentioned above- even Solar Measure B was slipped by the other Council members for a while until the whistle was blown by activists that sent CMs to say they approved things based on what was presented (and that was their "out" on responsibility as they quickly back-pedalled out of that jam.)

Enough said for now on this sad state of affairs coming from the highest paid (about $178,000/year; a shade under $15,000/month) council in the United States. Every 2 years the Council comes up for elections of about half of the seats; even-odd numbered districts alternately up for election. We need representation not victimization. The termed-out CMs already have plans for their next office as most are professional politicians, hopping to new offices like a frog hops from lily pad to lily pad, or you can see it a little more clearly as a very taxpayer-expensive form of musical chairs.

City Council Finally Approves the Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance

An ordinance to try to get control of the hundreds of "Medical Marijuana Dispensaries" is finally approved. It did not get the 12 votes needed to begin effectiveness, and so will have to wait a week for another council vote but then will only need a majority of the vote to prevail.
"L.A. City Council gives preliminary approval to pot ordinance requiring 1,000-foot buffer zones" [Updated], January 19, 2010 1:07 pm
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/01/los-angeles-city-council-approves-pot-ordinance-requiring-1000-foot-buffer-zones.html


The story on this is still evolving and how the rest turns out will be probably another be effort to get the compliance needed that will mean shutting down hundreds of pot shops. CM Rosendahl opposed this since he did not agree with the 70 cap set for operating dispensaries. There is a real issue that no on spent much time on and that was the underlying basis for establishing the "medical conditions" that create the need for medical marijuana.

Since there are no standards it doesn't really matter, but if you were to count everyone who has a "recommendation" as state law references, you probably have a huge number. ("Prescriptions" are not issued for this drug and issuance would be against the law.) You have recommendations that really are issued on a pay-to-play basis from cooperating doctors. This is what demeans the real need that exists for medically needy patients that the law was aimed at reaching. Who sorts this out? Apparently, no one. The "recreational" users easily can get in on this process and my guess is that this is the bulk of the users who CM Rosendahl considers to be underserved. "There will be lines around the block" was a prediction from him, if I recognized his voice correctly on the audio, but why would that be?

I don't know how fast any personal user will go through each dispensed amount, and so far, I haven't heard of any limits on obtaining weed at each visit. There are no "sales" as the council considers this since "sales" are illegal under State law.

In any event, the Council, after spending numerous hearing days on this, finally has voted on an ordinance. Do not doubt that when there is a final vote to approve it, there will be a parade of Council Members praising each other for their work. The truth is that they let this fester without any serious attention until the proliferation of dispensaries began grow, causing concerns of residents. Without prodding from neighborhood councils and individuals, this would have continued to be neglected The land rush boost in the filing of applicatons for MMDs under the "exemption" happened when CM Huizar announced he would be introducing a motion to end the exemption that was being used to promote more businesses being established.

The last-minute rush to file using the "hardship exemption" was what happened to effect at least a tripling of MMDs over what was already several hundred places. So here we are, and don't take all that coming self-congratulation that CMs will spurt over this since THEY HELPED CREATE THE PROBLEM by not doing their jobs, especially in the "Planning and Land Use Management" committee, chaired by Ed Reyes. The "moratorium" created was not followed and no one in the city ever tried to seriously do much to get enforcement and end the new shops popping up.

As CM Wesson urged. To paraphrase his concerns, "We need to start somewhere and get an ordinance that can be changed to fit conditions as we see the needs arise."

Meanwhile all the other ills in the city continue.

The Mayor's Personal Life Is At A Great Place- what's missing here?

One of the more odd pieces of printed material on the Mayor was found this weekend in the L.A. Times. "Villaraigosa's personal life is 'at a great place'
Without the drama of a run for governor or a media frenzy surrounding his relationships, the L.A. mayor seems more at ease both at home and at work." By Phil Willon, January 17, 2010.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-villaraigosa17-2010jan17,0,2354939,full.story It's one of the fluffiest of fluff pieces that the L.A. Times could have constructed about a subject who thrives on such items.

