L.A. CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 8, 2011 ELECTION VOTER GUIDE

LA CITY NEWS
MARCH 2011, L.A. CITY COUNCIL - ELECTION EDITION
by Zuma Dogg

Welcome to LA City News - Election Edition. There are important Los Angeles City Council elections throughout the city on Tuesday, March 8, 2011.

As you are someone reading this, we hope you help raise awareness, this election season, letting people know that there is, indeed, ANOTHER election on Tuesday, March 8th.

After the intense round of Gubernatorial and proposition debates during the recent election, some people may think they are reading about the previous election, not able to fathom that it is ALREADY time to once again put on our voter "thinking caps."

The current crop of city-hall-machine, incumbent officials are planning on this election flying under the radar with as low of a voter turn-out as possible...so they can have their political machines send their people to the polls -- with as few real community members casting ballots AGAINST them as possible.

There are seven city council seats up for grabs in the March 8th election: CD 2 (incumbent Paul Krekorian), CD 4 (incumbent Tom La Bonge), CD 6 (incumbent Tony Cardenas), CD 8 (incumbent Bernard Parks), CD 10 (incumbent Herb Wesson), CD 12 (open seat/no incumbent), CD 14 (incumbent Jose Huizar).

DISTRICT RUNDOWN:

CD 2: Paul Krekorian was just recently elected to the seat about a year and a half ago, and hasn't been in the seat long enough to lose support, yet. The slickest of the shady machine-backed incumbents is expected to easily win re-election. So LA City News is not going to get into this election much, in favor of focusing attention on the other tighter elections where the grass root/community candidates have much more of a viable shot at winning the election. Although it would be nice for Krekorian to lose; as he is part of the slick, political, city hall machine...he'll easily win since he is still new, and isn't tagged with being in office while all the disaster was being created.

Although we would like Paul Krekorian to be replaced with a true community member (not a professional, political-insider, seat jumper like Krekorian), it isn't likely.

HOWEVER, Augusto Biasani is the grass roots candidate to vote for to send a message to City Hall! I have gotten to know Augusto, personally, and can vouch that he is a quality, thoughtful, individual. One of the most compassionate and upstanding people I've met in this city as an activist.

CD 8: Bernard Parks is the only incumbent that LA City News actively asks you to support for re-election. We actually WANT Bernard Parks to WIN! He MUST WIN! He is the only councilmember in chambers that has a grasp on the budget, has been warning council all along, trying to get the body to take responsible action -- and if nothing else, is the councilmember who will always press his button to stand up and expose the problem at hand, before council, that the rest would have allowed to go unsaid, and off the public record and TV 35 airwaves.

So we can't kick out the only Councilmember who is trying to put on the brakes for the rest of us watching at home. AND, Councilmember Parks has a lot of competition being thrown at him...some of it most likely from the unions he stands up against. And the political machine opposition they will be running against Parks to try and take his seat will be MUCH WORSE than any other issue you may have with Parks. We are at a BIG PICTURE juncture in this city's history. We aren't gonna lose Park's seat to a grass root candidate. We will lose Park's seat to the TRUE city hall machine candidate.

At least Parks is truly a thorn in the mayor (and many times, his own council's) side. HELP SUPPORT PARKS IN HIS CAMPAIGN AND MAKE SURE HE WINS. AND BERNARD PARKS IS THE ONLY INCUMBENT TO RE-ELECT. ON MARCH 8, 2011, send a clear message to Los Angeles City Hall and vote out all the current councilmembers (except Parks) -- and replace them with the grass roots/community candidate in your neighborhood.

CD 4: Incumbent Tom La Bonge: Tomas O'Grady and Steve Box running against La Bonge.

CD 6: REPLACE INCUMBENT TONY CARDENAS WITH DAVID BARRON. (I know David Barron. A very viable candidate with solid, inside knowledge of the inner workings of city hall. Has been a good friend to Zuma Dogg over the years and I have really benefited by his knowledge.)

