Election Day in CD-2- News -Vote Zuma Dogg/ David Saltsburg; Media Ignores City Hall- as usual

VOTE for David Saltsburg. He's running for CD-2 to shift power away from special interests.

Today, until 8 pm, CD-2 registered voters will trickle to the polls for a SPECIAL ELECTION and vote for a Los Angeles City Council Member for this district that is mostly in the San Fernando Valley from the 405 Freeway and meandering to Sunland-Tujunga. Wendy Greuel, up until she was sworn into her new office as City Controller 2 months ago was their Council Member. There are a few years of unexpired time remaining for that term.

If you rely on television for news, there's a good chance you don't know anything about the election, that it's today, that there are 10 candidates running or that 3 of these are "the Machine" candidates, having well-financed campaign, running against 7 "grassroots" under-financed campaigns.

If you think, "CD-2, What's that? Who Cares?" then you are doing well to fall into the chasm that keeps the same types of rotten politician in office. CD-2 has a population equal to many name-cities. It is one of 15 Council Districts in the City. Voter apathy is what we have for most city elections, as only 18% of the registered city voters came out to vote for Mayor and the odd-numbered CDs, 7 of them. The city council members decide L.A. life. Another bad choice keeps this club to do that, unimpeded.

As L..A. is run, the rest of the Southern California is affected. The fallout will eventually spread over to impact other cities and policies set in L.A. WILL wind up impacting other places. If you say I live in CD-14 so I have my own problems- and we do- we don't want another bad player in the game to strengthen the choke hold the Council puts on the constituents. Same as CD-1 with Ed Reyes and his DENSIFICATION to make every housing a packed deal, more congestion- and no infrastructure attention FIRST. Broken water mains? Just a start of what to expect by bad mangement of the City.

The CMs keep there jobs through voters being both apathetic and ignorant. The lack of City Hall news coverage on television or newspapers on the elections (at time for any given city election) contributes to this condition. Most incumbents welcome this low-profile situation at election time, being able to control information better when they send out waves of slick campaign brochures in the mail to residents to convince them that all is well and will continue to be well with things as long as you re-elect them.

Most of the city's current financial mess, with the current budget over $450 million in the hole, and recent arrangements keep certain union employees safer from layoffs than other who, coincidentally don't supply elected officials with the all-important campaign contributons that get attention. The Engineers and Architects Assn. is one union that's getting about 27 days of furlough, being on the outs with last week's City and unions "deal" - and tell me, how that's really gonig to work when most of the favored unions will be protected from layoffs and others get early retirement deals to be paid but not work?

Is a CD job a good one? Just look at how hard the CMs go to protect these jobs. See the L.A. Weekly's February story just before the March 2009 elections,
"Los Angeles on $300,000 a year Why next week's City Council "coronation" will cost you far more than money," By Patrick Range McDonald -Published on February 25, 2009 -
http://www.laweekly.com/2009-02-26/news/los-angeles-on-300-000-a-year/

Yes, lots of money is nice to have, and the other thing is the power. You will see that L.A. draws people back to the city politics like with Richard Alarcon, a former state assemblyman who makes a career manipulating power, and CM Wesson, another of the refugees who left Sacramento for a better payday in L.A. by choice or because there were termed out.

Without going much more into the problems, you can see a list of items showing a badly run city in Mayor Sam's blog covering mostly local politics
http://mayorsam.blogspot.com/

Ron Kaye, former editor of the L.A. Daily News based in the San Fernando Valley, supplies some through and critical thought, often exposing the secret side of dealings at city hall, on his blog www.ronkayela.com

The most colorful and absolutey harshest critic of the City Council and L.A. politics is "L.A. Daily Blog" http://ladailyblog.blogspot.com/ written by David "Zuma Doog" Saltsburg,whose been pulled into the political whirlpool since his own visit to City Hall over 3 years ago when the city shut down his right to sell things at Venice Beach, and that started it all.

I got to know ZD over the past few years and his knowledge of the city operation is gained by day to day involvement, contacts with people who know how things work, and inside information from people tired of the sneaky dealing going on in City Hall.

One thing that I have to give much credit to ZD for and not to any others in the same way, is that he has broken down the city's way of burying the real actions in paragraphs of legalese and boilerplate language that tells you nothing of the real meaning of the motions, the ordinances and most money-shuffling that goes on.

ZD's theatrical manner at Council meeting annoys many but exemplifies the ills that he finds and puts it out into the open. He's gotten more people clued into city activities, and has more young people learning more about what's there to affect by action. More people now than ever are challenging the city leaders, but still in small numbers that have not yet caused any upheaval in the MACHINE type of special interest controlled organization.

That special interest controlled group handles that first and you and me last. Parking meters quadruple the rates, extend hours, end free Sundays and that's a small part of what's visible that affects your day-to-day life. There are so many more things that sneak by that you don't even notice and that's the way City Council works- them first, you, well, you're just there to pay the bills, see your city billings rise and services deteriorate as you watch their Ch. 35 or internet video broadcasts of their "performances" to see "how smart" they are. The word is not smart but "insulting", "slick", "greedy", ignorant", "arrogant", "condescending" or a number of other words at various time that fit them all at one time or another. It needs to change.

DWP is bled dry by the CMs deals and your transformers blow, the water mains burst and people see things are not being maintained. The GENERAL FUND of the city gets money fed into it by many things and DWP is one source- also DWP's IBEW unions was the best contract deal made from the employees side, with pretty good raises every year as the economy was beginning to collapse.

