L.A. City budget moves still on hold by Council; new taxes an idea- a bad one.

The Council is still not able to come to a decision to fill the deficit in the budget. Over $330,000 a day- I don't recall the exact quote off-hand- is the amount that is added to the deficit EACH DAY that no action happens, according to Miguel Santana, Chief Administrative Officer ("CAO"). Putting that another way, from the same source, you would have to add another 4 positions to the lay off to cover the additonal shortfall.

From the L.A. Daily News, "In crisis, city hall talks new tax hikes - Council faces 1,500 layoffs if revenues aren't found to offset a more than $200 million deficit," By Rick Orlov, Staff Writer, Updated: 02/03/2010 09:02:48 PM PST
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_14329429 Here's the idea and it's not a good one for taxpayers already living in a state with the highest taxes in the country:

As the City Council delayed a decision on making layoffs and eliminating city
departments to balance the deficit, some council members began talking Wednesday
about proposing new taxes to help ease the city's budget woes.

Councilman Bill Rosendahl suggested placing a parcel tax for an
undetermined amount on the November ballot to generate more revenue, in part to
help pay for the city's ballooning pension costs. Councilwoman Janice Hahn said
she wanted to consider submitting a variety of potential tax increases to
voters.

Bill Rosendahl is the same one who did not want to give up the Calligraphy people- and if that's something that stays in the budget in tough economic times, they you are in for problems in seeing what SHOULD go, if not that PURE LUXURY that serves to stroke people and businesses. Bill Rosendahl is one of the people behind kicking up the parking meter rates. Not anyone you would call "a friend of the public."

Aside from the mention of tax hikes, the story today adds that, "The council debated for six hours, with hundreds of city employees showing up to express their anger about potential layoffs." This is something of another luxury that happens only in this arena, the Los Angeles city government. It is something that most people in the private sector do not see in their jobs at all and it sounds pretty crazy when you study what's going on.

For the private sector, when the decision is made to do layoffs, usually there is not anything to do but pack up and leave. But take the City situation. It really amounts to having the employees blast the boss and then they expect to get some changing of minds as their reward. A real life, non-government job would have security called and out you go with that escort and it's over. And I don't think the city employees recognize what an oddity the system creates for them to do that. They do their work- of course they do, and was that supposed to be a unique thing for an employee? This is another place where we see reality drift off track again.

There was a photo in the L.A. Times today of a city worker wearing his bright safety vest and speaking during public comment. It said, as closely as I can remember, "What am I going to do for a job if I get laid off?" That happens to be everyone's thought in these times, and there is not going to be an easy answer.

But you know what? In city government, they flip flop so much in what the decision will finally be, that it often works. There is not that much resistance put up to the public pressure- and it's not the public, as here, it's employees. Anyone who gets a group together to fill up the seating in council chambers has a good chance of influencing outcomes. The Intimidation factor at work.

This is really why nothing happens. You might notice a theme, "We do our jobs" and "We work hard," but if you were the boss, wouldn't you say that that was the reason they got hired in the first place. That whole line of reaoning is lacking some real bsic logic, but you know with the layoff, it's financial and not performance that is mainly driving this.

And HERE, city council members have agreed to put off a decision for 30 days to decide what they will do. Meanwhile the meter is still running on mounting deficit until there's actioni actually happening.

But I will leave it at that and tell you later about the decision that WAS made: trash rate hikes for some seniors and disabled.

And how high will these proposed taxes be that will still probably be short when the time comes to find a figure?

I heard today that the revenues now compared to last year are at 97% of last year's and revenues have not been higher- the problem is in the way council and the mayor continue to spend and management continues to allow waste. There's lots of abuse in there, too, mostly known to insiders and not a whole lot of people willing to take responsibility to fix or report it.

So much needs to change here. If you agree with approving tax hikes, it's just making you an "enabler" to these spending junkies. Money is the fix for them. Elections are coming for the even-numbered council districts and new blood is called for since this crop of representatives is firmly set in their ways and it's not helping us; it's not getting the job done that they were hired to do.

And woe is us if ANY of them does becomes mayor- since being voters, we control that choice if there's enough to take that responsibility. It's bad enough now in the city with Tony V. , "the 11% Mayor"and you see he's not improved his habits one bit, even with increasing his staff to the 200 person range, they can't produce solutions. What about cutting THAT part of staffing? Those positions rate a pretty impressive pay check. Hmm?

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

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. ]

CD-2 election is next week- watch for who's getting money AND WHY.

The Council District 2 vacancy created by the election of ex-Council Member Wendy Greuel in March's election brings us 10 candidates for her former position.

Don't expect much change if CHRIS ESSEL, tagged as a carpet bagger who has not shown much knowledge of the CD-2 issues so far in the candidate forums, and ducked the radio forum on Keven James' show last week, also missed by Assemblyman Paul Krekorian who initially missed this because the Assembly was in session, later acknowledging it was not. ESSEL is a mayor's agent in my view, useless to CD-2 interests and dangerous if she's rubber-stamping TONY'S views in City Council meetings- like what you have now.

PAUL KREKORIAN is part of the career politician contingent who look for one postion after another to stay in any office. Pay for the Council is $178,00-plus per year (I earlier said incorrectly that it was $176,000.00 per year) plus about another $100,000.00 of benefits attached to the office.