CD 8: Re-elect incumbent Bernard Parks.

CD 10: REPLACE INCUMBENT HERB WESSON WITH AUSTIN DRAGON (http://AustinDragon.com). (Althea Shaw supporters vote for Althea. http://AltheaShaw.com) A vote for EITHER is a vote AWAY from Herb! SUPPORT THESE CANDIDATES' CAMPAIGN! (Remember, even if you do not have an election in your district, a councilmember votes on citywide issues that directly affect you and your district.) And Herb is much more of a powerful mover and shaker inside council chambers and city hall than his constituents realize. 

Herb is great at having pancake breakfasts, BBQs and monthly movie showings...so he has a lot of support from dummies who vote based on who fed them the largest stack of pancakes. The challenge is to get the word out that Herb voted "yes," for every rate increase, fee hike, new tax and every reduction in service that his constituents are up in arms over. 

Herb Wesson is Housing Chair -- and the city's housing policy stinks of corruption allegations and an accompanying lawsuit. Councilman Wesson boasts that his, "best friend is Antonio Villaraigosa." If you don't like the direction of the city under Villaraigosa, then you don't like the direction of the city under Herb Wesson. (Check his voting record.) 

The other very real issue, is that Herb Wesson spends WAY too much time, OUTSIDE city hall (as in OUTSIDE with the grass and trees) on smoking breaks -- DURING the city council meetings. It's not about Herb smoking, or not. It's about Herb not being present at the council meeting when the public is giving testimony; when city experts are presenting information that the vote is to be based upon; he doesn't hear the debate of his colleagues...but most importantly, isn't inside council chambers to stand up and fight for his district and his people. And when you read about his involvement on the CRA project merger that is awash in controversy (shady allegations) -- HERB'S GOTTA GO! (Get out the word.)

CD 12: Open seat. Vote for anyone besides insider City Hall machine candidate Mitch Englander. (Sorry, Mitch!)

CD 14: REPLACE INCUMBENT JOSE HUIZAR WITH RUDY MARTINEZ. No matter how dirty Jose goes against Rudy at the end of the campaign...you cannot reward Huizar's behavior as an elected official, nor, Villaraigosa & City Hall with another term. What makes Rudy Martinez a most viable candidate among all the other grass root candidates in the other districts is the big money he is able to personally finance his campaign with as a reality show TV personality and successful business operator. Pull the plug on a this firmly-entrenched Villaraiogsa political machine. If you know someone else running in CD 14 that you want to support and vote for, vote for them. ANYONE BUT HUIZAR.

And keep reading LA City News (online at http://LACityNews.com) for some of the shenanigans (reasons to vote out Huizar) that go on in CD 14 and in the other council districts.

Zuma Dogg Takes Stage To Rally Masses At Bernard Parks For Supervisor Campaign Event -- Plus Perry, Rosendahl, Molina & Waters (Preface)

[Pictured: "Tons of Fun" Supervisor Candidate Bernard Parks]

What a truly triumphant day it was in the City of Los Angeles as a diverse coatlition of City, County and State elected officials joined Zuma Dogg on stage to endorse "Bernard Parks for Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, District 2!"

After showing up at City Hall for over two and a half years, and really turning up the heat over the past five months, with only one council meeting absense in five months; ZD wanted to try and channel some of the frenetic energy I have been putting out there; and focus it toward something out there, this election season.

And I found my cause in the most unlikely of places...Oh no, not Parks?!?!?

But Zuma Dogg is more confident, assured, passionate, pleased and fired-up over the decision to make quite a statement by deciding to push hard to help get a Councilmember ELECTED for higher office...when all these past two years, I was just chompin' at the bit to do everything humanly possible to PREVENT an LA City Councilmember from advancing into any thing else than the private sector.

ZD will be bringing attention to certain ballot measures and bonds on the ballot, this election...but the LA County Board of County Supervisors is an important as hell election, this November 4th, because the only time one of these positions turn over, is when the person retires. (Once your ass is in that seat, it's almost impossible for voters to pry your ass out. INCUMBENTS ALWAYS WIN!)