Mayor V. is just too out of touch with city business, claimed he approved that deal because he could not tell of bad times ahead. He's barely changed since then, the union's best friend as long as the keep supporting his campaign funding, he's still trying to keep them happy even when layoffs are avoided when really needed to balance the budget.


Zuma Dogg/ David Saltsburg is one candidate I support, and any of the other of the 7 grassroots would be an improvement over what's there now.

NO, NO, NO TO ALL MACHINE CANDIDATES. Tamar Galatzin is the least harmful of the 3 MACHINE candidates, too closely tied to Mayor V., Chris Essel is totally a carpetbagger who was assigned to run and be a stooge for the mayor, and Paul Karabian would be bringing more State bankruptcy-making skills to further plunge L.A. into the financial black hole it's already headed for.

If you live in CD-2, vote. A 20% turnout is predicted. The top two vote-getters will be in December run-off election if no one gets 50% plus one vote, a majority.

City Elections Tuesday- CM for cd-5 and City Attorney

For City election items:

CD-5 ELECTION - Vahedi.

If you live in CD-5, Jack Weiss is leaving so Vahedi and Koretz are the runoff candidates- Vote Vahedi, more in tune with the neighborhood level of political actions than Paul Koretz, career politician. Either would be a big improvement over current office holder CM Jack Weiss.


CITY ATTORNEY - By far, VOTE for Carmen Trutanich, best candidate.

Trutanich's opponent is Jack Weiss, virtually a stooge for the Mayor and big developers. He's known for rudeness and incidents of ignoring, i.e., "blowing off", consitituents from his CD and for those coming to his Public Safety Committee that he chairs. (If you noticed, most of his "High Visibility" actions in Public Safety began to show up just as the election time got close, to try to erase his real record of uselessness- a big phony and looks to Mayor Tony to do what the Mayor needs to be done. Weiss is NOT good as a CM and a DISASTER if City Attorney.
VOTE TRUTANICH

State Sen. Gil Cedillo living high as term nears end; A May 19th election win for more of same?

Another politician living very comfortably, all because he is a public office holder, and that's Gil Cedillo, State Senator who is running for Congress in the May 19th elections. And it was just when you thought Fabian Nunez' extravagance was maybe just one bad example of greed and arrogance by spending habits. The L.A. Times story today shows that Cedillo apparently learned a few tips from his friend and former colleague in the State Senate, Fabian Nunez, another big spender who himself became indignant when confronted with his own practices. It looks like more of the same here.

"Cedillo reports that his campaign donors bankroll lavish meals, travel and shopping; The congressional candidate said he spent more than $125,000 in the last six years on fine dining, high-end hotels and shopping sprees, expenses he says were 'relevant' to his job as a legislator." By Michael Finnegan, April 11, 2009.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cedillo11-2009apr11,0,170280,full.story

Cedillo is apparently stamped from the same mold as Nunez, the former Assembly Speaker, who was termed out of office last fall. I have written often about things done by politicians that show their unfettered self-indulgence and and now this story comes along so conveniently to further demonstrate many of those very points. Cedillo's opponent in the upcoming election is Judy Chu, and her disclosure report shows what a taxpayer would like to see in terms of spending, generally. I was suprised from what the disclosure showed of her spending, but in a good way, for a change. I expect a lot of shady actions by polticians, and usually there are more examples than I expected to find to show the bad side of political dealings. Chu is definitely not a lavish spender and if their were a few more lawmakers NOT spending so routinely, we'd have a better budget situation at all levels of government.

You really don't want to see expensive personal spending patterns developing in a politician, whether done directly with tax dollars or the money collected from campaing donors, or indirectly through accepting services covered by other individuals and groups. Such outside individuals and groups all do this to gain influence. It's a plain example of "quid pro quo," the concept of getting something of value in return for giving something of value. Did you ever hear the saying, "Nothing is free?" It applies in politics in lots of ways.

All that splashing around of money on themselves tends to create a person with those pesky traits of being a big spender that translate to how they act when it comes to operating the State's business and making spending proposals and voting on spending measures.

Cedillo's spending, detailed in reports he filed with the secretary of state, contrasts with the frugal record of Judy Chu, his chief rival for the San Gabriel Valley congressional seat. A former Monterey Park assemblywoman elected to the state Board of Equalization in 2006, Chu has spent no campaign money on shopping or entertainment, and less than $5,000 on meals and travel over six years.

The two are vying in a May 19 election to fill the House seat
vacated by U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis.

The L.A. Times story excerpts below give an idea of the problems with elected officials who parlay their political position into more of the dollars to finance a high lifestyle. That's a lifestyle that usually was not enjoyed until coming into office and a lifestyle that I would make a guess that is well above what most of their constituents would enjoy. You would expect some self-control by a politician, in this case, Cedillo, when it comes to spending since it can become public. In Cedillo's case, it looks like he is enjoying it to the fullest. I think he just cannnot help himself now

Such spending that is associated with the high living has become a part of them and they defend it, justifying it as somehow "necessary." Yes, necessary to them. The fact that they have no reluctance to continue in that style shows how much they have come to believe in their "entitlement" to do it. All of this is a bad sign for the taxpayer, and if you don't see it when it's so obvious, you will surely miss it all when they try other angles to keep up the lifestyle.