The third BIG candidate is TAMAR GALATZIN, City Attorney AND LAUSD Board of Education member. She is doing well as a Board member, but I do not see a benefit if she leaves that job. A new election for another persson, also likely to be backed by the Mayor, as was GALATZIN, but diverges now and then from VILLARAIGOSA's desired actions. She would not be the best for the CD-2 interests although she's a good politician and speaks very well.

The GRASSROOTS candidates supply lots of variety among the spectrum of challengers.



DAVID "ZUMA DOGG" SALTSBURG has been continually involved in the city business and still is my choice. But I can't vote there, being in CD-14 with JOSE HUIZAR, an ally of the Mayor, who supported JOSE over the others to take office after TONY left us in CD-14 as Council Member to run for Mayor. That move was a preview of his self-centered ambitions overriding concern for constituents. SALTSBURG has learned what's going on at city hall where they don't like him for butting into their business and revealing informatin, but he's exposed a lot of their practices and showed that you can come to city hall and confront these guys (and women) on their lies. He's complained about special event waivers wasting money for years and Alarcon was so angry at the council voting changes that he said "Zuma Dogg should not be dictating city policy." Alarcon was so bitter while himself being so sneaky and continually sarcastic towards persons with opposing views.



Many more people are becoming clued in by SALTSBURG'S continuous presence at Council Meetings to the shady side of our representatives. Saltsburg translates things that are buried in legalese and "code" to show what's going on at the hands of the Council Members, and that's encouraged more involvement and promotes understanding of the maneuvers that city hall tries to slip by the public.

TODAY'S STORY IN THE TIMES.
From the L.A. Now section online,
"L.A. council candidate gets TV ad support from Assembly colleague as competitor cries foul," September 17, 2009 - Maeve Reston ,
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/la-council-candidate-gets-tv-ad-support-from-assembly-colleague-as-competitor-cries-foul.html This shows some big money coming from Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes (D-Sylmar) who spent $15,000.00 for a t.v. ad airing in the Valley that praises PAUL KREKORIAN, the money coming from Fuentes own campaign funds, as Fuentes says he was trying to show what a good job Krekorian has done. He did not specifically endorse or mention CD-2's election that barely keeps him on the legal side of the campaign funding rules.

MAYOR SAM'S BLOG also reference this with some commentary, too.
http://www.mayorsam.blogspot.com/ "Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes gives "Monetary Thanks" to CD 2 Council Candidate, err, Assemblyman Paul Krekorian." Thursday, September 17, 2009. The comments there tell you what you already may know or should know, that you can't trust these guys with lots of money to do things for anything but themselves first- and maybe think about you when it's election time somewhere down the road. Read the comments- remember that some of those come from Krekorian's supporters and staff, anonymously posting.

More on LAUSD- strike is barred, teacher performance based termination changes in law requested

A couple of stories on the LAUSD teacher issues are continuing in the news.

And L.A. Times story. "School board members acknowledge swifter firings are needed; Four L.A. Unified board members say state laws need to be changed to get rid of underperforming teachers. Support for such efforts has increased in the wake of a Times investigation." By Jason Song May 13, 2009.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/05/la-schools-supt-reacts-to-teacher-dismissal-controversy-and-flu.html

There's the expected reaction coming from the recent series in the L.A. Times about the many teachers that can't be fired and that still get paid while housed at Beaudry headquarters. The LAUSD Board wants to have the state change laws but the Times items showed that the problems often came from mishandling of complaints and the processing by personnel that should be responsible for attending to hiring and continuing supervision. A lot of the problem is of LAUSD's own processes that you just don't see in the private sector, or if you do see it, the condition changes very soon upon discovery, and the people responsible have their own jobs to worry about.

There needs to be action to remedy situations like the one presented in the Times story, sounding similar in history to the various cases of sexual abuse in the Catholic church, including the Los Angeles Archdiocese under the "leadership" of Roger Mahoney. You may recall that there was the constant moving of priests and others accused or suspected of sexual abuse, instead of addressing the situation appropriately to end the conduct. Sometimes the people new location had some idea of the earlier problems and many times, nothing of the sort was mentioned, and the conduct was repeated upon other victims, usually children. The Archdiocese undeniably received favored treatment by law enforcement during investigations, and no one came in to clean out files and other records like what happens in other cases where it's not a church involved.

So let's not forget that. You had the D.A.'s office as another entity entangled with politics, not wanting to stir up a hornet's nest of controversy- but who suffers from that? It's justice that was shortchanged. It didn't help the victims. That entire scenario was not a good model to follow, but the impact on victims is no less serious when it's in the schools and not the church. In both cases, positions of respect and confidence allowed vulnerabilities of victims to be exploited.

The idea of easing restrictions on how a teacher can be terminated is one of the things that the Board voted for by a majority. President Monica Garcia is one of the persons usually in the union's corner, in the tradition of her benefactor, Mayor Villaraigosa.

Board President Monica Garcia, among others, cautioned that the solution would
be complicated and needed careful study.

Garcia seems to favor "studies" that are costly and that still leave you without any changes when much time has passed and much money has been spent. It seems that she is, in her own way, "running interference" for the union.

