Reader Comments on Measure B: Did L.A. Port Executives Give Themselves $60K Raises While Demanding Budget Cuts?

Reader comments from: Villaraigosa’s Measure B (Solar Panel) China Connection: NO ON MEASURE B

"Zuma Dogg, start asking questions on how Port of Los Angeles executives gave themselves raises of around $60k while their budget is out of control and demanding budget cuts from staff. Is this why Mr. Freeman committed the Port of Los Angeles to install 10 megawats of solar power on port property? Someone needs to investigate his dealings at the Port. Solar power, electric trucks, maglev, .... No wonder the Port may operate in the red this coming year."

TO ALL THE HATERS...READ IT AND WEEP: Issues to Ponder: Pondering Who to Vote for in L.A. By M Richards

"For the office of Mayor of the city of Los Angeles, I don't think you could do any better than electing Zuma Dogg for that office.It would be better than allowing Tony Villar (Antonio Villaraigosa) a second term." (Click link above for full story!)

From Zach Behrens of LAist.com:

Hey Guys,I just posted the first in a series of questions posed to candidates running for election on March 3rd. Today is three LADOT focused questions for City Controller Candidates Wendy Greuel and Nick Patsaouras:

http://laist.com/2009/01/16/wendy_or_nick_how_they_would_help_f.php

There's a poll at the bottom, so don't forget to vote! And please pass this around so others can read and learn a little more about their future Controller. Thanks for your help,
Zach Behrens Editor, LAist.com

http://zumatimes.com/

Nick Patsaouras STUNNING INDICTMENT of Villaraigosa's Measure B (DWP Solar Power Bamboozle)

HEY!

The following was sent to me by Nick Patsaouras, Candidate for City Controller and past president of the DWP. This is a stunning indictment of negative impacts of Measure B and I am asking that you publish this, prominently, so that voters have the information they need to make an informed vote. While I do not have a dog in this fight, I believe that what Los Angeles votes in March could, potentially, affect the entire country especially in this time of economic upheaval. Thank you for your help.

LA DAILY BLOG READER

Solar Energy: The Right Way

For more than three years and more recently as President of the Department of Water and Power Board of Commissioners, I fought to end waste, inefficiency and contracting abuses in the city-owned utility and sought to create a Ratepayer Advocate to protect the public in the future.

Now we're being asked to give a blank check to the DWP and City Hall to spend billions of dollars on the nation's largest solar energy initiative ever -- a proposal that has no planning, no financial analysis, no engineering study.

Approval of Measure B on the March 3 ballot would be a costly mistake. It will cost ratepayers dearly, set back hopes for reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and provide the special interests and politicians with a license to steal.

I resigned from the DWP Commission in October right after this measure was introduced without even being brought to the DWP board, right after my efforts to bring transparency and accountability by creating the Ratepayer Advocate were brushed aside.

From my experience as an engineer, businessman and 30 years as a watchdog on government spending, I can tell you as a fact the DWP isn't up to the job managing a solar energy this big and this important.

As things stand, the DWP just doesn't have the managerial skill and experience to handle a $3.6 billion solar initiative that's supposed to deliver within five years more than 30 times as much solar energy as the DWP has been able to deliver in the last 12 years.

Despite its high wages and benefits, the DWP has a very hard time recruiting and keeping workers and maintaining existing water and power facilities. Its management and staff are already overburdened trying to fulflil the Department`s commitment to complete a multi-billion dollar investment to bring those facilities up to date.

Just 11 months ago, DWP management felt the best it could do was manage a program to add 20 megawatts of rooftop solar energy to government buildings. Now, it is being asked to own, install and maintain a 400 megawatt system on commercial and industrial buidlings as well plus oversee a public/private solar energy program twice as big.

If past performance is any measure of future success, DWP isn't up to the task of handling this much money. A wind farm in Utah was financed by Lehman Bros., the failed investment firm, and now DWP faces losing that project as part of its renewable energy portfolio or being hit with big cost increases.

Measure B is a blueprint for disaster and the public will get the bill.

Let's go back to the drawing board and come up with a renewable energy plan that makes fiscal sense and common sense, that protects ratepayers from catastrophic increases in their bills and delivers what we all went: A renewable energy program that we can afford, that is well planned and managed and makes Los Angeles the center of a thriving clean energy industry.

Nick Patsaouras
Former President of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Board of Commissioners

NICK PATSAOURAS IS CANDIDATE FOR LOS ANGELES CITY CONTROLLER (versus Wendy Greuel who supports this measure). Today, the E.A.A. (Engineers and Architects) endorsed Nick Patasouras.

A MESSAGE FROM RON KAYE Regarding SATURDAY MEETING (Solar Measure B)

Everyone:

I'm sure everyone knows about the lawsuit against the "Solar 8" over the Prop. B ballot arguments. I'll be talking about the measure and the legal issues to the L.A. Neighborhood Council Coalition meeting on Saturday at the Hollywood City Hall, 6501 Fountain Ave. and those who are interested in being involved can hang out after the LANCC for an informal meeting of the Saving L.A. Project to discuss strategy for the March 3 election.