After reading this, you'd think all was fine with the city so that L.A. Times had to really search for a worthy area to focus upon regarding the Mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa.

Pretty much an item you would expect to find in some sort of Christmas card or press release and this is coming from Phil Willon who gets his paycheck from the L.A. Times and not the Mayor, but you might not believe that after reading this article that does nothing to cast any serious doubts about the Mayor's performance in term one or this one, term two, thankfully his last one.

For about every paragraph here, you could construct some criticism or some counterpoints very easily. The Mayor- and it's an important point, but mentioned subtlely- admits he was distracted by the governor's race that he's given up on. Another "Really?"- As if we didn't know that L.A. was getting a part-time mayor for all that time. And do we know if Antonio was "districted" in his efforts at getting Hillary Clinton on the Democratic ticket for the 2008 election for President of the U.S.? How about the idea of his shift to Obama when Hillary called it quits after being considered a shoe-in a for that spot a year or two earlier?

You have to remember that Tony V. still was trying to cultivate a relationship with the Obama administration to be picked up for a spot with them, maybe a cabinet position. Many in the Los Angeles City administration WERE invited to go to D.C and work with the administration, but Villaraigosa himself was not. That's why he's had to fill a lot of spots in L.A. as noted in the story- but that reason was not indicated in the story.

You see the "family" importance being mentioned, but the immediate family is nearly all grown
and it's a case of too little, too late when you talk about connecting with your children. And why? That Political Career that swept up Tony V. and left little room for anything that did not work to feed that insatiable thirst for power, praise and attention.

Too bad that Phil Willon didn't try to balance some of the realities of the city with the points that he mentioned. "Meatless Mondays?" I think we could expect a lot of people in the city to be experiencing that, too, along with some of the other days of the week. In their cases, it would be due to a lack of money available more than some health regimen that's been adopted by the people. With the pairing up of the Mayor with Lu Parker of Channel 5's news department, you would expect something of substance to be written. The influence of Parker on the Mayor has done not one bit of good for getting him to be serious about helping the city residents and businesses and leaving the photo op and center-of-attention stuff alone.

The story would leave you with the idea that all is well with the world, with Tony, his family, and the City. Aside from the well-known straying from the marriage during his career that lead to the divorce filing, the Mayor's actions continue to be a series of contradictions to what we see in real life situations. The only thing that we can be glad about that was mentioned in the story is that this second term is his last one. Re-elected to a second term by a bare majority of one of the slimmest voter turnouts just doesn't say much for "having the support" of the people. And I have read that the mayor's "staff" has grown to almost 200 persons from less than 100 when he started out. Any explanation? Of course one will be created if needed, but really, it's all about his importance being raised commensurate with the numbers serving him from my observation here.

Now if Villaraigosa would try to get a grip on the issues and stick to that job instead of being a camera-hound, that energy might lead to some re-direction of the City to accomplish some solutions. All of this is not any new thought. It had just been ignored by the Mayor and the Council member for years when they could have had a jump on fixiing things BEFORE they slid so far and heavily downhill. Talk about the rain sending down mud from the hillsides in the burn areas of the county in this rainy spell, the worsening of city conditions were allowed to fester and to get a real foothold so that remedies that your politicians preach of, the "serious" steps needed, and so on, have become very crucial indeed. Working on things sooner might have done a lot to lessen the current near-bankruptcy of the city.

I noticed today that the local Public Library branch hours have been cut down on Fridays. This is probably not going to stop there. That's a small taste of what we are headed for very soon. The story in the Times is just weird when you consider all the crap there is out there that needs attention from city officials to keep things from going over the cliff. But I guess there's at least one person in the city who's really feeling good about where he's at.

And with all his travels, including three international trips since the July second-term inauguration, not to mention all of his first-term travels where he earned the LA Weekly's story title, "The 11% Mayor" for working so little on actual city business, we wondered where he was, too.

