Zuma Dogg on Zev Yaroslavsky As L.A. Mayoral Candidate

[Pictured: One SWELL guy! Moe Howard's Estate called. They want his act back!]

SUMMARY: DO NOT VOTE FOR ZEV YAROSLAVSKY FOR L.A. MAYOR! (Look at his record and performance as Los Angeles Board of County Stupidvisors.)

Board of County Supervisors (BOS) are FAR WORSE than L.A. City Council; and based on my review of Stupidvisor Yaroslavsky's performance, at the BOS meetings, as televised throughout the county...MOE HOWARD'S ESTATE CALLED: They say, "Ceast and Desist on the 'Moe from 3 Stooges' Act."

So Zev is a career politician, who has sat on his lazy, bureaucratic ass for twenty years, or so, in the same seat, as the county slid right into the toilet, under his brilliant analysis, assessments and voting record. (He paid $200,000 to have his social network set up for him. (Didn't YOU set up you facebook, twitter and blog, for free, by yourself? Even if he had to pay someone to do it, $200,000??? What does HE care...not HIS money.)

So more to come on Zev "The 4th Stooge" Yarboslobsky: But finally, here's what concerns me about his campaign for mayor, if he chooses to run. (And I say he still might not run, cause Austin Beutner, the city hall-backed candidate, has retained the political consulting services of Ace "Avril" Smith. So that means Zev is gonna be DESTROYED in the mailer attack campaign. And Ace is known to get UGLY. REEEEEEEEEEEEEEAL U-G-L-Y!!! (So I don't know if Zev wants to endure that type of whipping.)

But here's what concerns me about Zev's campaign (positive for Zev): He's currently a long-standing Board of County Supervisor. He has union support and big support from his years and years in that position. And BOS is WAY bigger than City Council, in the fact that they oversee more and make decisions on much bigger money and projects. And everyone knows, these elected officials benefit in their campaigns by the leverage and even infrastructure of their office and position. And here's why:

Imagine if you are a big shot who DOES NOT SUPPORT ZEV and he wins?: OH MAN, are YOU on the out...better take your chances with Zev!!! Because, guess what? If he LOSES...oh no...his ass is still "Krazy Glued" to his BOS seat, and he'll still be voting on all those big projects and money. (Hope you don't have business with the city OR county, if you don't support Zev.)

I don't think any of these amateur. chump-change councilmembers will me able to mount the political infrastructure to beat Austin and Zev in the run-off. (Even though I think Jan Perry will surprise people with the amount of support and money she raises, out of the gate, compared to Garcetti. And Wendy...buh bye! City Hall threw you under the bus on the "Gold Card" ticket fix story, letting everyone know, you either HAD to know about it, or were a moron. Plus, you are too cold and do not even have the ability to be warm and fuzzy, like the despicable Antonio, Garcetti and these other phonies. AND AGAIN...it ain't gonna be the smooth sailing, like it was when you ran for controller against two grass root candidates with $50 bucks spent, between them. (You'll be fighting for union/billionaire share by TOO many other elected insiders. Riordan is backing Austin...when YOU used to be his gal. May as well pull the plug now, to save face on election day.)

So Zev will get support, cause if not...you're almost screwed, either way.

But Zuma Dogg predicts Austin Beutner would DEFEAT Zev Yaroslobsky in a run-off, because ULTIMATELY, people will have had enough of the same, old, tired, elected officials...Ace Smith will DESTROY ZEV in the run-off election...and all the movers and shakers have already fallen in love with Beutner -- and the more who meet him, the more who will jump on his bandwagon.

Anyway...whoever decides to run...if Zev runs...vote for ANYONE ELSE! (And you have a nice day!)

Refresh to top of LACityNews.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"