August 2009 Archives

Gang czar Jeff Carr got the top billing in Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's shakeup in the leadership of his vast personal staff.

But the real play is the appointment of high-flying Jay Carson, the 32-year-old named to revive the mayor's political fortunes in the newly-created post of Chief Deputy Mayor.

The shakeup announcement (CarrCarson.doc) stressed Carr's role and downplayed Carson's and for good reason. Carson will be in the center of where the power and money are, the missing link in Antonio's circle of 'friends.'

The link that matters in this case is Stephen Bing, heir to a vast fortune who has thrown nearly $100 million into Democratic causes and campaigns, including Villaraigosa's, and even more into buying his way into Hollywood movie making.

It was Bing who brought Carson to LA early this year in a top post in his Shangri La business enterprises. And it's the Bing connection that creates a huge ethical cloud over Carson's role as Chief Deputy Mayor, one that the mayor glibly kissed off at his press conference last week although serious questions need to be answered.

Not long after Carson joined Bing, the mayor threw himself across the tracks as head of the board overseeing the MTA and kept the staff from eliminating AnseldoBreda as a competitor for a $300 million rail car manufacturing deal because of the Italian firm's poor performance on a previous contract.

The key to keeping the deal alive is the partnership between AnseldoBreda and Bing's Shangri La Construction to build a rail car manufacturing plant with heavy public subsidies in the five-mile strip near downtown that the mayor has dubbed LA's Green Tech Corridor and made the centerpiece of his second term.

Bing stands to profit handsomely from the project which is just the first step in reaping  billions of dollars in profits from construction of the California high-speed rail lines -- deals where Bing's political influence are sure to stand him in good stead.

Carson faces an almost impossible ethical dance since he worked for Bing and his duties as Chief Deputy Mayor include "Education, Housing & Economic Development, Transportation, Energy & Environment, and Commercial & Residential Development," according to the mayor's press release.

Those are the most controversy-laden areas of city government, the areas where special interests with all their cash flow for politicians collide head-on with the sentiments of many residents. Specifically, they are the areas of responsibility that come into play in Bing's deals.

The mayor casually threw out that Bing will "recuse" himself from involvement in the Bing rail car deal.

But how is that possible?

He's not a legislator recusing himself from voting on a measure because of a conflict of interest.

He's the man in charge supervising the people developing strategies, cutting deals and implementing policies that affect Bing. How can they be insulated from being influenced by Carson and his clear connection to Bing?

You got to feel for Antonio Villaraigosa. He's taken over the schools, launched his pay more for less water and power initiatives, tweeting hourly of his accomplishments and ignoring the city's budget crisis, and now key players on his team are abandoning him.

Chief of Staff Robin Kramer is announcing her departure today at 10:30 a.m. in what's billed as "a major announcement regarding his administration."

In a brilliant managerial stroke, the mayor is naming gang czar Jeff Carr as his new chief of staff -- what could be more righteous than to put a gang intervention expert into the middle of a gang of thieves.

In other words, Kramer -- who has been in and out of City Hall from Richard Alatorre, Dick Riordan and now Antonio -- has had enough after four years in the hot seat.

That leaves a lot of holes in the lineup.

Fire Chief Douglas Barry has retired.

Police Chief William Bratton has chosen to chase the green as a global security expert.

His lawyer Thomas Saenz -- architect of his first failed school takeover plan and negotiator of his sweetheart labor contracts -- has gone on to the more natural surroundings of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Andrew Adelman, the head of the Building and Safety Department, has gone on injured reserve -- a self-inflicted wound caused by accusations against him of date rape and other californications.

And sooner rather than later the plug is going to have to be pulled on DWP General Manager David Nahai who is finding it's very lonely at the top of the nation's largest municipal utility when everyone around you hates your guts.

The mayor is finding it's tough being captain of a ship without a crew, of being the butt of so many jokes about being the city's worst water waster when everyone else in town is getting slugged with soaring DWP bills even as their lawns are turning brown and it's getting too expensive to turn on the air conditioning.

At the current rate of departures, there soon will be no one left to turn out the lights at the mayor's mansion.

Not to worry. Unemployment is so high, the mayor will have no trouble finding jobless people to fill all his openings.

I'd apply but I work for love, not money.

Antonio Villaraigosa has finally staked out his claim as the leader of Los Angeles; now all he has to do is lead.

He knows good and well what the No. 1 problem is: Public employee unions are out of control. They have gone from their rightful role as bargaining agents for workers to policy makers, successfully throwing their weight around in elections to the point that too many elected officials are little more than stooges for their interests.

As the elected leader of the city, the mayor has the primary responsibility of resolving the financial crisis brought to a head by the economic downturn.

By stepping to the forefront of the movement to reform the school system, he has now fully asserted himself as the man responsible for ending the LAUSD's 30-year record of failure.

The city's financial troubles are far less complicated than the challenge of providing a quality education to nearly 700,000 children.

LA doesn't have a revenue problem; it has a spending problem mainly caused by years of sweetheart contracts with its workers that no longer are affordable.

The mayor knew, and acknowledged knowing, that the sweetened retirement deal that he and the City Council offered the unions threatened the city with bankruptcy. He pulled it off the table last spring but then lost his nerve and gave in.