When you listen to him now, he's really having some difficulty getting out his verbal version of anything. When you might expect that a lot of things would be on the tip of his tongue, he's acting like he's searching for an answer to some obscure topic that's testing his recall instead of items that he's been preparing to present. Listen to the recent news audio clips and it is not the realm of an artful and agile speaker that can handle any topic on the fly. We know he detested being challenged in question and answer session unless they were heavily scripted, completely rejecting appearing at any debates during the mayor's race for his second term, but now he really has no challenger and the content of his words is becoming of secondary interest to the actual reason for these speech problems. That is a very different situation from the creation of the L.A. Times article, but it's also a curious situation that is becoming increasingly apparent. The plain act of cutting down on speaking opportunities might help all around for a lot of reasons.

[Note: A Little History/Background-
There was a response to the September 2008 "11% Mayor story" on December 26, 2008 in the L.A. Daily News story by Ric Orlov. The Mayor's response was then addressed in another L.A. Weekly story. "Villaraigosa, the All About Me Mayor, Is Still 11 Percent There." By Patrick Range McDonald, Published on December 30, 2008 at 8:17pm http://www.laweekly.com/2009-01-01/news/villaraigosa-the-all-about-me-mayor-is-still-11-percent-there

Next, a January 7, 2009 story in the L.A. Weekly wrapped up the jousting between the Mayor's side and the L.A. Weekly's reporting with another very revealing story that's still valid today in it's assessment of the Mayor. In my opinion, the comments also address the failure of the L.A. Times to go any distance to be meaningful in its reporting the facts and views properly. "The 11 Percent Mayor Villaraigosa Lashes Back - Blasting L.A. Weekly, he says we relied on bad facts. Aides say he misspoke." By Patrick Range McDonald Published on January 07, 2009 at 4:27pm. http://www.laweekly.com/2009-01-08/news/the-11-percent-mayor-villaraigosa-lashes-back/

Besides being unable to dislodge the report in the L.A. Weekly as incorrect, the Mayor opened up the issue that he's keeping two calendars, one actual and one for the public's consumption, and that had to be addressed by Matt Szabo, then-assistant to Villaraigosa, and still it was an insufficient and very suspect. ]

News from the week on local matters- Los Angeles

Looking back on the week in local matters, here are a few comments that I passed along yesterday to another group for sharing that I think might be worth repeating generally, and so, here it is as a sort of "weekend update":

A FEW NEWS ITEMS

1. CITY AUDITS: City Controller Wendy Greuel has presented some findings this of audits on some aspects of city government, including the Neighborhood Councils, with Highland Park's NC one with problems. "Neighborhood Councils Accused of Misspending Public Money." By EGP News Service http://egpnews.com/?p=15333 DONE [Dept. of Neighborhood Empowerment] has been working with them since at least the summer to resolve the problems with their operations and maintain their status as a certified NC. You many have read of some of the issues affecting their operations appearing in the Boulevard Sentinel over the past months. http://www.boulevardsentinel.com/ .

2. AUDIT- CITY PHONES WASTING MONEY. A news item in the past week showed a huge cost to the city of phones that were apparently unused- [from] NBC news, "LA Wastes $237,800 a Month on Idle Phone Lines- Wendy Greuel calls the city on its wasteful hones." By OLSEN EBRIGHT and CHRISTINA VILLACORTE http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local-beat/LA-Wastes-237800-a-Month-on-Idle-Phone-Lines-81564507.html

Among the problems was the failure of the call-blocking feature that allowed international calls to the Phillipines, Canada and Mexico. The Daily News report shows that corrections have begun on the problems. "Audit: 12,000 idle phone lines cost city $3 million." By Rick Orlov, Staff Writer. Updated: 01/14/2010 10:32:21 PM PST http://www.dailynews.com/ci_14191733?source=most_emailed

3. DA'S PUBLIC INTEGRITY DIVISION AT WORK. An investigation into CM Alarcon living outside of his council district is under way. "Alarcon says his legal residence isn't safe, so he's staying elsewhere- The councilman says he stopped living there after an October break-in and has been living outside his district." By David Zahniser and Maeve Reston, January 16, 2010- L.A. TIMES. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-alarcon16-2010jan16,0,2218965.story Neighbors said he's not lived there for months and the CM has an explanation that he says supports his actions.