This is a great opportunity for us to help make a difference. The way City Hall is treating the community has reached a level of arrogance that is bringing people together from all over the city to work for change.

The LANCC meetings starts at 10 a.m. and I'm supposed to speak along with others about 12:30 p.m. so we should be able to hold our meeting about 2 p.m. or so. It's really just to bat ideas around about strategy and tactics and organizing various groups to get involved.

I've been writing a lot about the solar issue on my blog if you want to read in:
http://ronkayela.com/2008/12/the-solar-8-our-legal-defense.html

Many of the court documents and other material are available in those articles.

We're going to need to raise funds for the legal case and the campaign. The DWP Committee led by Soledad Garcia has set up a bank account to receive donations and the money is being handled by SLAP President Heinrich Keifer.

Send checks to "DWP Committee for advocacy," c/o of Secretary/ Treasurer Heinrich Keifer, 5669 York Blvd., Los Angeles CA 90042

All donations are welcome and most importantly help get the word out to other groups you're involved with.

This solar plan is a fraud. It's not about bringing solar energy to L.A., which gets less than 1 percent of its electricity from the sun because the DWP and its union, the IBEW Local 18, have blocked development of solar energy. Prop. B is nothing but a payoff to the union so we can move forward with green power -- something we all want to see -- but the cost is too high and there's utterly no planning or studies to justify.

Even beyond that, the process of rushing this measure through the City Council in just three week with little or no serious public discussion, excluding Neighborhood Councils and the DWP Commission and keeping critical information secret says a lot about just how bad this measure is.

We owe a huge debt of gratitude to City Attorney candidate Noel Weiss for stepping forward last Saturday to give us legal help in responding to the lawsuit.

Happy New Year to everyone, it's going to be an exciting roller-coaster ride.

Best, Ron

Some Good Reasons To Vote "NO" on Measure B (Solar Energy BONDoggle)

This came way via Zuma's email inbox at ZumaDogg@Gmail.com.
Please email it around to get the word out.

SUPPORT SOLAR POWER...VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION B.

There is a more efficient way to produce more solar power AND at a lower
cost using better technology - but if Prop B passes - the City will be
forced to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on outdated technology
that benefits no one but the people who paid to put this on the ballot.

This multi-billion dollar plan was placed on the ballot at the last
minute as the result of City Hall backroom dealings.

There were no public hearings and no engineering and operational input
from DWP. The Council did not consider the impact on Ratepayers, the
overall cost of this massive project, or the impact on the already burdened
infrastructure. Our rates were just raised 24%!

It is just another one of these tricky deals that says it’s about solar
energy and workforce development.

The LA Times wrote, “This rush to the ballot has the scent of swindle
about it."

The Council's own analyst explained that it would be better for the DWP to design a solar
plan with the public’s involvement and then have the Council vote on an ordinance. It’s
really that easy.

Trade union members, environmentalists, solar equipment manufacturers, DWP Ratepayers,
and citizens are disgusted with secret self-serving deals that favor special interests,
in this case the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

· IBEW was the Mayor’s largest financial supporter.

· IBEW will be handed the entire “contract.” There is no competitive bidding.

· Other skilled trade unions can do the work more efficiently.

· The IBEW monopoly will cost Ratepayers hundreds of millions _extra_, which could
be better used to buy additional solar power!

Don’t be fooled by City Hall. Demand honesty and transparency.

MARCH 3, 2009:
VOTE "NO" ON MEASURE B!
VOTE "NO" ON ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA!

LA Voters For Change.com

EVEN MORE Bad Publicity For "Measure B" (Solar Energy Boondoggle) On March '09 Ballot (See Also: Eric Garcetti/Wendy Greuel)

Let's call this "Measure B" Solar Energy BOND, the Solar Energy BONDoggle!

From Ron Kaye (RonKayeLA.com):

Everyone. Please be aware that the mayor's lawyer has dragged Jack Humphreville, me (Ron Kaye) and others who signed the "No on Prop. B" ballot argument into to court today, challenging our statements.

This is being done even as the L.A. Times reveals today that a critical report exposing this solar energy plan as costly and "extremely risky" was being kept secret from City Council members and the public even as the measure was being rushed to the ballot.

The mayor's lawyer, Stephen Kaufman, representing Mitchell Schwarz of the League of Conservation Voters, is demanding opponents pay court costs and legal fees when we don't even have a lawyer. Stay tuned.

ZD's Reply: Oh my goodness. Congratulations, I guess, on their petty, vindictivness, once again.

Oh man, is this gonna garner MEASURE B (Solar Energy Bondoggle) EVEN MORE bad publicity on top of the LA Times article.

What a bunch of A-holes, if "The People" are stuck with the court costs. I can only hope, cause again...EVEN MORE bad publicity, making them look vindictive and retalitory.

NOW, some people will be scared to write a ballot argument. We need a "Special Order 40" type law, now, that will prevent them from being able to stick ballot argument writers with court fees. (LOL!)

