DWP gets 5 years of raises, LAPD doesn't; LAFD still on rolling brownout conditions- Layoffs and furloughs. ERIP to hit services.

Here's a little information on the DWP's union, the IBEW where it seems they are more in control of that agency than the public, or more precisely, the public servants supposed to be watching out for us common folks, and that would be the CITY COUNCIL, with the Mayor giving cues to the many puppets at City Hall.

When you have a budget that is in the red as it's never been before, last Friday's meeting showed approval of the DWP raises that just don't make sense to me and many others when you have the LAPD going without raises and the LAFD has less than full staffing as the rolling brownouts reduce the ability to respond to emergencies as fully as they used to.

ERIP is going to hit the city pretty pretty hard in services. That's the "Early Retirement Incentive Program," that is planned for 2400 employees to retire early. There's about 400 over that number who have signed up to leave, but for now, 2400 will be leaving.

You can check some of the "progress" in city business by going over to columns posted by Ron Kaye L.A. www.ronkayela.com last week. The DWP commotion is explained well and there's a few video clips from the Friday Council Meeting to show that all is not well with a reduced staff.

That action was designed to cut jobs out so the payroll will drop and city expenses are lowered, right? Well, there's the double situation there to replace the old one: First, the pensions mean there will be payments for people NOT working anymore. It might be less overall, but the City is still responsible. A colleague of mine asked the Mayor at a public event just what was going on with the pension situation and Mayor Villaraigosa glibly replied, "I don't know, I'm not a pension expert." Well, that's pretty clear now, except there's supposed to be the "... but I'll find out" added to these response when you have somebody who is actually DOING their job.

The second part of the ERIP impact is that you will have the most senior employees leaving and that's usually cutting heavily into management. At Friday's council meeting, the people in the know reported all this to the CMs, many of whom were surprised. They mostly are surprised because they don't pay attention to news the first time it's brought up. Rosendahl was one of them. None of this is news but he started demanding reports and saying that no one should leave without somebody having their tasks covered, most of this directed to critical position holders. The staff reporting said, for example that one department's entire HR people will be leaving.

Usually, matters of common sense and logic don't always register with the CMs. You already know they don't with Villaraigosa who is on another out-of-country trip to Copenhagen and other European destinations that further add to the City deficit. There is nothing that requires him or Los Angeles to be represented at this conference so it's purely for image, usually his own, and as a functional matter, there's a limit to what can be done. Villaraigosa, with the support of Council President Eric Garcetti, continues to "pledge" to meet goals in "greening" Los Angeles, even though most of these actions will be costly to the "rate payers" or other participants.


Costs to the public for greening activity takes a back seat to the "image" and self-interest of the politicians, especially the Mayor. While he continues announcing all these so-called benefits, there is nothing to match that in HOW people, especially those on low or fixed incomes will be able to meet the predicted higher bills. Why is this the case? Simply because THEIR future and life style is more important to THEM and "THEY" call the shots as long as they keep getting re-elected. The Mayor, as a lame duck in his last term as Mayor, still does not appear to care about the city as much as he does to grab the next flight out of town on time.

Getting back to ERIP- the Council will meet on Tuesday and Wednesday and then be off until 2010. There's lots of business unfinished and the ERIP predicament is not clear- other than the people leaving will not be coming back due to "no funds" so the distess that CMs express should be no surprise IF they had been paying attention to the overall picture in the first place. They each have a budget for 20 staff members- and I heard that CM Huizar has more than this, but that's not confirmed. Surely they could have delegated some tasks to some of them for FINDING OUT the consequences of major changes that they put into action. What happened here? They won't tell, of course, but for certain, they won't take the blame and will be spreading around heavily any credit for reaching a solution, complete or half-baked, but any solution wil do for them to grandstand.
------------------------------------

And there's more, too. The Medical Marijuana Dispensary matter is still not finished as there is another delay while more changes and conflicts keep the CMs from fully agreeing on settling this after a few years that it sat on the back burner and the MMDs have risen from less than 200 when a moratorium on new ones was enacted in 2007, to an uncertain number now (as they are opening without city approval) that may be 800 or more in operation. A "hardship exemption" to the moratorium was written into the ordinance that opened the doors for the new operations to open, and that moratorium, though without any enforcement ever happening, was declared invalid as the City tried to extend it further. So there's no moratorium and no ordinance and clarity in this area is still missing. That is a topic for another day, as I see the CMs have postponed action until 2010.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The story says,

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

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

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

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