Regardless of legality, the nature of Cedillo's spending is troublesome, said Robert Stern, president of the nonpartisan Center for Governmental Studies and a longtime advocate of campaign finance reform.

It sounds like he is using campaign funds to supplement his lifestyle," Stern said.

Cedillo collected $116,208 in salary last year and $39,825 in tax-free per diem. The Senate bought a $53,436 black Lexus hybrid for Cedillo; he is charged $280 a month for its use. The state pays for his gas.

But Cedillo has relied on campaign donors to bankroll his shopping and travel, along with hundreds of restaurant meals and tickets for the Rose Bowl, Los Angeles Opera and Clippers basketball games.

I mentioned that the way politicians act may not reach a level where laws are being violated, but they still don't seem to address "the spirit of the law" by using campaign funds and donations to cover lavish spending on meals, lodging and travel and trying to relate it all to doing state business.

Another feature of politicians' who come from modest backgrounds is that they seem to become so overwhelmed with their good fortune and they reach out to get the most expensive of whatever they can grab that is paid for as part of being in office. It might be for another reason, too, and that's to show everyone that "I'm an Important Person," and this satisfies a need for ego gratification.

Like I have said before- and most of what I see has been said by others before, too- If they were not in office, all that money would not be seen by them. It's given to them with the expectation of getting SOMETHING BACK. Those are not donations from Santa for being good. If anyone expected them to really be "good" you would not have the money going to them in the first place. No, the idea is to get noticed when money is given- even indirectly, like to a politician's favorite charity or "social cause.' It's not a very complicated analysis. Politicians get money and favors based on the idea of, "Don't forget about ME and what I need."

And if you didn't remember, Gil Cedillo, called by some as "One-Bill Gil" because of his repeated introductions of a bill to permit issuance of drivers licenses to illegal aliens, is among a large circle of old friends in politics. Cedillo is a friend of Fabian Nunez, and was from Roosevelt High in Boyle Heights, a very good friend of Mayor Villaraigosa and both went to Roosevelt, UCLA and Peoples College of Law, and neither are attorneys. Did I mention before that lots of the political figures happen to be friends or relatives of each other? This is very evident with Latino politicians, being a situation something like the trade unions of old, where you had to have a friend or relative bring you in. That political "fishbowl" effect is what makes the actions of so many of them so similar, I suppose; It's more like a club than a public service to be a politician with this group. Look around for yourself and do a little review to find so many of the connections and that should explain something of our political environment that many take for granted as untouchable by the common voter.

The disturbing part in this picture is that there is no modesty, no reluctance to partake in the money available or any shame attached to how the politicians see these actions. After all, they ARE important, aren't they?

As for the trips overseas, Cedillo said he visited India, Taiwan, Italy, Brazil, Argentina, Cuba and Mexico on Senate business. He recalled discussing energy, immigration, population growth, water and climate change with foreign officials.

To help manage the world's eighth-largest economy, he said, senators must "go and engage people who have the same or similar circumstances throughout the world."

"All these experiences are relevant to the extent that they enrich my capacity as a legislator," he said.

I disagree with the candidate. At the rate of spending and taxation, the "world's eighth-largest economy" is headed to the "world's seventh-largest economy." All that self-importance is coming through in these, "I am worth it" actions and statements. I did not really know much about Judy Chu before, but just from seeing the spending report, I see a way to stop the continued practice of such self-indulgence from a lawmaker that should not be part of politics. I don't say it "isn't" a part of politics, but, like the example of trash on the school grounds, it just creates a condition that invites and accumulates more trash, leaving a dirty landscape for everyone. It needs to be cleaned up, not spread.

I encourage you to read the article that is detail-rich in amounts and events and other things. It might have you wondering if you really want to be sending such candidates into further political ventures where more of the same is just going to happen, and that's that. And in closing, I need to say again that the days when there were statesmen holding public office have long been gone, and I add, unlikely to return.

Final Vote Count Leaves Solar Measure B defeated. Runoff election coming.

The final vote is in from the March 3rd election and it's final- Solar Measure B is dead, just over 2,000 votes difference decided "No" on this DWP Union-crafted proposal. It would have limited work to only the IBEW union and included a DWP job training program for prospective workers to add to the union ranks, along with an unknown cost that consumers would have to bear. This hastily passed proposal also would have changed the City Charter to give more spending authority to the Mayor- a provision that's a disaster standing all on its own.

The additional ballots amounted to 49,000 more besides the ones cast on March 3rd, including Absentee ballots and provision ballots that were because of damaged ballots, absentee ballots not received, and voters registered but not listed.

The runoff election will be Tuesday, May 19, 2009 to settle the CD-5 council seat between David Vahedi and Paul Koretz. Another position in the runoff is the City Attorney spot. The race is between Carmen Trutanich and Jack Weiss. Weiss really has no business running for this office if you know his history. He is running because Mayor Tony needs more support in government and Jack is a his loyal "Yes-Man" that he can control.

Trutanich is the more experienced lawyer and did not have his attorney practice stopped for 7-1/2 years like Weiss did while serving as Council Member for CD-5, being vacated by Weiss under term limits. Chief Bratton, another official beholden to Tony for his position, naturally support Weiss, so that should be ignored as a hollow endorsement.

