HUGE!!!
Everyone (including Zuma Dogg) is all happy about the LA Weekly story about the $8 million CRA battle between the CRA (Community Robbing A-holes) and LA City Councilmembers Cardenas and Perry that has now caught the attention of a Federal judge.
BUT DOES ANYONE HAPPEN TO REMEMBER WHEN MC ZUMA DOGG BROKE THIS STORY LAST YEAR (September '07)?
The great David Z. of LA Times did a story on this $8 million CRA/Council issue. But it was Zuma Dogg's inside City Hall sources that provided the REAL DEAL on this issue -- and now it all comes to light in the LA Weekly, as blogged by Zuma Dogg last year!!!
PLUS -- In case you missed it...LA Times did a FRONT PAGE SUNDAY COVER STORY, last week, on ZD's #1 "pet peeve" -- non profit corruption (fraud, waste and abuse)!!! A couple weeks ago I started shouting, "WHERE IS THE LA TIMES AND OTHER MEDIA ON THIS STORY!?!?! And a week or so later, ZD had his front page Sunday Times story!!! (I don't care if it was a coincidence...I'm taking full credit, y'all!!!)
AND NOW...on the heels of that...THIS!:
From: LA Weekly
Los Angeles City Hall as Slumlord
Council members Perry and Cardenas pressured the CRA to hand Ruben Islas public money. But a federal judge called it like it was.
by Tibby Rothman
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
BRUSHING OFF THE ALLEGATIONS of a bedraggled group of protesting tenants at an explosive Community Redevelopment Agency hearing last summer, two Los Angeles City Council members lobbied extensively — and unusually — to assure that the alleged slumlord of the Alexandria Hotel, Ruben Islas, received $8 million in taxpayer monies for another, similar downtown renovation project.
L.A. Weekly has learned that City Councilman Tony Cardenas and his colleague Jan Perry — with an assist from Assemblyman Fabian Núñez — sought Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s personal involvement last August to make an unguaranteed loan of public funds to Islas, a rich political insider.
Read MoreHERE ARE TWO BLOG POSTS BY BIG ZD ON THIS ISSUE:
Friday, September 07, 2007
Zuma Dogg Follow-Up To Zahniser's LA Times Story On Shady As F*CK CRA (Community Robbing A-holes)
Ben Frankilin said if he had more time, he would have written a shorter book. In this case, if my A.D.D. wasn't so bad, I may have been able to simplify this story. But it's a good starting point for those who care to indulge in what may be going on "behind the scenes" at the CRA as ZD reads "between the lines" of Zahniser's LA Times story on the shady as hell Redevelopment Agency.FROM ZUMA'S INBOX: ZumaTimes.com (ZT) ZD wrote about Eli Broad's Grand Ave project and started talking about Profitable Affordable Housing on about 8/10/2007, so someone acted tough on 8/16/2007? Unfortunately, someone probably didn't read the detail, and predictably acted tough on a medium or small developer? Perhaps ZD caused the big fight there at CRA?
Zuma Times follow-up on:
Divided agency guides L.A. growth
By David Zahniser, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 4, 2007
Are they having a "cat fight" at CRA over (profitable) non-profit affordable housing?
by Zuma Dogg
MAN, do I wish I was Bewitched so I could wiggle my nose and have a Jurassic Park dinosaur eat the whole damn CRA. But the corruption would probably give the dinosaur acid reflux. I'll try and simplify this later, but this should allow those in the know to add some additional info. Most of you won't give a hoot about this. BUT IF YOU WORK FOR A NEWSPAPER, MAYBE YOU CAN DO SOMETHING WITH THIS.
ZumaTimes.com (ZT) recently wrote about Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (perhaps along with LAANE) being soft with big developers such as Chris Pak (paying only $900,000 to waive 30+ affordable units?), while LA Times writes this article about how LAANE is being so tough with other small or medium developers; who either don't have the "in" connections; who didn't contribute to the right people; or who haven't hired the right consultants; or who don't understand that they have to pre-negotiate with LAANE and know to go to LAANE first -- not just to CRA staff or Council Office.
Zuma Dogg is concerned they are more (only) concerned about maximizing profits for the (profitable) non-profit affordable housing developers who are either related to them; buddies of theirs or have hired certain consultants or have made certain donations.
LA Times, "Historically, the redevelopment agency made such demands only of developers who received direct cash subsidies. But these days, the left bloc contends that any decision that benefits a developer financially -- an increase in height for a building, a reduction in open space around condos, a change in zoning --is grounds for extracting more concessions."
Meaning they have created more ways and more reasons for developers to hire consultants and have more reasons for developers to make donations or contributions as they await approval of their projects before the City of Los Angeles.
CLICK READ MORE FOR SOME STUFF THAT'S GONNA GET ZD IN SOME HOT WATER I AM TOLD...BUT I DON'T LIKE TO HOLD THIS STUFF IN. ANY CLARIFICATIONS, PLEASE POST A COMMENT.