Look at her colleague, Board member Yolie Flores Aguilar, recently in the news when getting a big chunk of tax dollars as salary for consulting for state Sen. Gloria Romero, "Yolie Flores Aguilar, a longtime friend and political ally of some powerful California Democrats, last year supplemented her income as vice president of the Los Angeles school board with more than $32,000 as a consultant assigned to a state Senate committee that, during her tenure, did not meet or release any reports, " from the story, "California jobs go to those with connections; Lawmakers can hire anyone they choose. Sometimes that means friends and family." By Patrick McGreevy, March 27, 2009 http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-nepotism27-2009mar27,0,1567133.story

Flores Aguilar is in step with Garcia's view of this situation,

"We need a comprehensive strategy, we need to present a well-thought-out
legislation, and we [need] someone who will carry legislation. We have to do all
of our homework," said board member Yolie Flores Aguilar.

It all makes you wonder how anything will change when you have such an influence of politics overshadowing the need to act responsibly which is not always to stall things with a "study" but instead to move on making changes. Maybe one of the most significant changes you could ever see would be something done INTERNALLY to make the Headquarters and Sub-District offices do a better job to keep everything up to date. Some training in legal issues would help and some teacher and administrator training to avoid allowing the conditions that create lawsuits. And another improvement might be a novel one: using some common sense, often a scarce commodity in bureaucracies, as I have noticed over the years with many governmental agencies. When somebody asks for explanations for things, there should be prompt and good ones. There should not be cases where people have to construct lies or, maybe notice at that point, that what they have is not a completely responsible situation and they should not have let it get to that condition.

A lot can be done NOW to make the District act responsively instead of being a runaway train that will either crash or take miles and miles to slow down for control to be regained.

The other story is continuing from yesterday's L.A. Times story on the court order stopping a strike- updated for May 13, 2009- "Judge prohibits L.A. teachers strike; He grants a restraining order against the walkout planned for Friday, saying it defies the United Teachers union contract." By Howard Blume May 13, 2009 http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lausd-strike13-2009may13,0,1958124.story

This strike is still something that many wanted to participate in but the law is what controls. If any complaints are to be made by UTLA members, complain to your negotiators who made up the contract. They could look into seniority as the controlling factor for layoff notices while they are at it.

You see in the story that there still was an impact from the threat of the strike, where cancellations of events and changes in schedules had to be made in anticipation of the strike happening, including a Lincoln High trip to Glendale Community College. While maybe not all people are going to college, the things like this trip being lost for that day is another waste of time in the planning and need for rescheduling. Exposure of even Community College facilities to many students is often enlightening. Many have not been exposed to what many of us now take for granted as know by all. Students don't necessarily "know all" about anything, and assuming so itself is a reason for a less-than-the-best learning environment to be presented. Such things like a strike that upset the school day have to be subordinate to what gets an educational experience accomplished for students at every opportunity.

Lots in this area- imparting personal knowledge and skill- can be helped along by persons with such personal knowledge showing many or even just a few students, those things that they otherwise would have to learn about from reading books, or from "field trips," and maybe not learning at all. There are so many people who are themselves potential resources for information that would be able to give students a richer learning experience, more easily getting students "engaged" in the process to perform better academically and at least be sure of what they do know from such mentors efforts.

The mentor approach is something that even I as a former teacher and alum of the school don't hear about as "happening." If I were a parent of an LHS student I might have that information, but even there, I am not sure that parents, in general, know much about what happens in school. I see numerous learning opportunities lost through the short-sightedness of people in administrative roles who remain confined in thought to ritualistic procedures. Some other approaches that seem to be "new" are often explored, including the "small learning academies" ("SLCs") that still don't make complete sense to me- if small is the only way to educate, then why do other districts with comparable populations have academic performance so much better without resorting to SLCs?

I will get into SLC discussions later and I don't think it's the panacea for the poor performance that many believe it to be.

"Assembly Leaders Withdraw Staffers' Pay Hikes"

That was the next day's story L.A. Times headline following the Part 1 pay hike announcement. "Assembly leaders withdraw staffers' pay hikes; Speaker Karen Bass and minority leader Michael Villines acknowledge that the raises for 136 were ill-advised, given the state's budget crisis," by Patrick McGreevy, April 23, 2009, Los Angeles Times. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-govt-payraise23-2009apr23,0,4194428.story What a difference a day makes. The alarm clock went off and somebody finally woke up there. The comment and speculation in the story go beyond the simple observation that giving raises was the worst choice of actions under the current circumstances. And again, I remind you that these two, Karen Bass and Mike Villines are the leaders of their respective parties in state Assembly, so contrary to their actions, they cannot be complete idiots, but they are obviously capable of making idiotic decisions. And that demonstration alone should cause you to become vigilant as a voter and not eat up all that is spooned up for you by any politician without applying your own independent examination of what's there. You may soon discover more reasons to examine more things that they do "for the good of the public."

The story noted that the hopes for the politicians to have the voters approve their tax plans was damaged by this move. Bass made a few more comments that have her own way of interpreting things built in.

"I absolutely don't want the people who oppose public education to use this as some sort of club against the responsible, urgently needed ballot initiatives Californians will be voting on," Bass said at a Capitol news conference. She said she would not rule out future pay hikes.

When she says "people who oppose public education" she's way off base. The opposition to the idea of carrying a heavier tax burden does NOT in any way automatically mean anyone is against public education. Public education is a good thing, but it's not done very well, especially here in L.A. where it looks to be done poorly. The Bass comment reflects her own perception of persons with opposing viewpoints, and unless you agree here, then you are "against public education."