I was out of town during the first election which ended in this November run-off. But now that I am back in action, I wanted to get to the bottom of the Board of Supes race to see if I felt passionate, one way or the other between California State Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas and Bernard Parks.

And of course, my intial first take was that the mayor was probably behind Parks and I would probably like Thomas, better.

So right away, I find out that Villaraigosa didn't endorse Parks (and insiders told me Villar wants Ridely-Thomas to win.)

That means, Parks is still in the ballgame. Because if Antonio was not endorsing Parks, that was a good sign to me, and something was up, and I needed to roll up my sleeves and check it out.

Bottom line: Yeah, Parks is the grass-roots candidate and Ridely-Thomas had all that shady labor money behind him, and suddenly it all came together!

FORGET ABOUT PARKS FOR A MINUTE...IF RIDLEY-THOMAS GETS IN THERE...things would be going the "Villaraiogsa" way on the legislation (and spending) -- AND I SERIOUSLY DO THINK, YOU MAY AS WELL FLUSH THE COUNTY (AND REGION) DOWN THE TOILET IF MARK RIDLEY-THOMAS WERE TO BE IN THAT SEAT!

So then, I was thinking back on CM Parks, since my attendance of the meetings. And although as a body, I am no fan of ANY councilmember since they all vote on the stuff I am against (including Parks).

But Ridley-Thomas wouldn't have been any maverick, either. And 99% of the time, you just aren't going to be gettting too excited about the perfection level of ANY politician, jsut by the nature of the game and what it takes to get elected in the first place.

But this election isn't about reforming the democratic system...it's about THIS ELECTION before us, that will have a long-standing effect on the City, County, region and State. (And as goes California, will go the rest of the nation.) SO THIS IS BIGGER THAN A COUNCIL ELECTION!

So when looking to see if a candidate is worthy of endorsement, ZD looks to see if they have distinguished themselves in at least ONE (or two) ways. Because, unfortunately, that IS all it takes to stand out from the pack of elected officials in this city and county.

And I can maintain credibilty by saying that Bernard Parks HAS distinguished himself in a way that I look for. In his case, the prudent, responsible, fiscal conservative who is the Councilmember you can expect to hit his buzzer, to warn the ir-responsible and juvenile behaving Los Angles City Council how their actions may have a negative financial impact in the future. (Aka: They're setting themseleves up for lawsuits.)

Remember, "Oh no...not Parks!" (One of the most viewed YouTubes and many people's favorite.) Well today, I was thinking about how the reason that I said, "Oh no, not Parks" is actually the reason I like him for Board of County Supervisor. Here's how "Oh no, not Parks" came about:

Zuma Dogg and Matt Dowd were in Van Nuys waiting to beam our public comment back to City Hall. A loooooooong agenda item was JUST wrapping up, and ZD even took to the podium in Van Nuys to be ready when they cut over...but then, President Pro-Tem Wendy Greuel pipes in, "Oh, Councilmember Parks would like to speak."

WHAT!?!?! I thought we were outta there and on to the next thing. But here comes Parks, just when the the students thought they were done for the day to say, "Oh yeah, we didn't review yesterday's assignment, so before we go for the day, let's go over it with a fine tooth comb."

JUST WHEN I THOUGHT WE WERE DONE, "OH NO, NOT PARKS!" (Knowing we were in for a long, prudent, fiscally responsible discussion of the pitfalls.)

And when I have popped into the SCAG meetings for a spot inspection of Councilmember attendance, out of the 15, he is one of only three who attend regularly. And I can tell you, I was never sure if Parks was just an empty headed-dummy, or not...but this guy sits there with his face in these fifteen inch thick reports and reads, reads, read, reads this stuff. (I've always joked, he HAS to read every bit of information, because it's free so he can't pass it up!)