Currently, Weiss is on his best behavior, in attendance at Council meetings and speaking up on matters to be more visible as the election nears. He was often absent or disengaged during meetings, and he behavior pushed Zine to say, "Vote for ANYBODY but Jack Weiss. Jack Weiss would be a disaster for the City." I whole-heartedly agree.

LAUSD can help inform young voters- at least that there is an Election Day

LAUSD was given a respite from criticism while the city elections took the spotlight- and a dim spotlight at that, if you consider how poorly it was covered by the television, radio and newspapers, generally.

A radio interview on March 3rd of some young female voters on KFWB or KNX went like this:

Question: "Who did you vote for?"

Answers: Young woman: "Obama", other young woman, "Obama"

Question: "No, I mean for the election today."

Anwers: "Is there an election today?"

I do not know if these young women were LAUSD alumni. I think that this kind of answer was all too common among the younger voters with a 15% turnout at the polls. Voter eligibility at 18 years old does not mean that they are automatically informed. I think the District might consider including at least some familiarity with civic affairs to avoid the situation illustrated above and work to instill some awareness of the value of voting at every election.

As of today, there are about 43,000 votes still not counted- some are provisional ballots, used where there are problems like Absentee Ballots that were not received or a name not showing up on the voter list, and then the regular Absentee Ballots, all that still have to be counted. There is a potential for a run-off election for the the Mayor's office if Villaraigosa's current 55% of the vote drops to 50% or less after all the votes are counted.

The runoff election is coming in May, and Jack Weiss will be running against Carmen Trutanich for the City Attorney- and Jack Weiss IS NOT anywhere near being the right candidate for that office. Trutanich is the guy to vote for so that we can begin to get the city on the right track after two terms of derailment with Rocky Delgadillo's hit-and-miss history of running of that office, lately being "miss."

Steve Lopez: Mayor's win not a victory? and IBEW and the Mayor deal Measure B

Steve Lopez, L.A. Times columnist comments in this morning's edition on the poor showing of the Mayor, a surprise to both him and to the mayor, as well. There are a number of things that are pointed out in the column to show some interesting conclusions taken from the election on Tuesday, including the fact that over 9,000 voters in the city elections did not cast a vote for ANYONE for mayor. "Villaraigosa's win might not be a victory," Steve Lopez, March 4, 2009. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopezweb-2009mar05,0,3425143.column?track=rss

According to the news reports in the Times, there are about 4,000 absentee ballots that remain to be counted. Measure B, to Solar Energy proposal that had no certain price tag established, lost by a few hundred votes, and this was needed by the Mayor to be able to take credit for it.

Measure B still has a chance of passing but if we are lucky, it will not. A proper ballot measure can and should be presented before something of such huge financial impact is considered. The measure still had lots of information on costs ranging between a million to 3 million dollars, and we weres supposed to trust them while giving, essentially what amounts to a "blank check" for the costs, and making this a change to the City Charter. This was not done that way, and simply done so because it was a product of deceit and backroom deals. The mayor's interview on this is very revealing on the topic.

Measure B's Smoking Gun: Antonio Confesses Measure B Is a Payoff to the IBEW
"You say, 'We cut a deal with them.' Yeah, we did. We built a partnership with them...they didn't see any jobs." -- Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa in an interview with the LA Business Journal published Monday March 2, 2009."
By Ron Kaye on March 2, 2009
http://ronkayela.com/2009/03/measure-bs-smoking-gun-antonio.html

Kaye starts of with, "That's what Charles Crumpley, the editor of the Business Journal, reports under the headline *Mayor and Business a Poor Union.* "

The IBEW involvement was genuinely responsible for adding in the DWP jobs training program and the provision to prohibit any others but the IBEW local from doing the installations. This was all what the mayor gave up in trying to get the union to give in on the Solar proposal. They had been against this for about 9 years according to other critics, and suddently "Measure B" pops up by the deadline to go on the ballot, and the union does a complete change in position, and is in full support now.

All these deals are too often the norm for political representatives, and they say something else- which is what fits the regular definition of a "lie." Not a complicated analysis at all.

But why the URGENCY to put in on March 3's ballot? (1.) so it can win in the traditionally low turnout election when most people are not aware of an election and even less aware of what it's for, and (2.) So Tony could add it as HIS baby, that HE got it passed in what he likes to say as a slogan, "L.A.'s the greenest large city in the country," taking the credit himself first and then tossing crumbs to a few others while he assembles a resume to run for Governor in 2010. At least that was the plan. He's gets the goods and we get the bills. He may be sticking around now for the entire term, but not by his choice.

Lopez gives his view of what Villaraigosa's actions mean and some opinion on what the Mayor could do.

My "Summing it up" views on City Election Day

I was thinking about what to put into my next blog entry, with nearly all things being about the election locally in Los Angeles and not too much else. Well, I decided what might be useful to share with you reading this on Election Day for Los Angeles, maybe repeating some things presented in the past, today, worth another look for some decision to be made.

I sent an email late yesterday to a friend of many years who worked with me for a time back 30 years ago- how time flies- and we have teneded to let months, sometimes years, pass between calls. We both knew just about the same group of people from that time and the origins of so many Latinos in political and legal circles. Even before then, she's not lived in the City of L.A. so is spared from a lot of the impact our "leaders" have inflicted upon the residents and businesses in the name of "public service." We surely are not.