Secondly, Bass included for a description, "the responsible, urgently needed ballot initiatives..." and that's HER opinion. The ballot initiatives themselves are not "responsible" but are to remedy irresponsible spending by the legislature. The "urgently needed" part is BECAUSE of the financial hole that they have dug for California. Absolutely NO responsibility is ever taken by politicians for HOW things came to be. They only tell you how bad the situation is NOW, as if it was a surprise to everyone that it happened.

And, lastly, think for a moment about Bass's comment, "She said she would not rule out future pay hikes." Politicians, both appointed and elected, along with their staffs, go into public service nowadays without any real acknowledgment of the idea that they are supposed to be "Public Servants." As such, they are supposed to work for the good of the public above all else. You are not supposed to come away from such a job with the idea of achieving any accumulation of wealth, but many do have that objective in their mind and act on it. Expecting pay raises, especially in a very troubled economy, is wrong. If there is not enough money in that job as it is, then leave. There is no one FORCED to enter public service, and all go into it with their eyes wide open. If an easy payday is the real attitude held, it's and expectation that needs to be changed and automatic or large pay raises should not be assumed.

[Jon] Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., also is suspicious that Bass did not rule out raises later this year.

"The implication of what the speaker said is that she will be open to the raises after the election," he said.

The story shows the attempt to be postive on the big error made. The tax measures on the next ballot (May 19) really are loaded with more taxes and deception that the legislators purposely put in to achieve their goal of approval of the tax measures. Giving them more money only allows them to waste more money as this "pay raise" choice of action was a sort of "Freudian slip" but in a non-verbal level of expression of the real nature of their thoughts.

Google searches of the topic will show you more of the same type of spin applied for all the governmental-side screw ups. The only thing that the legislators really work on is trying to figure out WHICH people they want to tax and HOW MUCH it will be.

And, that's at the state level. The city-level style of operation is about the same. It's hard to have a positive attitude about this, other than to try to reduce the amount of waste and self-indulgence undertaken by the persons paid to do a job and not let such things slip by unnoticed.

A private sector remedy for such things is "termination." The public sector remedy is different. It's usually only elections as your main opportunity to be heard- and they CAN be "fired" by NOT re-electing them. As too often seen, it's now becoming deception done as a cooperative effort of both parties as mentioned here with the ballot measures, and not telling you the truth. In that case, when elections do come, a concerted effort to NOT re-elect that party member can send the strongest message for changing their ways. Most politicians don't worry about it since it's not happened before, but only recently becoming used as a remedial device. They are so arrogant and in need of a reality check, courtesy of the voters. That attitude of theirs has got to change and it can be changed this way

Karen Bass, Assembly Speaker, Approves Huge Raises to Staff in Cash Strapped Economy

As a review of the past week's "bad judgment" example by an elected state legislator, I bring to you Karen Bass, Assembly Speaker. Karen Bass is the successor to Fabian Nunez as assembly speaker who was termed out of office last fall after living a lavish life on other people's money during the time he was supposed to have "our" best interests at heart. Nunez's son was recently indicted for the stabbing murder in October of a San Diego student while the younger Nunez was visiting the area with friends from Sacramento. They are also charged with the murder.

But that's all another story and Karen Bass has another kind of problem. Bass really stepped into a big pile of her own doing by approving over half a billion dollars in pay raises to 136 staff members. Bass maybe had a mental blackout for that period of time, enough cause her to forget that the State is a bit short on cash, while it furloughed workers and has approved the largest tax increase in the history of California- and presenting more taxes for approval to the voters on the May 19th election.

The L.A. Times, in case you missed it, captures the lurid details of a cash grab. The story presents us with the inescapable conclusion that the elected officials believe that they are ruled by some other form of laws than the rest of us, and that they are ENTITLED to raises, large ones, no matter what financial chaos the rest of the state or the world is experiencing. "State Assembly leaders hand out staff raises; Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) and minority leader Michael Villines (R-Clovis) give 136 staffers increases totaling $551,000," By Patrick McGreevy, April 22, 2009 Los Angeles Times. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-govt-payraise22-2009apr22,0,3407994.story Mike Villines, Republican minority leader was right up there with Bass in making what surely would qualify as a "politically incorrect" move if ever there was one.

Bass, besides approving the raises, made some idiotic comments besides by which she tried to justify the raises.

Bass said the raises would be more than offset by a $15-million reduction
in the Assembly's operating budget that included the elimination of 20
jobs.

"I'm trying to streamline my operations," Bass said. "That allows me to
give a 5% raise to staff who haven't had a raise in three years."

This is one of those situations where, when somebody who finds themeself in a hole, needs to stop digging. By her very statement, she acknowledges losses of jobs. I don't need to make any analogies at this point, but the situation is ripe for some. Mike Villines did not want to be left out of the "Let's make a stupid statement" competition as the L.A. Times story reports more,

Villines similarly said the raises would be paid for by "significant spending reductions to our budget."

In this case, the inability on the part of LEADERS of the legislature to grasp the hypocrisy while displaying utterly selfish greed at taxpayer expense makes this action all the more outrageous. If they are unable to see the picture in front of their face, what other things are they fouling up? And maybe they aren't "lying" about the reasons for the raises, but lying would probably have made them look less absurd in the positions taken on the matter.

The story was the beginning of the escapade into financially irresponsible behavior. Like many talk show hosts come to realize in reporting on politics and the unbelievable things that people do, "You can't make this stuff up." The next part of this story comes almost immediately in some very lame attempt to make stupid moves sound reasonable. Standby for part 2.

