I'm arm-weary like a prizefighter who's pounded and pounded on an opponent who just won't go down for the count so I need a break from beating on L.A. I think I'll kick the state of California for a while. OK, I can't help myself, the city, too.
A thought keeps sticking in my mind about the appointment of former Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez to a part-time Department of Water and Power gig -- first reported here on June 3 -- at the handsome rate of $150,000 a year. GM David Nahai said that as a special advisor she will handle regulatory and legislative duties, which I assume means she'll be a lobbyist and influence peddler for the utility every so often at City Hall and Sacramento.
DWP Board President Nick Patsaouras shocked many by publicly criticizing the appointment because Montanez will still maintain her $130,000 a year state post on the California, Unemployment Insurance Appeals. Board.
But the unflappable Nahai was unshaken by criticism of this blatant double-dipping patronage problem, assuring the public: "The appeals board, as you may know, is an engagement that is only one day a month."
Thanks David, I'd forgotten that. Tens of millions of dollars a year are spent by the state to keep up the lifestyles of political hacks, their families and friends.
Ever senstive to the struggles of the ordinary working stiff, Nahai thought nothing of telling him and her -- people whose federal income tax rebate is being stolen by higher taxes and fees imposed by the city and state -- that paying Montanez $8,500 a day is, as you may know, perfectly fine. You can bet Cindy does a fair-minded job of balancing the interests of employers with those of workers when she hears appeals of unemployment cases.
And you can double up on that bet on whether she'll have to do very much for her $12,500 a month in DWP ratepayers money.
What stuck in my mind about Nahai's comment was that the Unemployment Appeals Board was high on the list of 117 state boards and commissions recommended for elimination four years ago and it made Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's short list of 88. That would still have left more than 100 in place
A thought keeps sticking in my mind about the appointment of former Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez to a part-time Department of Water and Power gig -- first reported here on June 3 -- at the handsome rate of $150,000 a year. GM David Nahai said that as a special advisor she will handle regulatory and legislative duties, which I assume means she'll be a lobbyist and influence peddler for the utility every so often at City Hall and Sacramento.
DWP Board President Nick Patsaouras shocked many by publicly criticizing the appointment because Montanez will still maintain her $130,000 a year state post on the California, Unemployment Insurance Appeals. Board.
But the unflappable Nahai was unshaken by criticism of this blatant double-dipping patronage problem, assuring the public: "The appeals board, as you may know, is an engagement that is only one day a month."
Thanks David, I'd forgotten that. Tens of millions of dollars a year are spent by the state to keep up the lifestyles of political hacks, their families and friends.
Ever senstive to the struggles of the ordinary working stiff, Nahai thought nothing of telling him and her -- people whose federal income tax rebate is being stolen by higher taxes and fees imposed by the city and state -- that paying Montanez $8,500 a day is, as you may know, perfectly fine. You can bet Cindy does a fair-minded job of balancing the interests of employers with those of workers when she hears appeals of unemployment cases.
And you can double up on that bet on whether she'll have to do very much for her $12,500 a month in DWP ratepayers money.
What stuck in my mind about Nahai's comment was that the Unemployment Appeals Board was high on the list of 117 state boards and commissions recommended for elimination four years ago and it made Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's short list of 88. That would still have left more than 100 in place
That debate occurred when Arnold was still new to the job and still
believed he could actually do something to fix state government. He
knows better now.
For what ensued over his plan to save tens of millions of dollars is what happens whenever there's a proposal to stop government waste and put the public first.
Polls showed 60 percent of the public agreed with the governor but the newspaper headlines of the time showed the press and special interests didn't give a damn what they thought.
A well-orchestrated hue and cry went up across the state that the governor's plan would -- God forbid -- favor business interests. And the Democratic-dominated legislature expressed its contempt for reform by creating six more commissions just a month after the governor formalized his plan.
By February 2005, the plan was dead.
And now that the state has run up a $15 billion deficit during one of the greatest economic booms in recent decades, you might think the idea of getting rid of costly programs that do little or nothing of public benefit would be high on everybody's agenda.
Don't kid yourself.
Cindy Montanez' $280,000 a year in income is safer than the streets your kids walk on or the water you drink. She may not be serving you but she's serving he system that pays her salary -- with your money.
For what ensued over his plan to save tens of millions of dollars is what happens whenever there's a proposal to stop government waste and put the public first.
Polls showed 60 percent of the public agreed with the governor but the newspaper headlines of the time showed the press and special interests didn't give a damn what they thought.
A well-orchestrated hue and cry went up across the state that the governor's plan would -- God forbid -- favor business interests. And the Democratic-dominated legislature expressed its contempt for reform by creating six more commissions just a month after the governor formalized his plan.
By February 2005, the plan was dead.
And now that the state has run up a $15 billion deficit during one of the greatest economic booms in recent decades, you might think the idea of getting rid of costly programs that do little or nothing of public benefit would be high on everybody's agenda.
Don't kid yourself.
Cindy Montanez' $280,000 a year in income is safer than the streets your kids walk on or the water you drink. She may not be serving you but she's serving he system that pays her salary -- with your money.
Ron Kaye is the former editor of the Los Angeles Daily News where he spent 23 years helping to make the newspaper the voice of the San Fernando Valley and fighting for a city government that serves the people and not special interests.
Twice in recent years, Los Angeles Magazine listed Kaye among the city’s most influential people, specifically in the area of politics. Kaye has been variously described in the media as the “accidental anarchist,” “the Patrick Henry of the San Fernando Valley” and a “passionate populist.” He is now committed to
carrying on his crusade for a greater Los Angeles as an ordinary citizen. Previously, Ron worked at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner,
Associated Press, Cleveland Plain Dealer and The Australian as well as papers
in Fairbanks, Alaska and Yakima, Wash. He also wrote for Newsweek magazine, The Guardian in London and the Naitonal Enquirer.
David Nahai says: "The appeals board, as you may know, is an engagement that is only one day a month."
Well, either he's misinformed, or he's blowing the whistle on a lie that justifies the board members' lofty salaries.
Although the board's formal meetings are scheduled only once a month, the job supposedly involves "daily duties."
At least that's what the CUIAB's website says here, on the page that links to each member's bio. Here's the direct quote (emphasis mine):
The seven-member Board is the governing body of the CUIAB. In addition to the daily duties of reviewing and deciding appeals of field decisions, the Board sets policy and approves the major activities of the agency.
So which is it, David: Were you "misinformed" in calling it a one-day-a-month job, or are they lying in saying it's something more?
Cindy: Feel free to chime in with your own clarification as well.
"And now that the state has run up a $15 billion deficit during one of the greatest economic booms in recent decades, you might think the idea of getting rid of costly programs that do little or nothing of public benefit would be high on everybody's agenda."
Sacramento pols talk a good game, lamenting the fact so many Californians are suffering, all the while pointing their fingers, blaming somebody else for the deficit, and protecting their own special interest projects.
It's these same folks who gave us the $15 billion deficit and they won't even consider taking a 10% cut in their own salaries.
And yet they keep getting re-elected. No wonder they don't want a legitimate redistricting.
They don't want to give up their gravy train.
There was a line that you hear around from time to time that fits in right here- and this is directed to Nahai, Montanez and the rest of the pigs at the public funds trough:
"Kiss me. I like being kissed when I'm getting 'effed'."
With all that's going on with the budgets in government, we'd all be well-covered in lipstick and saliva if that happened each time.
With 280,000...this would be seed money to begin building like crazy in the valley. density, vertical growth in the west valley. thats what i'd do.