LA Times, "When the real estate market was soaring, some commissioners spoke in favor of getting as many concessions as possible out of developers, Jackson said. Now that the market is shaky, those same concessions may end up killing economic activity", Jackson said.
[THIS IS HOW YOU TANK THE LA ECONOMY LIKE AN ANVIL ON A HOUSE OF CARDS.]
"There were points that weren't completely negotiated. And there was all of this political pressure put on every member of the board." (said by Janis)
["There were points that weren't completely negotiated"?]
How did SHE know? How WOULD she know?
Did she take part in the negotiation too?
ZUMA DOGG WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LIST OF NEW PURE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE CITY THAT ARE GOT SUBSIDIES AND/OR ZONING CHANGES. (Same thing, right Mr. Perez?). INCLUDING THE TOTAL COST PER UNIT AND UNIT SIZE. (Including the value of the zoning change and/or free land). ALL SUBSIDIES AND BENEFITS FROM ALL AGENCIES COMBINES, PER UNIT ON EACH PROJECT.
SINCE IT'S PUBLIC MONEY, THAT INFO SHOULD BE AVAILABLE? WHERE DOES ZD GO TO PICK IT UP?
AND, does LAANE release a list of all its contributors?
More stories ….
THE FIGHT:
LA Times says, "Tenants of a building in downtown Los Angeles were furious over multiple evictions, and Commissioner Joan Ling wanted to quiz them about it. Commission President William Jackson did not."
Someone explained to ZD that, "Joan Ling wanted to quiz them" means that she wanted to help and give them a second chance to speak more. Next time, when ZD is at City Council and wants to speak for more than 2 minutes, just ask Eric to please quiz ZD.
Joan Ling is the (profitable) non-profit Affordable Housing expert in Santa Monica, is very close to LAANE, and is a good friend of Janis (Does anyone know if she is working on any non-profit LA projects?)
CRA Commission Chairman Bill Jackson is a lawyer. He is described to The Times (Zuma, not LA) as, "quite reasonable and moderate. He tries to use a balanced approach, but perhaps being too easy-going, sometimes gets taken advantage by fellow board members."
LA Times reports, "Jackson interrupted Ling, saying the commission needed to move on. Ling then cut off Jackson, saying she had a right to ask questions. The spat ended when Ling and another commissioner abruptly left the room to meet with the tenants. And that was just the public comment period."
As if these two commissioners (at least one is an affordable housing expert) don't already know what affordable housing tenants usually complain about. We could have told them: 1. Illegal rent increases and evictions 2. Unsatisfactory living conditions: things don't get fixed or repaired - both of which agency staff have no time to deal with 98% of the time. But the thing is, it is the same with most Affordable Housing. Some commissioners make it look like there are good guys and bad guys. But most of them are "bad".
LA Times, "At its most basic level, the commission has two distinct camps: three pro-business members who favor the free market and three left-leaning members who aren't afraid to demand new, sometimes unprecedented concessions from developers on behalf of renters and low-wage workers."
On behalf of renters and low-wage workers? (LOL!) Zuma Dogg is of the first amendment protected opinion that they are playing "tug-o-war" (deciding/arguing) over which Profitable Non-Profit or For-Profit Affordable Housing group they get to give the projects to.
Some commissioners use "renters and low-wage workers" as "warm and fuzzy" excuses to block projects from going to small or medium developers who aren't on the "cahoots" list of preferred developers.
However, the few big developers, in the know (who know the "ins and outs" tricks) will receive much less bamboozlement/more expeditiously/friendlier treatment from the board.
(Like only paying $900,000 to waive 30+ onsite affordable housing units at the Wilshire-Western MTA project? And when I say 30+, it's really 37.)
ANOTHER INCIDENT
LA Times, "The unpredictable meetings have infuriated some City Council members, who have begun intervening aggressively on behalf of projects in their districts. Last year, Councilman Bernard C. Parks was livid after commissioners demanded that a developer of student housing near USC pay its property taxes early, at $42,000 per month, into a fund for affordable housing."
$42,000 property tax per month? That's $504,000 a year!
Chris Pak, who the Times wrote about recently has a 2.6 Acre project sitting on County MTA land with a ground lease of only $350,000 a year. Chris Pak's project doesn't have to pay any property taxes on the land by leasing it. County MTA still owns it (so no one will have to pay any property tax on the land). And by leasing it at $350,000 a year, doesn't it cost less than the property taxes on the land value alone that Chris Pak's group would have to pay if they were given the land for free?
And did Chris Pak's group pay only $900,000 to waive 30+ affordable units?
BREAKDOWN ON THE MULTIPLE ROLES OF A HARDWORKING CRA COMMISONER
LA Times, "Parks said the deal would have scared other for-profit developers away from his South Los Angeles district, an area starved for investment. "We went to the mayor and said this has to be overturned, because these commissioners are behaving as though they are the developers," he said.