Then and Now, Predictions- L.A. high schools and L.A. life-

Checking the L.A. Times, with the “Then and Now” feature for Sunday that has a pretty interesting picture attached of Charlton Heston from the movie, “Earthquake,” that is representative the story topic, “A world of end-of-the-world predictions; End-of-the-world predictions and tales of catastrophe have long been part of the Southland's culture,” by Steve Harvey, March 22, 2009. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-then22-2009mar22,0,909297.story The local predictions from the past are brought out in the story and showing us some effects that they had on the people of the times. The 1953 movie, “War of the Worlds,” used Los Angeles as the scene of the alien attack, and I remember it well from the “Noon Movie” presentation at Lincoln, (3 days at 10 cents a segment) or it could have been at Nightingale, for that matter (5 days at 5 cents each). I remember the H.G. Wells’ “The Time Machine,” too, as a noon movie favorite, but that’s another topic for another day.

The look to the past brought little known details out, as usual with Steve Harvey (the columnist, not the comedian and radio host), and I found something that many younger people today might have been puzzled by at the end of the article. Harvey writes about the experience of one guy, “East L.A.-born Val Rodriguez, then a Roosevelt High School student. Rodriguez ditched school the day before the world was to end.”

It was not his excuse that I found as the surprise in the story, but the simple mention of his punishment barely avoided-

“The attendance counselor called the boys' VP, who in turn called the principal
to hear my excuse. They bought it! No swats.”

“No swats?” Do you remember those days in high school? Well, not from the 40’s- then you really have some years on we of the 60’s generation- but “swats” in high school when it was commonplace. I hadn’t thought of swats in school for awhile, although when I was teaching, it was a topic of retro-days at Lincoln High School that had the students amazed at such a thing happening. The thought of having that practice revived ocassionally crossed my mind with some of the student behavior that I encountered. Then the recollection of the turmoil caused by the teacher who put duct tape on talkative student’s mouth a few years back was the next thing that usually came to mind and that was that, more that enough for the fleeting thought to exit consideration immediately.

Occasionally, as I think of the old reasons for the "Walkouts" of 1968, I wonder whether swats were a part of the school assortment of disciplinary measures used district-wide, or did we have more of that applied more generously on "our side" of town? I don't recall comparing notes with others at college who attended "non-Eastside" high schools in L.A., or even bringing it up later. I'm just now thinking that there was a difference based on geography, which meant "school population," but at that time there were lots of differences for that reason anyway. The "Walkouts" were supposed to be about such things being handled "differently" at Eastside schools.

I don't want to be like Tony Cardenas, an L.A. Council Member who regularly slips in his digs at "us" and "them" and is such an example of a divisive element in local government. Example: One day last year in a Council Meeting, Cardenas said, in connection with LAPD officers acting as something of mentors or volunteers in recreational activities at local parks, "Police should not have any contact with our youth unless there is an official reason," and I paraphrase that, and continue with his take on the situaton, "Parents on the West Side would not tolerate that."

I see some history of "Police v. Tony Cardenas and bad experience" in the crystal ball for that one. The dichotomy of attitudes shown by Cardenas when it comes to police is undeniable. You see that when topics of crime fighting and working with the community are raised, and when congratulations are presented to police officers. Cardenas is right there with the routine praise- Kind of like Jose Huizar's actions when there was a shooting, a fatal one, of a suspected gang memember by an LAPD officer following a foot chase in Ramona Gardens last year.

Jose gets called to the scene at night and is prodded by local residents so he says, "I will be demanding an independent investigation tomorrow." There was an earlier incident, I don't recall which it was, but Jose wanted to be on the "community's" side, and in so doing, effectively said, "LAPD, I don't trust your organization to be honest. I don't trust the D.A.'s office to do a fair investigation of the "Officer-Involved shooting." The smoke barely had cleared on the location, and Huizar's making these accusatory statements when the LAPD had not even finished a preliminary sorting of what happened, yet to Huizar's already putting the blame them by calling for the "independent" investigation.

It was very revealing of the attitudes held by Huizar towards the operation of the police department and the critical view he must have held about the processes that are put into place for investigating shooting situations. A little premature to challenge anyone's veracity in the investigation process, I thought at the time, but Huizar's continual dilemma is choosing what to say and when to say it. Often it's poorly done by Jose, usually a risk when entering discussions on topics during Council meetings. Regardless of the intent, what it sounds like is not very well thought out. Think of the President on Leno's show last Thursday night for another example of choosing to speak at the wrong time on the wrong thing.

But getting to the immediate story again, just a little of the past is brought back to us in a few lines in a story. For another thought of the days past, do you remember when a call from anyone at school was something to be avoided at all costs? Nowadays, many home numbers for students on the speed dial of their teachers’ cell phones. There's more need now to call but there's not much changed after the call for many of the cases. Times change.

Too much Homework is stressing out students- ?

HOMEWORK- something that most students don’t want to think about on a weekend, especially a good one like we’re having now with a little morning rinse off and then sunshine again. There’s a story in the L.A. Times today that shows there is a trend to reducing or cutting out most homework for students. “Some schools are cutting back on homework: When is homework just busywork? Weighing stress against learning, some districts are cutting back on academic work outside the classroom,” by Seema Mehta, March 22, 2009. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-homework22-2009mar22,0,1964937.story That’s kind of an odd situation from my viewpoint, but I’ll get to that later. The story mentions that there has been so much homework placed upon students that they don’t have time to be kids. The students get so stressed out by having to keep up with assignments, especially on the weekends, that it interferes with other activities.