So Councilmember Parks is no Tom LaBong. He may bore you to tears with the explanation of what he has learned, but when you look at the two candidates running for Board of County Supervisors this November 4th, Zuma Dogg feels if there is ONE ISSUE he can take on and try and squeeze as much energy out of himself to do all the things to rally the masses...

IT'S TO MAKE SURE BERNARD PARKS HAS HIS ASS IN THAT SEAT, ALL LEANED BACK AND COMFORTABLE NEXT TO ZEV AND ANTONOVICH!!! (And then ZD will be showing up to make Parks as un-comfortable as possible. Cause there's nothing shadier and impossible to move through than the beuaratic-saturated Board of County Stupidvisors! And I hope ZD welcomes CM Parks to the club!

NEXT: LA Daily Blog covers Parks for Supervisor election kick-off rally event.

Park's Park Politics?

MASSIVE UPDATE: COUNCILMEMBER PARKS DENIES INVOLVEMENT AND CALLS FOR AN INVESTIGATION INTO THIS MATTER!!! (See story at LA Daily Blog.com.) But I am leaving the original allegations regarding Park's involvement because that is the talk that was being bantied about in the media and public opinion, and is the reason Parks is quick to be seen calling for this investigation. (I was told by his office they are aware of how his name is being associated with this event in the media.)

Inspector General Zuma Dogg has completed his initial investigation into the police encounter the Shaw family experienced this past Sunday at Leimert Park in Board of County Supervisor candidate (and current LA City Councilmember) Bernard Park's district.

Much has been said and speculated, so ZD got on the phone and started aksing some question, myself, to try and clarify some details.

DETAILS:

The police activity at Leimert Park this past Sunday was part of a task force, put together by the City Attorney's office, in response to complaints from community business owners and residents regarding "illegal vending" (although all criminal activity was part of the "task," too).

It was a County wide effort including both LAPD (who denied any "contact" with the Shaws); General Services Officers (a separate "police force" started by LA City in 2004 to patrol city property like City Hall, public buildings and the parks); plus other county agencies.

HOWEVER, no motorcycles or helicopters were part of the order from the City Attorney's office and those resources were not included in the briefing before the event.

Zuma Dogg was told by one of the involved agencies that there was a traffic accident later in the afternoon, and the LAPD motorcycle cops were responding to that and were not used in the "illegal vending" park sweep.

It was not confirmed whether the helicopter was there for the accident, but it was NOT there in conjunction with this task force. (And although ZD was not there as an eyewitness, conceptually I can believe this, because even if the REAL reason to do the sweep WAS to target the Shaws specifically for whatever reason -- I DON'T THINK THEY NEED OR WOULD CALL IN A HELICOPTER!)

Which brings me to the next point: WOW, did this backfire on the City! Cause now helicopters and motorcycle cops are all part of the public perception, and the City is claiming it was just a coincidence the Shaws were there when the task force swept in and that they wouldn't target the Shaws (claiming they did not know who they were when they approached the table).

So now what would have been a great PR event for cracking down on illegal vending turned into the City looking like they were targeting and harassing the Shaw gathering in the media and minds of the public.

But of course common belief is that this was not about a wave of complaints about illegal vendors taking over Leimert Park, causing Councilmember Parks to contact the City Attorney's office to take action; but because the Shaws are KNOWN to be there every Sunday.

Ron Kaye mentioned to Zuma Dogg (I called Ron to tell him what I heard and for his experienced take) and he said the same thing ZD's source actually told me; the request probably came from a community prosecutor or neighborhood level. (But as Althea Shaw has stated, she was told, any complaints...call Councilmember Parks, he knows about this.) So that would mean CM Parks' name may even be part of the City Attorney request (doubt it though). AND, I was told that the Shaws' name was not mentioned anywhere in the briefing.

But I'm sure your reaction will be the same as Ron Kaye's: "So the police didn't have to know who were pulling their strings." And based on what I was told by one of my sources during my investigation; it didn't come from as high up as the mayor's office. But from the "district level." (So maybe some readers may feel the mayor put Park up to it, or was in cahoots with Parks, but for the purpose of this investigation, based on my time and resources, this came from the Council District level.)

