Comment on this post

Jack Weiss Running Third, Measure B Too Close to Call — Panic at City Hall

The word leaking out of City Hall is that poor Jack Weiss has awakened from his long smug slumber and is having a panic attack at the very real possibility of finishing out of the money in the City  Attorney’s race.

Nobody inside the leaky City Hall political2007-05-recalljack.jpg machine actually likes or respects Jackie Boy — except maybe Chief Bratton who enjoys sending him out for coffee and other errands — so the news that Carmen “Nuch” Trutanich and Michael Amerian might make the May runoff and not Jack is getting more laughs than tears.

Tears are, however, being shed over the prospects that Measure B — the ultimate pay-to-play money machine — will fail.

Let me repeat that a little louder: MEASURE B IS NOW A TOSSUP, TOO CLOSE TO CALL, 50-50!

That’s right, your vote on Tuesday could change the whole political dynamic in LA, send City Hall the message that the people are fed up with failure and self-service and will no longer tolerate a government of, by and for special interests.

Make no mistake: Clean energy and green jobs is something that has support from everyone — something that everyone has wanted for a decade or longer. But Measure B is on the verge of being rejected by a majority of voters on Tuesday because it is so bad, because it doesn’t do anything to create clean energy or green jobs as it claims. Because we want clean government, too.

Millions of dollars being spent to con the public are being beaten by a grassroots citizens campaign that has nothing but the truth on its side and the energy of hundreds of community activists who care about the future of LA when all their elected officials care about is themselves and the special interests that keep them in office as the nation’s highest paid municipal officials in America.

Virtually everyone who has listened to both sides of the Measure B debate or read what both sides of the debate have to say have come to the same conclusion: Measure B is a fraud.

That’s the conclusion reached by the LA TImes, Daily News and the Breeze; by labor organizations like the Carpenters Union and Laborers Union; business groups like the LA Chamber, Apartment Owners association, United Chambers of the Valley, VICA, by every homeowner and resident group and  Neighborhood Council and NC coalition that put it to a vote, which is most of them.

There’s a lot reasons why Controller Laura Chick says Measure B “stinks.”

It’s a boondoggle that was put together in back room deals. Critical information was kept secret from the City Council and the public. It was ramrodded through the council in three weeks without any meaningful debate, without ever being brought before Neighborhood Councils or the DWP Commission as required by the City Charter. The DWP management has done no analysis, planning or studies of its feasibility, costs or financing.

As if those are not enough reasons to vote against Measure B, try this: It’s a Charter Amendment that undermines every safeguard against graft and waste with the exception of annual unfunded audits by the City Controller and oversight by a hand-picked commission appointed by the mayor and council who can’t wait to get their hands on the billions of dollars in public money Measure B would authorize.

The trouble with that oversight is if Wendy Greuel beats NIck Patsaouras for City Controller, the watchdog will be a lapdog. Greuel is an author of Measure B and if she wins she will owe her election to the IBEW, the union that represents 95 percent of DWP workers, and has lavished a fortune on her campaign.

Brian D’Arcy, the all-powerful head of the IBEW, actually Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for darcy.jpegwrote Measure B after doing everything in his power to block every attempt to bring solar energy to LA for the last decade.

But as the special interests who are funding the Yes campaign like to argue: Solar power is an idea whose time has come. Actually, it’s long past that time but who’s quibbling.

So D’Arcy’s play is to get a DWP monopoly on the $3.6 billion Measure B so only his union gets the jobs and to have a shot at getting any other jobs that might flow out of the other solar programs the DWP has suddenly slapped together to try to get this passed.

We can do so much better than Measure B.

Environmentalists, the solar industry, experts in technology and finance, the DWP, the public and others could sit down on March 4 and develop a plan that gets us clean energy faster and cheaper than Measure B and actually brings solar manufacturing and research facilities to our region.

The choice is clear. The outcome depends on who shows up to vote. There’s no excuses in this election. You can put Jack Weiss on the scrap heap of the city’s political history. You can trash Measure B and join the rest of the world by joining the clean energy movement. You can even keep Wendy Greuel in her place on the City Council and put someone into the Controller’s office who will carry on the tradition of Laura Chick.

This entry was posted in City Hall, Community Activists, Hot Topics, Los Angeles, Solar Energy and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Jack Weiss Running Third, Measure B Too Close to Call — Panic at City Hall

  1. Anonymous says:

    I work in City Hall and the rumor is that Weiss is running scared. He has no trial experience…..oh wait…he said recently that he has done eight or so cases. How can that type of experience really help with the city’s problems.
    Im voting for Trutanich. The others running are ok, but anyone is ok next to Weiss.

  2. Anonymous says:

    seriously, seriously, seriously.
    will you shut down the your blog when jack wins in the primary as does wendy, the mayor and measure B.
    You have no polling.
    Let me ask you one question — which firm did the poll?
    Cause it sounds like a poll from
    Kaye, Kaye, Kaye and Associates.
    And while didn’t that organization go away a long time ago?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Ace Smith in the house!