There’s a short recap of homework being disfavored by educators at other times in history, but the idea that there should be no busy work is a little more understandable. Some comments are presented with the opinion that the forced reading makes children more resistant to reading on their own for enjoyment. There is a variable on the amount of homework that is given according to the grade level of the student. The story is still not convincing me that there is too much homework for children to handle.

But my opinion comes from my own experience at Lincoln High. The story’s point has to be based upon the important consideration that these students ARE DOING all the assigned homework. I suppose there is still some stress when the students continue to IGNORE or struggle with getting homework assignments partially done. I tried to give a little each day, hoping that the doing some work in the subject at different time of the day might help them actually learn the subjects a little more.

But as a more productive activity, my students would probably have been getting more out of being in school longer each day than having to be on their own with homework. I don’t think I gave much homework in the overall picture of a semester's time simply because the bottleneck in the path to moving ahead was reading. Plain and simple, the reading skills were poor, generally, and THAT was the key to having all the rest of school work become something that the students could handle at an appropriate, or even outstanding level.

If anything, being able to do homework on a regular basis- and not at amounts that will require the same daily amount of hours as the school day- will get their work habits up so that they will be better able to function AFTER they get out of high school. With the dropout level as high as it’s been, if students don’t meet some success at school SOMEWHERE, either in academics or other school activities, they become candidates for increasing absenteeism, declining grades, loss of social acceptance, and then dropping out begins to make sense to them.

Like I said, the story’s premise has to assume students are doing all the homework. My experience doesn’t have that many students doing all the homework, or even able to handle much of what should be homework. What I think would help would be more monitoring of the progress after assessments are made of work level for the students, so that they don’t fall more behind. They need to catch up to grade level in most cases where I was assigned, and that’s a different problem to add to the job of teaching.

Most students had more potential that was not being realized- and who doesn’t? - but in their cases, the ones that were my students, the non-achievement often led to anti-social behavior that accelerated poorer performance in academics and in regular school socialization. And that was long before they reached me in the chain of events that is LAUSD's social promotion. I won’t even get into the influence of the gang environment in high school, yet another factor in how the high school experience is handled by students of today in Los Angeles.

Homework has several functions and deciding which are the most important ones for your purposes- and it should be educating the student- will be what influences when and what kind and how much homework you will assign. It all depends. How's that for a definitive answer on the matter?

Wendy Greuel, City Controller-elect, Loves You.

Checking the blog, www.ronkayela.com run by Ron Kaye, former editor of the L.A. Daily News, His short-and-to-the-point blog entry, "Wendy Greuel Loves You, Needs You, Hears You..."notes Wendy Greuel's message that's spread by her emailed newsletter. You might remember that Wendy, currently representing CD-2, won the election last month for City Controller. You might also remember that Wendy has been one of Antonio Villaraigosa's strongest supporters on the City Council, with nary a hostile word ever directed at his administration by her. Her message was that "the voters have spoken." The "Comments" here have some of them being even more vivid in their lack of faith in Greuel and their suspicion that the strong friendship with Villaraigosa is going to affect her decisions.

You can put all this together with the nature of the city office she won, City Controller. In that capacity, current Controller, Laura Chick, conducted audits showing item after item of city waste and irresponsible conduct in the handling of taxpayer money. We found that the city has a small fleet of cars that are assigned full-time to quite a few more people than really have a reason to have them, and the city credit card were gettting a workout, some cards doing several fill-up on the same day at gas stations instead of at the city's pumps. The Controller is the city watchdog over operations and spending behavior.

Laura Chick was aggressive in that job, often embarrassing the city hall administration of Villaraigosa, and getting City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo so bothered that he filed a lawsuit against Chick to stop an audit of his office. Incidentally, Chick went to City Council for funding to defend herself against that action and under Council President Garcetti's profound lack of support for Chick, she was denied that support even though she was acting in well withing the course and scope of her duties, but that's how bad Council performs.

The L.A. Times "Opinion L.A." editorial of December 11, 2008, was on the right side on this one, despite the accusatory tone carrited by the title, "An Impatient Chick," http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2008/12/an-impatient-ch.html, and the reader comments in large part are supportive of the actions of Chick.

Keep a watch on Greuel to see her actions. I think that the voters made a horrible choice among the candidates. That's based on the reasons described above that are by no means all that apply here and I see the "checks and balances" in government rapidly disappearing in City Hall as far as the Controller's position is involved. And DON'T vote for WEISS for City Attorney or you'll see a rubber-stamp for whatever Villaraigosa wants, leaving the citizens needs in second place. In that runoff election next month, Trutanich is the only choice to very literally safeguard ourselves.

Words tend to carry very flexible meanings and in politics they just have minimal value without being put into action to show the commitment. And those upcoming actions will be the truest test for Greuel, since her actions duirng her City Council membership did not do much to hint that she could do the job.

LAUSD v UTLA, Layoffs coming, but how many?

The LAUSD Board meeting on Tuesday was lively with UTLA, the teachers union, staging a demonstration in opposition to the budget-driven plans for teacher layoffs. I heard union president, A.J. Duffy, in a clip that was a good one to get the tone of yesterday’s actions. His speech was all about not accepting any layoffs of teachers and the comparisons he made to justify his union's actions, as well as get tons of points with members (and that's always good for a dues-collecting union) is very distorted.