Zuma Dogg spoke with a police officer with knowledge of the event, and I aksed, "Well if it is a task force targeting illegal vending (and other violations/crime), why did you approach the Shaws and why didn't you move on, once Jamiel Shaw, Sr. informed you as to who they were and why they were there?"

Response: First of all, the source claims officers did not know who they were when they were approached for having their table blocking a walkway. (Again, I wasn't there; but blocking means obstructing others from passing. NOT just taking space where you preferred they did not.)

But for arguments sake, the table was BLOCKING the path. When told about it, the Shaws agreed to move, but the area they pointed to was no good either. (And maybe it wasn't. I know what they pull at Venice Beach -- and this all sounds like the same routine.)

But at Venice Beach, the cops will AKS you to move the table, first. THEN, if you say, "I kinda like it here, I'm not moving" -- THEN they will aks for your ID and issue a written warning. After that, if they come back and you are still there, you will be arrested.

So why no warning and straight to, "ID and Social Security number?" Warnings are at officers' discretion and since this was a "task force" no warnings were given, cause they were trying to get people's info for future encounters and lay down the line.

But why didn't they just move on when they found out it was only the Shaws doing signature gathering, if they simply moved their table? (Since I was told it was ONLY about the table, even though some water and food items [bagged chips)] may have been discussed, too?)

Zuma Dogg was told, then they get complaints from others that the police are not enforcing things equally and are only targeting some people. (Zuma Dogg would have told the people who complain that they were only gathering signatures, not illegal vending or any other illegal act the task force was targeting.)

So to put the best spin on this: Due to complaints from the community regarding illegal vending (and other possible illegal activity/nuisances to the community) taking place in Leimert Park during the weekend, the City Attorney responded to the district's request (probably Councilmember Parks) and sent a county wide task force into the park to sweep through and bust up the crime and inform violators to the laws and how they are being violated. (They do this at Venice Beach from time to time, too, regarding the vendors on the beach side.)

But I'm sure most readers feel the worst spin is that Councilmember Bernard Parks (who is running for Board of County Supervisors and Mayor Antonio is behind the campaign) contacted the City Attorney's office to send over a task force that did not include helicopters or motorcycles to try and swat the Shaw Family signature gathering out of the high profile park. And if you were to crack down on illegal vending, this isn't exactly very high up on the list of illegal vending spots in the city. BUT THIS, is the issue the City is rushing to the rescue to take care of with a county wide task force. Man, I'm just glad those helicopters werent' there for it!

ZumaTimes.com
ZumaDogg@Mayor09.com

WARNING: If Tennie Pierce Settlement Drove You Crazy...Add Another $1.6 Million For Punished Fire Captains!

Doesn't this baby deserve at least half a million?

Fire Captains Awarded $1.6 Million In Hazing Follow-Up Case

LOS ANGELES -- Two white Los Angeles city fire captains were collectively awarded more than $1.6 million Monday by a jury that found their race played a factor in their punishment when a firefighter they supervised was fed dog food as a prank.

John D. Tohill was awarded $1.05 million in damages and Capt. Christopher R. Burton received $592,000. The Los Angeles Superior Court jury deliberated for about 1 1/2 days before reaching a verdict in the captains' lawsuit, which they filed in October 2006.

The award comes about six months after Tennie Pierce, the victim of the dog food prank, received a $1.43 million settlement in his lawsuit against the city.

One of the captains' attorneys, Gregory W. Smith, said he was pleased with the outcome of the case. "I'm just sorry that the taxpayers had to pay millions of dollars to defend a lawsuit that the city could have settled for much less." (Hello, Bernie Parks! What's up wit it, dough?)

full article

CLICK HERE FOR EZ ACCESS TO ALL RECENT LA DAILY BLOG POSTS (Aka: Super Mega-Master SHADY REPORT)