She, like many or most people, is a busy person and spends time on other things, so the comings and goings of city hall don't get much notice at all except for the Villaraigosa-style photo-op press conferences and publicity stunts that- much to TONY'S delight- get spread across the television broadcasts that pass for "News" these days. So I wanted to let her know another view of things just as a matter of completeness of the picture, and maybe to vent a little.

He's just about all the message, minus the personal asides that messages have, with some highlights and with clarification and spelling in brackets, added here by me:

"Dear [my friend],

I suppose you aren't registered in L.A.and don't have much interest in the elections- lucky you.

Antonio is still plundering his way forward to hit that election nomination for Governor in the 2010 election. That means a year ahead of time to work on his campaign and getting bribes- oh, I mean "campaign contributions"- for the campaign. AND why no debate? Because anything revealed will send him stuttering and lying and his millions will be the smokescreen for his mal-performance.

THERE'S LOTS on Tony and his council who spend hours on Billy the elephant's story, turning it into a circus, so the elephant's already built-in. But they rush Solar Energy Measure B to a vote with very little discussion and really no available facts to fool the voters- Eric Garcettii, the culprit, doing what Antonio needs him to do. AND IT ALWAYS LIKE THAT.

ABOUT THE MAYOR PERSONALLY
That means more travel and more B.S like the 11% mayor story in the LA WEEKLY http://www.laweekly.com/2008-09-11/news/the-all-about-me-mayor/

A FOLLOW-UP ON THE STORY and he's pissed:
or see "The 11 Percent Mayor Villaraigosa Lashes Back. Blasting LA Weekly, he says we relied on bad facts. Aides say he misspoke. By Patrick Range McDonald. .1-7-09.." http://www.laweekly.com/2009-01-08/news/the-11-percent-mayor-villaraigosa-lashes-back

and MORE DOLLARS BURNED BY COUNCIL
Los Angeles on $300,000 a year http://www.laweekly.com/2009-02-26/news/los-angeles-on-300-000-a-year/
"Why next week's City Council 'coronation' will cost you far more than money."

Well I will vote for Zuma Dogg and not for Tony or wendy greuel for Controller or JACK WEISS.
* * *
[UCLA alumni news] sent me an alumni newsletter and fluff page on JACK WEISS as the right guy to run for city attorney.

I sent back my own composition listing all the sh** he's done and thanked them for not including their own opinions on others who already know better about the candidate- especially irritating how he held up JAMIELS LAW, the Dennis Zine motiion, in Public Safety Committee from April to October, and WEISS could have sent it to the council floor and should have within a month.-

So HE's the easiest one to decide "REJECT HIM." ANYONE BUT Weiss will do. See Council member Dennis Zine tell it like it is,
http://lincolnquicknotes.blogspot.com/2009/02/zuma-dogg-finds-cm-dennis-zine-rejects.html on my page with a YouTube window for the clip, 2m27s.

and MONICA GARCIA is part of the Villaraigosa machine, totally the wrong person in the office; she [is] into all the old Mechista ideas and not into what will get the students properly educated. Too much personal baggage and hang-up[s] brought with her from Chicano Studies at Berkeley. I think that is where she met Council Member JOSE HUIZAR, my slug for a cm. She was his aide and then moved to the BOARD with TONY'S help. TONY helped Huizar to take TONY'S vacated spot in cd-14 when TONY bailed out to run for Mayor the second time, winning this time.

So, [my friend], sometimes it's better to not know all the things going on- and I could rattle off another page of ills and bad dollar deals that LAUSD made recently and in the past; all bad moves and very expensive to the taxpayer.

QUESTION- if LAUSD student avg. performance sucks (and the Asians keep scores from gong totally in the toilet) [for Lincoln], why do neighboring cities, especially Alhambra NOT have a poor record. I passed by Alh. H.S while entering the new library last week and a big banner is on the front of the building, and it says they have exceeded State testing requirements for the last 3 years. I don't think it's the Asian element- could be, but there has to be more.

Ok. need to go- tell your friends who are LA registered voters to vote- UNLESS they are Villaraigosa people, then skip it. Tony's already mobilized the uninformed to get their votes tomorrow. "


And that, by E-mail, is my "summing-it-up" opinion to let you see that WE can change things and NEED TO do that.

A message on other measures on ballot- More costs

The Measure B ballot item is not the only form of expense coming at you this election.

There are A and E that need a NO vote.

The others may not be "evil" but will cost and on that basis alone in this recession, should carefully considered before being approved to add to public expense. However, Measures C and D go to disabled chidren survivors benefit of fire and police pension plan, and survivors benefit purchase plan, and serve an actual good purpose.


When measures are put into THIS first election of 2009, you already know that people are planning to play the game to get approval in a low-voter-turnout election when no one really pays attention. This happened with MEASURE B but was so ONE-SIDED against consumers and other businesses that it was caught right away.


BOND MEASURES cost money. Some voters read the ballot and think, "That sounds good." Remember the November elections and Subway to the Sea, and the Bullet Train to San Francisco? What ever the cost stated to be BORROWED, it's paid back WITH INTEREST to make the cost about DOUBLE. Meanwhile you have nothing useable- no train, no subway- for years and years, but the bills are there anyway.


BONDS ARE NOT FREE. Approval means more that government has to be paying, as if enough was not there. Think of that before you say, "That sounds nice." You may be leaving things for your children and their children to be paying off as a result of your good thoughts on the measure.

Tax Hike in store for you- State budget passed.