Duffy said that this was a civil rights matter now. I disagree.

The “civil rights” label has now turned into anything anybody complains about- if so, then Octo-mom is on her own civil rights crusade. One big reason that I have for denying that the cause presented by A.J. Duffy is not a civil rights issue is that the TEACHER'S WERE NOT BORN with the teaching job, and that is not the only employment they are suited for. This is where drawing any parallel to the civil rights movement fails.

The teachers are not like Blacks or any ethnic groups that are stuck with who they are as a matter clearly beyond their personal control. The teachers specifically chose to be teachers, going into this career with their eyes open, as they are supposedly educated (and that's a stretch for some) and they were warned by so many before entering the teaching path- I know I was by many- of the pitfalls that they would be facing.

You don't do it for the money- at least it's not there for about 8 years of salary scale steps, but the health benefits were unbeatable, a big consolation. But teaching can make you feel so much better about what you do with your time and what you leave behind in the education of individuals than a lot of other jobs could ever do.

You cannot honestly equate civil rights struggles with the current economic realities. There is not any hate or disdain for the group, the teachers- here that you have seen for the real civil rights predecessors in history. You cannot honestly say that there is such a feeling present, either. If so, you really are ignorant of principles of business and economy, maybe even government administration, but especially you are bad at math if you think there should be no firings when the money needed comes up short.

In Federal Government service, where I spent many years- the layoffs were called "Reductions in Force" or “RIFs” and we were always aware of it as a hazard of the budgetary formulations. It has a better ring to it and captures the meaning more accurately than "lay-off." The case with the LAUSD jobs will be controlled by “Seniority” as the operative factor. One’s PERFORMANCE level has nothing to do with determining which teachers are getting cut, otherwise you might have some cause for complaint.

In the end, you're out of a job, and that's the bottom line from the teacher's side. And that's the side that the UNION is FIRST concerned with. How can you justify KEEPING ALL for teaching if (1.) enrollment is downs about half a million over 5 or so years? (2.) How can you say no layoffs should happen if there is less money to go around? (3.) You see in the news that jobs are getting wiped out and companies are closing all over the country. You have to see that it is going to affect you in some way if you are a teacher in the LAUSD, or are teachers that insulated from current events?

The budget deficit is really what controls. Superintendent Ramon Cortines said that if there were personnel cuts, he would first get out the non-classroom personnel (but he didn't say ALL of them would be let go; they DO have a few there to operate the District, even though sloppily), and those ex-teachers among them will bump classroom teachers by the seniority rules that Duffy’s very same union follows, and likely created.

SOMEBODY has to go but it's not ALL- and the pink slipping has to be done at this time as a mandatory notice prerequisite to any layoff. Should it not be done properly, LAUSD has itself painted into a corner- AGAIN. Everyone receiving notice is not getting cut, but that's the pool from which to select and they have to have a margin that will give with the budget numbers.

To say that it's a civil rights cause is to defile the notion of civil rights, as very similarly neutering the magnitude of horror when someone makes a comparison and says that somebody "is like Hitler." It’s like comparing by saying a firefly is like the sun. That image comparison might better illustrate the disparity between what you have and what is truly a civil rights issue. This will never approach the level of a civil rights matter if there is no immutable characteristic involved, and being a teacher does not satisfy that element. I would say simply, “Get real.”

It's all grandstanding, and it's that demagoguery they in ordinary politics use when the tax dollars are going low, that causes them they trot out the cops and firefighters to say "We might not be there when you need us," to let the people cough up the money like some kind of ransom to end the takeover of public safety. That is distorting the picture but then this IS a political process.

However, with teachers- there's not too much sympathy for them coming from those people who are losing jobs and may be without good benefits even if they still are working. The only leverage there is that the teachers have "your kids" and that's the whole key to ANY STRATEGY for gathering support.

If something affects your kids, you are probably going to be very interested. BUT you already see that LAUSD has only pockets of unified parent involvement to begin with- in lots of other areas many are not carrying their own responsibility as a parent, and THAT'S a large, if not the largest, reason for poor student performance (and behavior) in LAUSD schools.

A word to the wise: IF A UNION'S INVOLVED - like the variation on politicians that they really are- you have to be vigilant and dig deeper into the facts. DUFFY'S speech, as loaded as it was with images of history and the personalities of the civil rights movement of the last century, is still just too cheap a pitch to buy. But because many teachers (an important job, of course) are too carried away with themselves in the moment and with a few who are too full of themselves regularly, they rally behind him.

Did you hear Monica Garcia trying to cope with this disruption? She's the recipient now, but being the "cause" person that she is, had to comment to validate the union's "civil disobedience." This "demonstration" of dozens was nearly the leading story in television news. It is a significant event but not enormous or even very big in terms of numbers participating. Compare coverage with that given the anti-tax protest hosted by KFI radio’s John & Ken team this past weekend. There were estimates of thousands, at least 15,000, there in Fullerton. Some estimated lower but they either were there very early, or have just tried to play down the impact to balance against their own reasons for not giving it proper coverage as a news story. It was virtually - no, actually- ignored by the L.A. TIMES, and covered more briefly by other newspapers, while it is unquestionably a topic that will hit most Californians dramatically.