4. SHOWTIME FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT. And probably the most bizarre item among city-related matters involves the Mayor and Council President Eric Garcetti as reported in the new, with a representative report linked here: Friday, January 15, 2010, 6:54am PST, "Villaraigosa, Garcetti to appear on 'All My Children.'" Los Angeles Business from bizjournals http://losangeles.bizjournals.com/losangeles/stories/2010/01/11/daily28.html

You can read the particulars yourself. I will comment on the significance of things like this that we see too often from people who might look at themselves with a bit more scrutiny. Role models? Getting down to business? Doing their best for you, the public?

I have to say -and it's all personal opinion- that this is typical of the way "leaders" continue to put the business of the city on the back burner while they engage in self-indulgence that continues to operate as a distraction from the urgent business of city survival. In a few weeks or months we will be seeing services cut back and city employees facing reduced hours or no work at all. Wendy Greuel told us at her appearance at our meeting that the city was spending a million dollars a day more than it was taking in, and where does that leave us? Not with time to waste, I'd guess. And that is why this dalliance into show business adventures is so irritating to me.

Until the financial picture of the city is in a presentable condition, things like this are "inappropriate." Some may say "stupid." City "leaders" should be in a 24/7 mode to address the crucial issues (and there's more than enough to go around), which would exclude a lot of their recreational activities. I don't see them doing that in the least. It's just my own opinion, but I don't think it is any more crazy than what you see happening with the electeds and appointeds around town.

REMINDER - THE amended MMD ordinance is coming back to council chambers on Tuesday. Many speakers are really distorting the picture in their public comments. The fact is that an ordinance to allow MMDs to operate is going to occur. The maximization under the most lax provisions is what many "pro" speakers are really looking to accomplish. There are many speaking as if there will be a complete cut off of this method of obtaining med. marijuana. Already noticed is the usage by CMs of "medicine" in place of marijuana. The City is trying to fix a condition that shouldn't exist but already an "entitlement" attitude appears present since laxity in this area was the rule for so long. The recreational usage is blending in with the separate purpose that the state law carved out for this drug.

Many on the Council are really in favor of complete legalization but that is not what is before the Council. Instead, a system of regulated operation of MMDs is the goal. Those CMs have to remember that and focus. They had the option to completely reject MMD operations in the city as many other cities have chosen, but that choice, as convenient as it would be to end the matter for now, is history. I think that the intimidation factor that large numbers of speakers creates is at work with this issue. I have to give credit to CM Huizar's restrained operations approach here, and he appears to be in the minority.

SIDE NOTE- Mention of proposal at the State level, I believe, to legalize and tax marijuana has been made. The proposed tax would be $50 an ounce. A matter of dollars in their eyes has overtaken some legislators. The value is arbitrary and may even make illicit street sales more economical, promoting instead of reducing the trade of marijuana on the illegal market.

"Marijuana legalization bill approved by key Assembly committee- The measure, which would tax and regulate pot for users 21 and older, is unlikely to get additional consideration until next year." January 12, 2010By Patrick McGreevy
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/12/local/la-me-marijuana13-2010jan13


And that's it for city business as usual as it is.

SOME NEWS FOR LHS Alumni- An Alumni Association January Meeting This Saturday morning

Time for another meeting of the Alumni Association- 9:30 am in the Student Cafeteria- and the reminder is that this is the meeting where the group photo is taken of all those attending, so be forewarned. You don't have to be a dues-paying member to show up for the meetings, and it would be fine to come by to see what's going on (and get into the picture, too.).

The February Valentine's Dance that coming up is one topic and so will be the Day at the Races event coming in Santa Anita soon afterwards. There was a Shakey's Fundraising Night to be happening in Alhambra this month, but there is not much publicity, if any, at least any I have seen, and it may fizzle. So much for continuing communication. But this year is just starting out. There will be some Dodger nights as fundraisers this summer.