You have some big tax impact coming from the State budget finally approved by the last vote needed. Abel Maldonado (r) was holding out for some concessions, which really meant that he WAS eventually going to vote FOR the budget and FOR the additional billions to be covered BY taxes. [Update:"California Legislature finally approves new budget" in L.A. Times today-http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-budget20-2009feb20,0,5263469.story ]

Look for the details that will become law when Arnold signs off on it. Not a pretty picture. The plan is to continue for 5 years, with some review in 2 years when voters can act again, I am told. Meanwhile the taxes-on-taxes (surcharge on state income tax bill) and double car tax and spending increases will roll on.

Democratic Speaker of the House Karen Bass continued to say "do the right thing" and she meant "approve the tax hikes" not 'let's continue to work on terms and solutions" that would include a few more frugal moves.

Bass and the other politicians were cleverly changing the vocabulary used, "taxes" was used no more, instead they call it "revenue"- they come out the same for US in the end, but the word tries to sidestep the slogan that SOME Republicans were still following, "No More Taxes" (that's no "additional taxes"- "no more taxes ever" would be nice).

Lots more to the picture. Maldonado's "work" before caving in does not give you, the taxpayer, much of anything to hold onto when you balance it all out. All politics on all sides.

CONSIDER WHAT A RESPONSIBLE STYLE OF GOVERNMENT DOES.
Today's L.A. Times shows cooperation happening in the city of Redlands in San Bernardino County, about an hour (in no traffic) east of L.A. They have their budget woes, too, and their solutions involve serious measures taken that demonstrate what can happen with ALL players working together AND working for the benefit of the City and the people. "A spirit of sacrifice sweeps over Redlands City Hall"
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-redlands19-2009feb19,0,7916203,full.story

There in Redlands, the financial pain was spread around to enable all to survive instead of just wiping out some segments completely. You can see in the story that a certain built-in value of greed is present, shown where other unions criticized the Redlands police officers and their union because that sets a precedent for other unions to share in giving up some things in negotiations.

That's a tradition that is not good in these times and works to shift the burden completely to others, like a hot potato or a case of musical chairs- some are the big losers and others are the big winners. Spreading out the whole pain would maybe even make the "untouchables" see what changes are needed in spending, especially at a state-wide level, if they were included in the "sharing."

In L.A., you have too many people protected in government. The DWP situation highlights that and the terms proposed in Measure B even work in a plan to get new members FOR THEIR UNION and to have training paid for before they get their jobs. As the consumer, YOU get to pay their bill in YOUR DWP bill , where it all shows up sooner or later. In Sacramento, Arnold already signed off for SEIU workers to be guaranteed a no-layoff status, I think it covered 93,000 workers.

Politicians or union leaders don't highlight that sort of deal-making and you see why. There is something inherently wrong when "some" are made to be untouchable and not feel any of the pain. But that's the reality of politics in action and why various unions get too powerful. A trade for favors- "Do what I want and my members will vote for you"- so that get's done. It's not costing the politician anything personally when taxes go up, when new programs get approved, worthy or not, and need funding. You will pay for that. This makes the case for "The tale wagging the dog," or "Who's working for who here?"

L.A city elections coming up in less than two weeks. The voters to come out to show you don't just let things happen. If you don't vote on March 3, you have no basis to complain about what happens in this city later. That would be called rolling over on your back like you see on Cesar Milan's T.V. show "The Dog Whisperer"; it give you a demonstrations of dogs doing that, going into a "submissive" condition- showing either "complete trust" or "fear." You have little reason for any complete or partial trust of incumbents. WE NEED new blood there, and if you vote for these incumbents, it just may be out of fear.

For me, keeping them to do more damage is what I fear. Time for change.

All the odd-numbered council districts are up for election March 3rd- including Ed Reyes' CD-1 that covers Lincoln Heights and over to Pico Union. The only challenger Jesus Rosas is not perfect but Ed has become just too comfortable as a career politican who needs to move on to shake off all those entanglements he's built up with special interests, lobbyists and unions that have so obviously seen Lincoln Heights for their own development profiteering opportunities.

They will object to that view, but this is when the voters make the difference.

Wendy Gruel's T.V. Campaign Ad doesn't match her actions.

Wendy Gruel, current CD-2 council member, is being termed out of office and needs a new job. She is running for the office of CITY CONTROLLER, now held by Laura Chick since Chick is herself being termed out of that office. Wendy is the Mayor's choice for the office, and she has always been his pal, never challenging Tony's decisions in any significant way, and that's not a good quality for any candidate for City Controller where you are expected to watch how money is spent.

Well, it looks like the L.A. TIMES, in a story by David Zahniser, one reporter who unerringly sees through most of the political smokescreens so often thrown up by office holders, has found some problems with Ms. GRUEL'S television ad. She's against now something that she approved in connection with the Housing Authority, and, next, she did nothing to act on another matter with the Animal Services department after she learned about it from an audit produced by Laura Chick's office, until bringing it up now. See:

"Greuel attacks program she approved;
L.A. councilwoman's 30-second spot names three city programs she says she would tackle if elected city controller. She voted for one of them and did not intervene on a second," a February 15, 2009 story, http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-greuel15-2009feb15,0,2829452.story.