  4. Grrrr
    “…the very real possibility of finishing out of the money in the City Controller’s race…”
    True enough, Jack is likely to finish outside the money in the Controller’s race which Wendy will win easily…
    on the other hand he is going to win the CITY ATTORNEY’S race…
    if only my master’s embarassing sloppiness was limited to typos and not actual facts…
    good thing he dosent work at a newspaper anymore and merely opines on the internet where you can make up anything you want at anytime without even the hint of a source (though I suppose if we are talking about the Daily News you can do that there as well)…
    woof

  5. Anonymous says:

    Ron-
    I have already this week received two robot calls filled with the lies about Measure B and urging a Yes vote. This is what Tony Villar and the IBEW are trying to do: dial all the likely voters and give Measure B a positive spin in the hope the voter does not READ the newspaper.
    You have got to rally all the activists and neighborhood council folks to send a form e-mail message to all over their contact lists and Facebook contacts to get out the word. You have just a few more days to counter the onslaught of Measure B robocalls.

  6. Way to fix the typo but not the fake story that is more craptastic then the pile I just left on the lawn outside
    Woof

  7. KK says:

    Bruno reminds me exactly why I despise the special interests that are promoting Measure B as well as the Sean Hannitys of the world: dripping disdain is not an argument and does not reflect well on the author. Measure B is the steaming pile on the lawn.

  8. In Eagle Rock says:

    Look at Measure B closely and look at the chronology of events that brought it to the ballot.
    What ISN’T WRONG with that picture?

  9. David says:

    Hey “By Anonymous on February 27, 2009 12:18 PM” you better hurry back over to Mayor Sam’s Blog. Posting here is taking away from your adolescent posts about your favorite Mutt…

  10. Anonymous says:

    3:22 says “dripping disdain is not an argument and does not reflect well on the author.”
    By which you mean this post by Kaye and every single thing he posts about Jack Weiss? This nasty intro to the Kaye, Kaye and Kaye Polling Firm’s (good title, 12:18) fantasy is just the last of a tediously never-ending series.

  11. Anybody but Jack says:

    My slogans for the City Attorney race are “Anybody but Jack” and “the good Weiss, Noel.” Before he announced his run for City Attorney, my favority slogan was “Jack the Jackass.” On April 2008, I witnessed an exchange between Weiss, the vice-chair and Ed Reyes, the chair of the City Council Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee. Reyes was grilling a member of the public who had the audacity to challenge an oversized and underparked project that received millions of dollars in government subsidies. Reyes, who was way out of line, grilled the person challenging the project asking him to provide a list of names of the neighborhood association that the person challenging the project claimed to represent. This Gestapo-like tactic was in total violation of the Brown Act and no effort was taken to present even the slightest bit of impartiality. Instead of stepping in and calming Mr. Reyes down or correcting him, Jack Weiss complemented Reyes and said that he would be a good Attorney. Now this Jackass has the nerve to seek our vote for City Attorney.

  12. Anonymous says:

    7:18: If Reyes was asking someone claiming to represent an HOA to identify which HOA it was and what his alleged Board position was, that sounds only reasonable. However, I know Weiss has opposed Reyes on many a development issue, including a dispute made public (you can check the papers) around the time of the meeting you attended, where Reyes became very angry at Weiss for not conceding to the reduced parking he wanted. Weiss said something like “eliminating parking will not just make the cars go poof” until the mass transit exists and is extensive enough to serve the building and area. Weiss has been for “smart growth” in a far more specific sense than some, to whom it means anywhere near a bus stop.
    I think what people miss about Weiss is that he’s tried to find a middle ground, and as proof of that, has often ticked off those who think he’s TOO protective of the westside single-family areas, as much as the absolute zero-growth westsiders. Imagine a Vahedi in that job — PLUM and Council would be total gridlock all the time. Unfortunately, getting your neighborhood what it wants means compromise.
    In another example, in a city where there just aren’t enough cops yet to avoid juggling them around where most needed, many westsiders are angry that he supported Bratton in opening two new stations in high-crime areas which meant moving some cops out of the westside AND other areas of town — but in doing so, LAPD has already documented reduced violent crime in those areas, which means fewer criminals on the streets. When there are spikes in westside and hillside crime, he’s made sure we get more cops.
    Of course he wants more cops so there can be more permanently based on the westside as well — he’s been one of the staunchest supporters of the Mayor on that, while some want to reduce police hiring and despite what they claim, didn’t see money for DNA rape kit testing a priority until it became big news, while he’s been documented to have focused on it since fall of 02. But those who argue (especially Vahedi supporters, but others as well) that the westside ought to keep almost all of its tax revenue in its own districts (I understand and sympathize with that, and agree it’s frustrating when they compare themselves to others in nearby small cities which are more homogonous, like Beverly Hills, San Marino or Santa Monica), are essentially arguing for a situation where violent crime in the city would increase overall — and yet they demand a major reduction in violent crime and the gang problem. You can’t have both. UNTIL the budget is brought into a better keel, with more serious reduction of waste, consolidation of programs, etc. What Weiss and the Mayor and Bratton, with Council, are trying to do. (Although the Council aren’t always all rowing in the same direction, and some not until the tide is so strong it sweeps them in anyway — but that’s political reality everywhere.)
    I’m speaking as someone who’s worked for over 20 years to fight major developments on the westside, both within L A and in West Hollywood, which is a couple of blocks from me. Frankly the disregard of West Hollywood officials and planners has been the worst, but I recall Mike Woo as being more of a hypocrite in that he’d say one thing and then it turned out he was really supporting the development or at least, was not inclined to do anything but speak out to look like he was supportive. Weiss has always says what he means and meant what he says — a straight shooter and clear thinker. Feuer came in as more determined to fight development, but fizzled out amidst accusations of holier-than- thou dealings with council colleagues and became ineffective. Zev in between was the best, but was responsible for the Westside Pavilion and for the fatal error of fighting the subway through the area when it could have been built.
    As a realist, I’m sick of the attacks on Weiss from people who wanted him to stop the world — he’s worked hard to balance the needs of residents/ homeowners and for re-development or expansion. The developments and improvements he’s been behind are upscale, well thought-out and will withstand the tests of time more than others before him. He’s done a far better job of this than almost every other councilmember, but we just happen to have the fiercest groups of vocal people anywhere in the city, even far more than equally affluent (but more mellow?) CD11.
    I hope the next person manages to find and achieve (with council/ mayoral support) a good balance between Homeowner Associations and development that preserves the best aspects of L A neighborhoods and the single-family areas while also allowing for areas that provide the integrated work/shop/live/walking areas people want from a big city, too — and the much-needed revenue to the city this brings.