As though they are the developers! Some commissioners may be using certain practice. Besides acting like the developers, also as plaintiffs (defendants sometimes), the plaintiffs' (or defendants') lawyers who coach some people beforehand as witnesses or speakers speaking for or against projects, on one side of the bench.
Behind the scenes/curtain as the negotiators, dealmakers, or fundraisers (non-profits). And on the other side of the bench, as the jury, judges, and final decision makers! All by the same people!!! I can see Alfred E. Newman saying it now, "What Conflict of Interest?" They are non-profits!?!? They have no financial interest. Only to help the people on these "warm and fuzzy" issues. No conflict of interests here! Ignore the man behind the curtain.
Instead of providing checks and balances to the system, some of these commissioners seem to want to do it all by themselves and eliminate all checks and balances.
From another LA Times article, "But some protest bitterly in private and warn that as the market softens, they may opt to take their building projects elsewhere rather than knuckle under to what they see as extortion from Janis and like-minded colleagues."
Currrent LA Times article: … she said, "with the addition of Ling, a provider of affordable housing; John Perez, political director of United Food and Commercial Workers in Orange County; and Madeline Janis, who heads the L.A. Alliance for a New Economy, a group focused on improving the incomes of low-wage workers."
LAANE stands for "L.A. Alliance for a New Economy". But Zuma Dogg says it stands for "LA Alliance for a Neutered Economy".
They mentioned Janis last and tried to lower her profile? She is by far the "brain" and leader (a much better 2 or 3-way horse trader).
"John, Joan and Madeline are concerned about low-income people," Dennison said.
ZT hears that Dennison is LAANE's non-profit buddy.
Concerned about low-income people again? ("Warm and Fuzzy", y'all!)
If only ONE low-income person was really helped every time they make that proclamation, we wouldn't have any.
The LA Times article mentions (finally) that Perez is the mayor's cousin.
contact: zumadogg@gmail.com
http://mayorsam.blogspot.com/2007/09/zuma-dogg-follow-up-to-zanhisers-la.html
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Better than Liddel vs Gracie: CRA/LAANE vs LA City Council
First it was commissioners against commissioners (See ZD coverage of LAANE/CRA stories on this blog). Now it is between one commissioner and two Councilmembers. (CM Perry and CM Cardenas)Wow! One against two. And I thought Councilmembers were powerful? But I guess it’s commissioners. (Or at least a commissioner that sits on LAANE AND CRA!) So, Perry and Cardenas had to sit through the four hour meeting in the peanut gallery like Dogg and Dowd! (LOL!)
LA TIMES: City funding for developer angers housing advocates
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-hotel15sep15,1,3571112.story?coll=la-headlines-california
By David Zahniser and Jessica Garrison, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
September 15, 2007
LA Times: “Days after that vote, commissioner Madeline Janis, one of seven board members appointed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, said her colleagues were under pressure to approve the $8-million package.”
[ LA Times...please don't forget to mention that Janis is the paid Executive Director of LAANE. And please look into LAANE a little bit more, like getting hold of their complete list of donors and contributors, etc. ]
Janis said it was especially unusual to see two council members -- Jan Perry, who represents downtown, and Tony Cardenas, who represents the San Fernando Valley -- sit through four hours of discussion on the matter.
"There was all of this political pressure put on every member of the board," Janis said. "It was direct, like having two council members sitting there the entire time, to the indirect, like hearing back that the developer was really angry and was going have retribution against any CRA board member who didn't support him."
Cardenas and Perry disputed the allegations. "I don't know Madeline very well, but anyone who comes up with such a concoction of a scenario is confused and making things up," Cardenas said.
[Interesting that CM Cardenas told Zuma Times (on the record, during a Housing Committee meeting, in response to my comments over “profitable” non-profit housing scheme as blogged here) that he had heard a story that was happening, too. (Driving up the cost of affordable housing units for developer profit.)]
LAANE: Can You disclose your COMPLETE list of donors and contributors.
Oh no...Someone may be trying to scare Zuma Dogg away from this whole LAANE/CRA/Profitable Non-Profit Housing Story:
CLICK READ MORE:
Zuma,
As you mentioned, LAANE is backed by the County Fed AFL CIO and ACLU. That is a formidable force!
LAANE can threaten lawsuits and can actually follow up with real lawsuits quite often (along with the help of ACLU).
A lot of people including some city hall politicians are fearful of LAANE because of that -- in addition to LAANE's powerful County Fed AFL-CIO backing.
Most people who understand what you are explaining are lobbyists, consultants, lawyers, developers, politicians and professional staffers who have made a lot of money by knowing some of the things you mention.
SOMEONE ELSE EXPLAINS TO ZUMA TIMES WHY THERE IS A LOT TO IGNORE HERE:
They want to keep making more money using the same old tricks. They want to keep the secrets for themselves. They don't want to disclose or share any of this stuff. Plus, they have made plenty of shady deals too. They don't want to be exposed and get into trouble.
zumadogg@gmail.com
[I TOLD YO AZZ!!!
Posts