Getting caught on conflicting details that show some real bad memories or plain outright "fibbing" on advertisements is just so enjoyable to see when you know they try so hard to hide it from us and then they still manage to mess up and not keep their stories straight. Reporter Zahniser used to work for the L.A. Weekly before the L.A. TIMES hired him away, doing the same detailed work on city hall stories that the L.A. Weekly continues to present with other reporters taking up the task.

Zahniser's story's ususally present the truest picture of all the reports on what's happening with politicians and he's often the one to discover problems with these officials.

Mayoral Forum for Candidates Thursday Night in Eagle Rock

All of the candidates for Mayor of Los Angeles were invited to a Forum

for each to give their positions, telling us why they should get our votes.

It's tomorrow night in the Eagle Rock

Date: THURSDAY NIGHT, February 19, 2009

Time: 7:00 to 8;30 p.m.

Place: "Center for the Arts" (the "old" library by the Bank of America). 2225 Colorado Blvd, L.A. 90041

"Your chance to hear and speak with the candidates for the mayor's office."

Co-sponsored by The Eagle Rock Association ("TERA") and
the Eagle Rock Neighborhood Council


Parking at Bank of America (west of Center for the Arts), and street parking.

Further information: 626-285-1482


(The mayor continues to ignore all challengers and all debate invitations or information forums before the election. Actually, to be completely accurate, he did not "ignore" the invitation but had his spokesman reply with a "scheduling conflict" as the no-show reason. They could put that on a single recording to use for each invitation offered.

That was probably the only item of "transparency" that we'll ever see from his administration.

What does that tell you about what he thinks about how important YOUR right to know anything of what he's doing for YOU? And he STILL expects your vote anyway? /r.g.)

Monica Garcia, LAUSD President, has L.A. Times reluctant endorsement in relection bid while running unopposed.

The L.A. Times today did not eagerly endorse MONICA GARCIA, President of the Board, for reelection for the District 2 office.

See: "A strong L.A. School Board; L.A. voters have several good choices. We pick three and hope they make students their priority."

They could have said "NO" to the endorsement and still print the comments that they did. It all fits. She is running unopposed and so she will be elected unless there is the nearly impossible outcome where she does not get the majority of votes cast for the office. With no other name on the ballot for "District 2", what do you think voters will do?

The Times was able to admit and to notice that Mayor Villaraigosa's selection for this office has not done much to advance her cause for re-election. MONICA GARCIA takes her cues from the Mayor and that probably is the reason all has not been going well in the education side of city operations.

The LAUSD is an entirely separate governmental body from the City of Los Angeles, and the responsibility for education decisions in the local public schools rests solely with the Board. The Times gives reasons that support its decision to be unenthusiastic in endorsing GARCIA that I agree with.

Read the Times item yourself. The LAUSD bond measure of $7 billion that passed originally was set at $3.5 Billion, but the last meeting on the decision for the amount had it jump to double that amount. There was not a specific application for all this money, but they wanted it to cover whatever they might need later. That was like, "let's ask for as much as we can and if we get it, we can decide later how we will spend it." So now taxpayers have that financial burden, like an unwanted tattoo, it's not going away.

Further, this is a GARCIA-led Board that has gone on a mission to build more schools as much and as fast as possible, displacing people, demolishing homes, (many homes in low income areas, pushing residents out), and then in Echo Park, doing this so rushed (rushing even while the case was in court waiting to be decided) that the opposition prevailed in court that ordered them back off and essentially start over. The LAUSD was responsible for not complying with required steps, like an inadequate environmental impact report, costing the public lots of tax dollars (again) and putting people out of housing.

But MS. GARCIA seems more concerned, as the Times sees also, with social justice so much that education turns out to take a back seat. First it's important to be able to perform well in school which will make the rest improve. That over-50% dropout rate is still there, and many parents who can manage it will continue to put their children in schools other that LAUSD. Even Mayor Villaraigosa did not have confidence in the system to allow his children to attend local public schools, and he made no apologies for his decision, he simply said he did not want to risk his own children's well-being.

The enrollment in LAUSD has noticeably been declining for years, but you would not know it from the rush for more construction that continues. Students are leaving for private schools, parochial schools, charter schools, or just leaving the District. But what happens withall this construction? Each new school needs another complete administrative population and faculty to operate and with each new school, comes new costs. The costs of schools has been out of control, another LAUSD trademark but the leadership survives unchanged at Beaudry St. District Headquarters. This year the budget is going to make some changes necessary for all the big spending of the past in assorted categories, but still there has not been a product to show for it.

GARCIA will be re-elected but not because she earned it.

Save L.A.- Keep Tony, Wendy and Jack from a takeover in March elections

The Sunday L.A. Times (February 1, 2009) has a few items of concern revolving around Mayor Villaraigosa's potential for achieving a long sought-after a death-grip on the city political front. “A Villaraigosa-Weiss-Greuel troika would consolidate power at L.A. City Hall,” by David Zahniser And Maeve Reston, http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-villaraigosa-allies1-2009feb01,0,887745.story

ANTONIO'S “Yes-Man” is Jack Weiss, the current Council Member representing CD-5 over to the north and west side of the city, and Wendy Gruel, CM for CD-2, in the San Fernando Valley and east, both are running for office, and both are bad news for the city if they get elected.