IT APPEARS AS THOUGH "MEASURE B" (Solar Energy Bondoggle) IS THE SHADIEST THING ON THE BALLOT THAT ZD HAS SEEN. I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS MUCH BAD PR, FRESH OUT OF THE GATE, AS "MEASURE B" (Solar Energy Boondoggle) HAS GENERATED, SO QUICKLY. (See also: Eric Garcetti, Wendy Greuel.)

ZumaDogg@Gmail.com
ZumaDoggForMayor.com

LA Times SLAMS Measure B, And Garcetti Looks Garshady Over This "Green" Plan

It's over for Measure B, the "green" energy solar measure on the March 3rd, 2009 ballot, that everyone was already against anyway, except for the shady politicians.

Analysis calls ambitious L.A. solar plan 'extremely risky'

An outside consultant says Measure B, which easily made the March 3 ballot, is more costly than portrayed by the city's Department of Water and Power.

By David Zahniser
December 19, 2008

When members of the Los Angeles City Council agreed last month to put an ambitious solar energy plan on the March 3 ballot, they talked effusively about their desire for cleaner air and "green" technology jobs -- the kind that could boost the economy during a recession.

What they didn't discuss was an analysis by a city-hired consulting firm that called the solar plan "extremely risky" and considerably more expensive than was being portrayed by the Department of Water and Power.

Measure B, which calls for unionized DWP workers to install solar panels on rooftops and parking lots across the city, sailed onto the ballot with a unanimous vote. But days earlier, the council's top policy advisor was so troubled by the proposal that, in an e-mail to Council President Eric Garcetti, he recommended that the council delay it until a future election.

After receiving the analysis from the consulting firm, Chief Legislative Analyst Gerry Miller warned Garcetti that the solar measure could result in "substantial increases" to the electricity bills of DWP customers.

Neither Miller nor Garcetti made those findings part of the public record. Since then, Miller's office has rebuffed requests from The Times for a copy of the consulting firm's analysis, saying the state's public records law allows city officials to withhold any document that would reveal the "deliberative process" between the council and its chief legislative analyst.

Miller said Thursday he is no longer worried about the cost, as long as the DWP can secure $1.5 billion in solar tax credits. But he said the agency still must deal with other findings from the consultant, which concluded that the utility "does not have the planning mechanisms and resources in place" to accomplish the solar plan.

Garcetti, for his part, said the consulting firm's findings were not made part of the record because they were among several opinions that he solicited informally on the ballot measure. Solar industry experts disagreed with the numbers produced by the consultant, he said.

"They said that this [ballot measure] was absolutely doable and that that [the consultant's analysis] was wrong."

Still, foes of Measure B said the findings confirm their worst suspicions about the measure -- and the process used to get it on the ballot.

Opponents have called Measure B a backdoor mechanism to make voters sign off on a huge package of DWP rate increases. And they accused Garcetti and Miller of concealing the findings of the private analysts, P.A. Consulting Group.

"That's the problem with City Hall," said former DWP Commission President Nick Patsaouras, who opposes Measure B and is running for city controller. "They think the average taxpayer is not smart enough to tell them the truth."

In a Nov. 4 e-mail obtained by The Times, Miller told Garcetti that he entered into a "quick contract with a very reputable firm" to study the solar plan at Garcetti's request. He offered to keep the analysis from other council members even as he complained that DWP officials had failed to do their own thorough analysis of the measure. "It concerns me greatly that the department did not come forward with this information themselves," Miller wrote. "It would have been as available to them as it was to me."

Miller later concluded: "Since this request came directly from you, I am not sharing this with [Councilwoman] Wendy [Greuel] or the other members until you clear it."

Garcetti said he later gave Miller permission to give the findings to other council members -- and would not have voted to place the measure on the ballot if he thought the findings were accurate.

Still, Councilman Bernard C. Parks, who heads the council's Budget and Finance Committee, said he never received the findings -- and wished that he had.

"If this is accurate information, or at least a point of view, the council should get the chance to ferret through this," Parks said.

The DWP has already agreed to impose increases of nearly 24% on electricity bills between 2006 and 2010. DWP officials contend the solar plan would lead to rate hikes of no more than 4% for the average household, and that those would occur no sooner than 2011.

But according to a one-page summary attached to Miller's e-mail, P.A. Consulting Group warned that ratepayers could face annual surcharges of up to 12% per year if Measure B passes.

The analysis also said that the solar plan would cost $3.6 billion, not the $1.5 billion suggested by DWP General Manager H. David Nahai.

"Bottom line is they do not believe that the department can deliver on this program at all, and that the costs associated with the program are way understated," Miller wrote in his e-mail to Garcetti.

CITY CONTROLLER ELECTION ALERT SIDEBAR: Wendy Greuel
wants to be City Controller? Not with a comment like this; "Greuel,
who is also running for city controller, said she also looked at Miller's document
but concluded that the DWP had answered all the questions raised by it."

WAY TO GO "GREUESOM!" I LIKE THE OTHER CANDIDATE'S REPLY MUCH
MORE..."That's the problem with City Hall," said former DWP
Commission President Nick Patsaouras, who opposes Measure B and
is running for city controller."They think the average taxpayer
is not smart enough to tell them the truth."

Read More "Greuesome Garshadiness"