So remember the meeting is at the campus with unflattering mustard yellow paint job- it's ugly but it's durable. For a different view with a different color, go to the classmates.com photos of the school for that basic beige we were used to.

Well, come on down and check things for yourself.

ALTERNATIVE: SEE A CONGRESSMAN IN PERSON
There's a "Coffee with the Congressman" meeting Saturday at Glassell Park with Xavier Becerra at 11am in the Community Center at Verdugo and Eagle Rock Blvd. It's actually inside the Storage center structure, a pretty nice setup that is hidden from the outside. The entrance is at the rear by the driveway. It's an hour long session and if you are in the area you might stop by and hear what the Congressman has to say.

City Council Agenda Wednesday- Medical Marijuana ordinance and Lactation Rooms

Wednesday was another big day at City Council with agenda items for the Medical Marijuana ordinance coming up and Agenda Item 9, the creation of "lactation rooms" in city buildings.

There were more adjustments to proposed ordinance and just as Council Presiden Eric Garcetti was going to cut things short and skip public comment until next Tuesday when it would be time to see the new language of the proposed ordinance. Janice Hahn spoke up to make the downtown trip worthwhile for the crowd who still only had one minute to comment.

Next Tuesday, more comment is going to happen since the changes will then be presented. At yesterday's meeting, there were an assortment of reasons for "favoring" the marijuana dispensaries- and at this point, it's hard to draw the line between those present who have interest in a "recreational use" more so than a "medicinal use." Some of the Council Members are already influenced by the numbers and are saying "the medicinne" instead of marijuana. I hear CM Huizar fall back into this usage last month.

One concern voiced by my CM (Huizar) was the prevention of an "over-concentration" of Dispensaries in any area. From a language viewpoint, I think it should be just phrased, "avoiding a concentration" because "over-concentration" is an unnecessary redundancy- and I think THAT phrase might itself be redundant. If you notice, the language in city council and other political areas is very long and drawn out and then when you get these guys (and women) to speak in simple direct English, they over-simplify or make illogical statements.

I have heard people in science fields speak and it's another world, with more easily understool terms to explaing ideas and operations. But remember, those in the science fields WANT people to understand the concepts presented. Politicians usually don't have the same goal. Science people understand what they are trying to do- Check politicians and other than staying in office- they squirm to try to please the largest numbers of potential votes out there.

So, back to City Council and MMDs and Marijuana Ordinances- The big problem was HOW FAR (or the reverse view, "how CLOSE") can an MMD be to residential areas, residences and anything else. 1,000 feet was initially the plan, but Ed Reyes and Rosendahl appear to be the most lax in moving this along with Rosendahl ready to legalize marijuana without the Medical part needed. Garcetti, for all his slickness, is moving along the same direction.

I think that the move to favor "legalization" of marijuana in any degree, is influenced by the budget issues that L.A. is experiencing that may move to bankruptcy for the city at some point soon. The idea of taxation of the product has them with dollar signs in their eyes. The state level has some proposals for legalization of pot altogether with a proposed tax of $50 per ounce to get the some dollars from the deal. That tax might work to chase people back to street dealers who might undercut the price, but that "tax as a solution" is getting some desperate ideas to sprout. In any event, the federal law still would not allow a state's legalization to neutralize the federal statute, so things would just get more messy, not clearer.

And this marijuana ordinance is really wandering way off the path that the state law's apparent concept, as flawed as it may have been in providing any city with proper guidance. A lot of comment "for" the marijuana side really was off. The Council IS going to approve some ordinance. The question is really HOW STRICT will the terms be and HOW MANY shops/dispensaries will be actually be allowed to operate with the ordinance in place?

The Council, like other cities, could have just outright banned the MMDs in the first place and that looks like it could have been a wiser choice and then when things become clearer, re-visit the issue. What happened now is like some kind of Gold Rush era operation for people to get their feet in the door to get rich. That clearly is not part of the vision of the Compasionate Use Act. There were some speaking at the Council meeting who were treating this issue as a business and not as a true "collective," that from my memory of terms in my college days, was about a "group" effort, with a "profit" not the goal. Survival of the collective's efforts was the idea.