  13. Anonymous says:

    You and your ilk are so proud of “my favorite slogan,” a nasty little ditty most of us outgrew by 7th grade, but not you or the people on the nasty little recall site Ron starts with as his “source,” the same people feeding the same to Nuch’s infantile negative campaigning in his Mother Goose slimy ad, parts of his website wholy devoted to Weiss, as is pretty much everything he says about him. I’d never vote for anyone who puts that demeanor out there as his calling card. Yet you wonder why Weiss hasn’t responded to such behavior in a positive way and has allegedly terminated some meetings which degenerated to this? I would too. You may model yourself after Zuma Dogg but that’s sad.
    Read again 3:22′s comment (although said about someone else NOT Kaye to whom it applies the most, the person like the rest of you charming “critics” having no sense of self-awareness):
    “Dripping disdain is not an argument and does not reflect well on the author.”

  14. Anonymous says:

    Feb 27 8:01 pm
    Whew! The Jack Jackass spinners are in the house.
    Tell me: Was Jack also there during Katrina when Sheriff Lee was on the phone and literally yelling at the bureaucrats to get the rescue boats going? Oh, wait. That was Bobby Jindel who just admitted that his Katrina story on national television was a fabrication. Just like the story about Weiss insisting on requiring a developer to put in more parking: total fabrication. Jack Weiss never saw a development he did not like just as soon as the campaign contributions arrived in the mail.
    Anyone but Jack Weiss… anyone. Let’s make sure he comes in THIRD to humiliate the Villaraigosa, Gruel and Weiss trioka. This City is finally waking out of its slumber…

  15. Anonymous says:

    11:53: I’m sure you don’t want facts to get in the way of your nasty and false doggerel, but here’s a start:
    Curbed LA, 10/17/07: “Reduce Parking: Will That Encourage Mass Transit?”:
    “Yesterday (in PLUM) Councilman Jack Weiss rejected a proposal that would see developers reducing parking spaces at new condo/apartment buildings, stating that L A isn’t Manhattan or San Francisco — and the proposal — which was meant to encourage tenants to use mass transit, for example, will not work.”
    “Per Kerry Cavanaugh’s Daily News story: ‘Just passing a new law like that will not make all the cars in the city go away, poof, like that…’”
    Article goes on to explain that with one parking spot costing as much as $25,000, some developers and their supporters want to let them cut them out to save money (some of which they argue, perhaps naively, would hopefully would be passed on to buyers/ renters) and to encourage the tenants to take mass transit.
    The other side argues that tenants would still have cars, just park them on the street making things worse, and wouldn’t take mass transit that doesn’t yet exist. More affluent tenants especially would be unlikely to take the bus lines which aren’t even extensive enough to get most of them to their destinations, and the subway is as yet unbuilt — when it’s completed from downtown to the ocean and people see how clean and fast it is, many will likely take it.
    Full story in Daily News: “Weiss Leads Oppostion to Cutting Apartment Parking Spaces.”
    There were references to this also in the Times, the California section as well as Bottleneck Blog, including references to Reyes’ being angry about it. (The fact that he’s still endorsing Weiss speaks well for the respect he has for his integrity, even when they disagree.) The issue was referenced in other media as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>