Another report on waste of tax $$ on vanity- First Ridley-Thomas, then 10 DWP unknowns; And a word on Villaraigosa's speech.

The story a month or so back in the L.A. Times reported on how there's some pretty big chunks of money that wer not in the interest of the public. It included the $25,000.00 that L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas paid to be included in "Who's Who in Black Los Angeles." in a way that you would put an ad in the Yellow Pages. And this would be his own venture into narcissism and I or many others would not really care, as the public offices are peppered with knuckleheads when it comes to having problems maintaining any personal integrity or dignity.

But Steve Lopez wrote about that and more who have shelled out public money for this same personal luxury today in the LA. TIMES - "Who's Who with whose funds? - L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley Thomas spent $25,000 for a spot in "Who's Who in Black Los Angeles." The DWP also put down ratepayer funds to spotlight 10 of its top leaders in the book." L.A. Times, April 21, 2010.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopezcolumn-20100421,0,7882706.column

There realy is no accountability by many politicians- dare I say "most polititcians" as well? Lopez makes this some interesting reading if it only it didn't hurt the tax payer. This is the kind of thing that is in line with campaigning for office and maybe even crosses the line of permissible use of public money and it shows that no one is watching the store. When confronted, you can bet there's some idiotic reason they can dream up (they have lots of practice at being idiotic). Another insult added to injury for us out in the public is that these people usually have a nice and secure payday and benefits, which is the case just by knowing that they work for the DWP.

More people should send some words of appreciation to these officials to tell them how we appreciate their generosity with "OPM" (other people's money) or more specifically, "TPM" (Tax Payer's Money). But there's lots more money that will roll in with all the rate hikes proposed by the DWP. I have to remind you that this is an agency out of control as the DWP commission works essentially hand in hand with the Mayor (Tony appoints them all), who himself is often the best friend when it came to union deals, and with all the expense of more added to the DWP payroll, they need to have more money. You know it would kill them to have to dip into the Billion Dollars of funds that they have built up.

Ok, just check the story and maybe I will get to the State of the City Address, 2010-style, that Villaraigosa read pretty well- dull but well. Too bad most of this was a combination of lies, reversals of blame and totally a CYA operation. But, as I seem to say too often here, "What else is new?" And Tony's blaming the economy downturn for where we are as a city is absolutely lame, (pun time), done by the "lame duck" mayor- still with a very long 3 years left on his second and last term.

Ok, I'll leave that for another time but keep checking www.ronkayela.com where you may get a laugh or too with all the bad news of our "leadership" at City Hall.

And check out the Lopez column and see what else he brings up or out.

L.A. D.A. investigating Supervisors spending from the "'discretionary" (slush) funds.

I suppose that there is some responsiveness still left in government, fortunately for us. This is coming from the District Attorney's office public integrity division. And the way things are going in government, you would think this could be a be division by now. Stil, I would like to see something actually materialize from these things. If ex-Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's circus performance as the city attorney office-holder did not earn more than mild notice by his colleagues, fellow prosecutors on the county side of things, then not much really is expected beyond the investigation stated here.

You have to remember that these supervisors have accumulated lots of favors with their years of building politcal alliances. How much of the "building" of those alliances came at the expense of public money, the tax dollars that came from all of us? What a clever set up. We fund their empire building and are all the poorer for it, money and condition-wise.

From the L.A. Times' L.A. Now newsblog, "Prosecutors examine spending by L.A. supervisors," March 18, 2010, by Jack Leonard. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/03/prosecutors-examine-spending-by-la-supervisors.html

The District Attorney's office is checking on the use of public money in the "discretionary spending" funds ($3.4 million per year each) that the county supervisors have done to follow up on a complaint about this subject. There are some challenges that the story identifies that question whether the procedures have been followed and whether the subjects are even permissible for the spending done in certain casess. Ridley-Thomas' $25,000 payment to be included in "Who's Who in Black Los Angeles," something like an ad in the Yellow Pages for the people who are listed, is more likely an entirely personal vanity issue than being anything of a necessity for improving the lives of the public he is supposed to be serving.


The Supervisor's high visibiity case of recent times was the request for approval by fellow supervisors for a $707,000.00 expense to remodel Mark Ridley-Thomas' office. That was approved and then the public outcry changed their minds, with complaints based on the waste, the fiscal imprudence of the decision, and highlighted by current conditions of the economy, and demonstrated even more strongly by cutbacks of people in governments. The spending that would rise after a reported planned expense of $300,000.00 on furniture would total a million dollars. Ridley-Thomas is so out of touch with real lives and the support of public employee unions who got him elected is his real boss, in my opinion.

And on this, all we can do is wait and see. You may think the reliance on the County lawyers for any advice sought by the supervisors on their spending makes them right in this siutation. Well, the government has a lot of lawyers who give out wrong advice and do misinterpret applications of the law because are not experienced in the law, even in terms of commonly encountered issues like employment law and retaliatory actions against whistle blowers. It can happen due to lack of training, interest, experience or just egos that are too big to allow any different notions to enter.

Maybe there's enough to be found here that will cause the supervisors to take off their crowns, at least while discussing the matter over with the D.A.'s office. And what about the L.A. county's D.A.'s investigating their own county supervisors? Any conflicts there?