That's amounting to "sales" no matter what they want to call it. Some comments mentioned letting all the moms and pops make a living and right there, I think they missed the idea. The collective aspect is really just a break-even kind of deal, not a "maximize profit" idea that you see in corporate settings. It's really nearly a volunteer effort in it's basic form, but we have progressed and there sure will be some more "misinterpretations" brought out as we go along.

The classes in setting up MMDs were not for just the experience of being a service provider as much as there were aimed at having their "students" get in on a highly profitable enterprise.

The real patients who could benefit from the MMDs really are not helped by the recreational usage people who try to come in under the camouflaged "medically needy" side of things. They really hurt the idea. Making a stand for the outright legalization of marijuana and not hiding behind any medical purpose, would make that crowd more honest.

And I remember that there was some problems with the city department of Building and Safety from the hearings in the last few months on this topic- the B&S people kept falling back on the lack of staff to perform investigations and inspections due to shortages of staff. This is the same department that could not even determine which billboards were set up legally and which were built without any permits. That inablity will no doubt affect policing of the MMDs situation and the Coucil is trying to give them the lightest duty possible because, really, you know they will not be able to inpect properly in either degree or timeliness.

Well, that's the city and what they should be doing now is CUTTING expenses. For a different view on the process, see "L.A. City Council Delays Medical Marijuana Vote Until Jan. 19," BY DON DUNCAN in the Opposing View blog. http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opinion-l-a-city-council-delays-medical-marijuana-vote-until-jan-19-r-1263488990

Don Duncan, you may remember from the LA WEEKLY story last year, was probably the major consultant to city council members for how the MMD situation should be handled, especially as to formation of an ordinance according to the WEEKLY'S story. [for that story see-
"L.A.'s Medical-Weed Wars- How the potheads outwitted Antonio Villaraigosa and the L.A. City Council," By PATRICK RANGE MCDONALD AND CHRISTINE PELISEK Published on November 23, 2009 at 11:49pm- http://www.laweekly.com/2009-11-26/news/l-a-39-s-medical-weed-wars/ ]

BREAST FEEDING- CREATING LACTATION ROOMS IN CITY BUILDINGS, AGENDA ITEM 9.

That LACTATION ROOM creation was put off to JAN. 20 for further action- CM Cardenas really needs to step back and see the big picture- worry about keeping the city alive without getting to the details of making more expenses which are not essential. This is something that everyone needs to see. Tough out the times, and the lactation issues have continued for years and were dealt with before, maby not happily so, but it's not the time now to add to city woes.

And that's just opinion since I am not in on any of this, nor was my opinion requested by anyone in the city. You can probably see why.

LAUSD Adopts Policy on Charter Schools Disclosure and Disabled Students Compliance

The generally better performance on tests by charter school students is often criticized as being a result of the charter schools cherry picking the students. Another related criticism is that special education students are not represented in the charter school population to any significant degree or not at all. This looks like it will be changing.

The LAUSD has added a policy item for charter schools that will require financial disclosures or operators of charter schools and it will require compliance with providing services to disabled students.

The L.A. Times report also shows that the move was opposed by the association of charter schools

The story is in the report by Howard Blume in the L.A. Times, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/education/index.html -

"Charter leaders must disclose financial details and follow policy on disabled students," by Howard Blume, January 12, 2010 5:00 pm

Currently, the LAUSD is responsible for compliance with a court ruling know as the Modified Chanda Smith Decree that requires the services to be provided with results to be accomplished. It looks like the charter schools opening up now in the LAUSD areas of service will have to follow that requirement, and that, if it's the case, will definitely slow the advance of charter school openings.

I have long thought that there was that built in advantage that the charter schools have in not having to provide services for special education that LAUSD is required to do and that it was not a good thing at all.

The special education services provided by the district were at sub par level long ago and to some extent, continue now. The particular decree was was a response to what was determined to be shortcomings of the district's practices. There is a very full PowerPoint sumary of the operation of the decree at http://dse-web.lausd.k12.ca.us/sepg2s/mcd/mcd.pps if you have that program operating.