In this poor economic time, trying to make the teachers’ ranks “layoff-proof” is not a practical expectation and further, if a teachers strike goes beyond only discussion, besides battling the public’s indifference or inattention, the union will have to contend with hostility of the those who have no jobs and on the brink of financial ruin.

Some layoffs are inevitable, and some readjustment of the structure of the LAUSD administration is needed but it will not be seen in the short term. Converting to smaller districts with better accountability would be an improvement, but that, too, is not going to happen in the immediate future. Meanwhile, everyone suffers and the student performance is unlikely to improve.

THE LA TIMES Makes an Ass-Backwards endorsement of ANTONIO FOR MAYOR

L.A. TIMES made another endorsement Saturday and this one is for the MAYOR- pure half assed L.A. TIMES style they have adopted of late. The to-the-point title is all it means: "Reelect Villaraigosa, The mayor deserves a second term. But we hope he'll keep his focus on L.A., not Sacramento" http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-mayor21-2009feb21,0,2274323.story The basis for this is a self-delusional view of things in Los Angeles, more like comments that a Villaraigosa employee would say about his boss than an objective evaluation.

All the bad things listed and the more villainous things- power broker and such- are what they HIGHLIGHT as positives, ignoring that as the "red flag" warning for seeing his personal exploitation of the office. A truly puzzling approach and miserable assembly of a conclusion when you think of making a current crisis even worse by a re-election of Tony.

The L.A. TIMES editorial person has listed numerous errors of the Mayor, but did not think they were errors, like being out of the city so often and rarely being found in his office where you might think he would be. The L.A. TIMES says that’s a good thing. So many reverse things in this assessment of the Mayor’s first term in office. The “power” of the Mayor is another item that wins over the L.A. TIMES. So, getting the people to vote a monstrous amount that will tax them for decade before they ever see it, it it’s done at all is supposed to be a “good” thing, according to the editorial.

And the editorial says, in effect, “Well, we endorse him and he should stay a full term if he’s re-elected to finish what he started.” Well, L.A. TIMES, you must be living in a parallel universe and see too much backwards.

NOT ONE mention of Tony's obsession for climbing the political ladder and TONY’S fresh announcement that CANNOT promise to serve a full term if elected as mayor since he’s considering running for Governor. “Considering?” That has been in his plans for years- who is he kidding? L.A. TIMES, what about that?

Purely a job of wishful thinking by the L.A. TIMES, as it did with WENDY GRUEL’s rap-sheet list of problems, including being so very close to the Mayor and his views, then giving her the endorsement for the office of “City Controller.” What?

Why endorse her at all or Tony? There's more there past what meets the eye and it can’t be good.

The LA TIMES also badly misinterpreted as more "positives" all the self-promotion and manipulations by Tony to get what they call his "achievements." Are they traveling out of town with him and miss seeing what’s going on in L.A. or what?

For one example: It's so clear; he's effed up people with his accelerated trash fees from the gradual step-increases planned to spread over years to 2011. He “asked” city council to move it all up as an urgent need, to begin in September 2008, the to be able to claim that 1000-officer boost to the LAPD. $11 a month is now about $36 a month, billed with your so high DWP bill every 2 months, so about $72 now is there per bill for each home. Ouch. On top of that, the money was not all spent for hiring the cops as “promised” and MORE money was still needed. It never ends.

So what if TONY’s career boost has jammed everyone's personal budget, and creates more financial distress for people already stretched thin on money? The IMPORTANT thing is that Tony gets another paragraph of “achievement” to add to his campaign brochure for the next office, and who knows how much of our money he will spend to get himself there if re-elected.

Tony's whole show is all about that and the L.A. TIMES missed it completely- no credibility there at all. They might as well have just printed TONY’s campaign mailer if they don’t want to waste time with examining REAL facts. It must be that parallel universe explanation. Anything else would be a crime.

The L.A. Times puts up a "City Elections" stories page that makes for some good reading

The Los Angeles Times has collected their stories on the City Election and for those of you who don't like to rely on television ads for "truth." This page, with the stories and comments, brings some really refreshing actions out into the public view, some things that would not be getting out if some candidates and other politicians had their way.

There is a story about Jane Usher an attorney who resigned from her position as the President of the city's Planning Commission after seeing some real problems going on and making her views public. The views were not what the Mayor wanted to hear or be spoken from somebody he put into the position and she resigned a couple of months ago.

"Sharp words in race for L.A. city attorney
Prominent ex-planning commissioner backs Nuch Trutanich, takes a swipe at Jack Weiss' 'reliance' on lobbyists, " by David Zahniser, February 12, 2009.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-city-attorney-race12-2009feb12,0,4018471.story

Ms. Usher has decided to endorse Trutanuch as City Attorney hopeful, and that means a complete split from Villaraigosa, who supports JACK WEISS for the office. (Do not confuse Jack Weiss [bad] with Noel Weiss [good] both running for City Attorney.) For Jack, think of Mayor Villaraigosa saying "Jump!" to "JUMPING JACK FLASH" WEISS, who will answer "How high?"and you will have an easier time sorting out who's who with the Weisses. Noel will say "NO"- so that image should help.


But read the story, very short and to the point. Ms. Usher just makes her displeasure so clear, and the descriptions of JACK WEISS and current City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo are pretty much so on-target. Other politicians who, like the Mayor, endorse JACK are all Tony's political buddies and the phrase, "What do you expect them to say?" applies here. They are doing the favor for old Tony, as some of them got Tony's help to get into their own offices.