Jack Weiss is running for City Attorney in the city-wide race, with a couple of challengers that would do better for the city, Noel Weiss (same LAST name but on the Good Guy side of things), and Carmen Trutanich http://www.tru09.com/cityattorney.php?Pname=cityattorney, WOULD would each be a good choice over JACK WEISS for that office. JACK'S been in city council for almost 8 years and NOT been in court or handled cases for that long. CARMEN TRUTANIC and NOEL WEISS are both practicing attorneys. It might not be so bad, but JACK has been doing a lousy job in the City Council, especially as Chair of the Public Safety Committee. Only lately has JACK been doing things to try to get "good publicity" with the election a month away.

JACK does things to get publicity? Yes, and that might be taking a few tips from the master of the photo op, TONY VILLARAIGOSA, the mayor who's into including costume changes for his press conferences, and caring not a bit if somebody is dead, since it's a good time to get his face on TV. He did that in Wilmington a few days ago with the death of 7 in a family, he did that in Chatsworth after the trains collided. So you see, getting votes is a little like advertising- show your face and say the same things over and over, and it doesn't matter if none of it it true because you can afford ads that say it's ALL true. Be on the lookout for those.

JACK wants to be City Attorney. Rocky Delgadillo, the current city attorney with an amazingly bizarre history of negatives in his professional, political and personal life is leaving the office, and it would be hard to do more things to rival his terms. But JACK WEISS might be the one to do it, too, but would do it more along the lines of letting the office exercise choices made by Mayor Villaraigosa, and not being independently operated from the other branches.

CM WENDY GRUEL wants to stay around in offices and sees CITY CONTROLLER as an open one she thinks she could manage. Right now, LAURA CHICK is the City Controller, leaving due to term limits forcing her out. CHICK performed lots of audits and opened the doors to numerous instances of waste and fraud going on in the city. She was the one responsible for telling us about all the city cars assigned to so many people, going home with them without a real reason presented. They also had city gas credit cards to use that were abused to some large numbers. There were cases where cars were filling up 10 times in one day, according to the L.A. Times report on the problem.

Well, to get back to GRUEL, she is somebody who has backed Antonio continuously through all the examples of bad management and absentee management, and I have not heard her utter a negative word or level serious criticism in Villaraigosa’s direction- and I can say there were plenty of opportunities to at least clear your throat, if not actually speak up when concerns arose so regularly with the Mayor.

WENDY GRUEL, as the city controller, would be the person who is responsible for checking the operation of the city and how it handles money, and she would be a disaster in that role, in my opinion. WENDY has absolutely no ability to criticize the Mayor, if he wins re-election. All of this waste that LAURA CHICK brought up was during the time of ANTONIO running the show. I will say that maybe he didn’t start every problem, but he didn’t find out and he didn’t check on how things were being run- how could he? He was never really here in the city, and HE'S the chief elected official.

TONY has been out of the city, regularly missing being around for working on campaigns of Hillary Clinton and then jumped ship when it went down, over to Barack Obama, for the last couple of years. When he wasn’t doing that, he was off to other cities to be at fundraiser events to raise money for his own re-election campaign, well over $3 million now, and on the city’s payroll, at that.

HOW COULD WE EXPECT WENDY GRUEL to give TONY anything but friendly treatment as the city “watchdog”, given her allegiance to his administration. She has said she could be exercise her “independent judgment” but so did ROCKY DELGADILLO when he ran for City Attorney and won, after it was revealed that he got almost $500,000.00 of free billboard advertising from some billboard companies. And there were certain billboard companies that had cases the City of L.A. had made against them, all part of the City Attorney’s office responsibility to prosecute. ROCKY said the advertising would not affect his judgment. But low and behold, there was a settlement that was made by the City Attorney with very kind terms to some companies.

After the City Attorney made the settlement, the City tried to come down on some companies when they wanted to put up more billboards. The City applied the terms of the settlement to limit those companies, so these folks went to court to challenge the deal made. The judge said that you couldn’t use that settlement for regulating billboards the way the City did since some companies were less restricted and others got no breaks, and that’s not allowed. So ROCKY’s job had raised some eyebrows and cost the city lots of money, time and still billboards are going up without much ability by the city to stop that.

WENDY can’t say that she will be INDEPENDENT and have anyone really believe it. Being a politician in the first place is already cause for people to reach for their wallets to pay up in order to keep their guy or woman in office and keep their arrangements preserved. For others, it causes THEM to reach for their wallets to be sure they stay safe from being taken out and emptied by deft means.

L.A. TIMES, January 29, 2009 story on L.A. City Attorney race, “What would they do as L.A. city attorney” by Maeve Reston, gives some information on the differences. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/01/what-they-would.html Not all the candidates were there, but you can see all plan to run the office differently than Rocky.

[Here is an L.A. TIMES story filed earlier in the day on January 29, 2009, by the same reporter, Maeve Reston, before the meeting happened, “In L.A. city attorney’s race, it seems that only money talks.” http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/01/in-la-city-atty.html ]

A “CITY DISASTER”? THAT WOULD BE TONY, WENDY AND JACK winning the election on March 3rd.

This would mean that you really have all the offices occupied by the same political machine and that machine will work for itself and its friends (i.e., “special interest” groups and individuals) without the expected checks and balances that are supposed to exist to keep the public from having the wool pulled over its eyes (again and again).

In the City election, your vote really is more significant since there are less voters eligible and many of them are neither interested in voting there, nor care much more than what they hear about in political ads. TONY RELIES ON THAT- That's what the $3 million is all about. WENDY AND JACK follow their boss in the same style of politics