So the situation will be a little more interesting with that feature requiring compliance, and with the financial disclosure of operators that may reveal something, I am not sure what other than to see how holdings manipulated for some that makes "non-profit" something a little more worthwhile to some. Non-profit rarely means "volunteering" for anything, only that there is no money left over to be a profit once the bills are paid.

The District has a worksheet to evaluate charter school operation in this area when it comes to renewal of the charter- I didn't see any indication of how old these forms are, but you can see the kinds of things that are rated to the extent that those items apply:
http://notebook.lausd.net/pls/ptl/docs/PAGE/CA_LAUSD/FLDR_ORGANIZATIONS/FLDR_INSTRUCTIONAL_SVCS/CHARTER_SCHOOLS/CHARTER_SCHOOL_POLICY_DEV_DOCS/MICROSOFT%20WORD%20-%20RENEWAL%20CRITERIA%20%20FINDINGS--DRAFT.PDF

So now, we wait and see what way this policy will be effected by the LAUSD in going through applications for charter school operations in the district.

L.A. Radio.Com to continue into 2010- subscription optional

The web site, L.A. Radio.com www.laradio.com is beginining a new phase this year. It started out over 10 years ago as a small and free site with notes on radio and people, then evolved into something that missed very little in the radio scene, in front of and behind the mikes and across all the formats that you can find in Los Angeles. It turned into a subscription based site, but even that cost was pretty cheap, $36 or $39 for 12 months, Monday through Friday.

Don Barrett is the creator and manager of this site and there's not much that goes on in radio locally that he does not know about. He often finds out about things before many others in the news business do. Some of the on-the-air personalities have said that they check laradio.com everyday to see if they still have a job or if their station has been sold. You may have noticed that over the years, there's CBS and Clear Channel as examples of the major owners of dozens of stations in the U.S. It used to be that radio people would move over to other stations when it came time to move on (fired) since there used to be so many stations independently owned. That's a big change for now.

Leave it to the government to de-regulate things and now you have whole groups of stations in a single city owned by the same company. So if you lose your gig and the company didn't shift you to another one of their stations, your choices for other work were dramatically slimmed down since there were not that many "elsewheres" to check for jobs.

So, to continue with the impact of this change, if there used to be 5 stations with 5 general managers and 5 program directors now owned by one company, the trend was to have fewer, or even one person, do the job of the several. Lots of people were now out of work but the corporate goal was to make money and cut costs. This outranked the idea of service to the public with a quality product, an old idea that was followed by many stations in the radio industry of old.

There are still a few independents but you will see the corporate mark across the country where they have the same person doing voices for stations in different cities, and similar formats in the chain, like cookie-cutter products that are the same from one region to the next. And in the end you lose a lot of the personality that radio stations used to have that was created by the people that worked there.

But for the meantime, you can find out what's happening and what has happened in the past with people and where you favorite DJ's are or what happened to them over the years and currently, too, if you follow the pages of L.A. Radio.com.

The current version with news is now FREE, with additional features available for that low subscription price.

Break ends, LHS students return to classes for 2010

The LHS students return to class today after a 3-week break.

There will be a lot of challenges for the administration this year, as well as for the students. Look for the changes to be ongoing that will address the problems of the school's PI (performance improvement) status for 5 consecutive years. 3 consecutive years can create the opportunity for the State to take over a school, but the money issues connected to budget woes of the State probably keep that action on the back burner.

A change to future charter school operations may be a more probable outcome if improvements don't materialize. The State law changes to allow parents to move their children to better performing schools may help on an individual level but it's not the solution for most students.

Some changes to help the conditions would be adoption of school uniforms or serious dress code that is enforced, and some changes to establish a uniform policy that would control usage of cell phones and other electronic devices during the school day to reduce the level of classroom distractions.

There are a number of changes that can happen that will work to improving the performance of the students here and at other LAUSD schools. Until that happens, you will just have a lot of cases of spinning your wheels rather than any forward movement.

We will see what 2010 will bring.