It has fallen apart now, which has left the Council shivering in its boots, or more likely basking in the sun on some faraway beach where its members have fled to escape their responsibilities.

Quite simply as the city's financial bureaucrats have repeatedly said, albeit timidly, payroll costs must be reduced. Giving a bunch of cash and enhanced pensions to workers who are ready to retire anyway doesn't achieve this. Furloughs and deferral of raises don't achieve the permanent reduction in payroll costs either.

There's no mystery about how to reduce payroll costs: You either lay off workers or you reduce their pay and benefits.

Finally, after 30 years of failure to achieve a record of success and a can-do classroom culture, LAUSD surrendered Tuesday and took the leap toward real reform.

The school board voted 6-1 to open 50 new schools and those that are failing to competition by independent operators, charter organizations and LAUSD staff..

The teacher, administrator and classified unions backed by ACORN, civil rights and community organizations complained about the process being too hasty and warned that charters are not the answer.

They threatened to sue and retaliate against board members who supported Yolie Flores Aguilar's resolution entitled "Public School Choice: A New Way at LAUSD."

Former Assemblywoman and school board many Jackie Goldberg, who many have blamed for turning LAUSD into an ideological battleground, passionately made the case against the plan, accusing the district of giving into the right-wing and abandoning their responsibilities.

Thousands of demonstrators chanting "We want change" gathered at LAUSD headquarters in support of the resolution which has the backing of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the LA Chamber of Commerce, Superintendent Ramon Cortines, the Parent Revolution, MALDEF, United Way and a number of educational, civic and community groups.

Aguilar acknowledged the district is making slow improvements in test scores but noted only a third of third-graders are reading at grade level and it will take as long as 20 years to make substantial progress at the current pace.

"Slow and steady gains are not enough...we need rapid large-scale student-centered reform," she said.

Tamar Galatzan, a candidate for City Council District 2, said she too was "fed up" with the slow pace of progress.

"I'm going to vote for this resolution," she said. "We have a chance to succeed right now beyond the capabilites and limitations of our district...we are expanding our district in order to save it."

Marguerite Lamotte was the only board member who voted against the reform effort but union backer Steve Zimmer eventually came out in support of the reform after stalling the vote for three hours with resolutions that sought to protect existing teacher union contracts and enhance the union's ability to throw roadblocks in the way of independent operators.

Zimmer said he was "hurt and angry" that he had to "shatter the trust" of either the union or many of his constituents with his vote.

He insisted the process was flawed and failed to put the interests of children first but he believes in the role of families involvement in education. "I'm voting yes because I want to make  sure I'm part of the next step of this process."

LaMotte said it was enough to be a board member to be part of the process and cast the lone no vote.

Passage of the change was a foregone conclusion despite the rallying of forces with the city's most powerful labor leader, Maria Elena Durazo, tilting in favor of the plan and agreeing to head the committee which will work out details of a 10-step process designed by Cortines who will ultimately recommend who runs the schools under a four-year implementation program.

I got to the first event of my 50th high school class reunion when the cocktail party was already in full swing in a hotel party room jammed with some 300 elderly people.

There was no line at the bar.

Drinks were cheap so I got a double and scanned the crowd, spotting an old girlfriend. Like 90 percent of us, she wasn't skinny like she was back in 1959 when we graduated from Cleveland Heights High School.

She had run off to New York at 21, eventually married and raised a family while running an antique business with her husband and now lived in Florida where they relocated and were still working.

Life was good, prosperity, happiness, family and friends. The room was filled with people whose lives were everything they were supposed to be for a generation that came of age in the 1950s when rock-and-roll and the space age were being born, when ordinary people suddenly could buy houses and cars and kids were expected to go to college.

It seemed like nearly everyone in the class of 600 did go to college. The room was filled with doctors and lawyers and accountants and realtors and insurance agents, teachers and therapists of all types, engineers and executives and entrepreneurs, even a few writers and artists and musicians.

It didn't matter whether they got all A's or all C's in high school. They had grown up in a middle class suburb and now were rich or at least upper middle class. They had scattered all over the country, more in California than anywhere else, and had traveled the world.

There were exceptions like one friend who grew up a pool stick in his hand and a deck of cards in his pocket. He had gone through hard times gambling his way into bankruptcy and blowing up a couple of marriages before straightening himself out 15 years ago with the help of Gamblers Anonymous where he was now a star helping others. He started his own insurance business, married again and now was a devoted grandfather to 14, retired, sober and happy.

I'm sure there were others who had struggles among those who were absent and beneath the surface of those who were present.

But the face we all put forward was the one of a generation whose dreams had come true -- true enough anyway even if they didn't quite fit all the pictures we held in our minds when we were young.

The Memory Book is filled with stories of marriages that have lasted more than 40 years, of loving grandparents, of adventurous travel, of happiness and success. It is the story of America in the post-World War II era of exploding wealth and hyper-consumerism, when father knew best and mom stayed home and took care of everyone's needs.

By the time we got to college there was the "pill" and rebellion against conformity, social inequality and war but ours was a time of relative innocence and the lives of my classmates reflect that.

We are old now, retired or semi-retired for the most part, the pre-boomer generation with long life expectancies. Our children are gifted with greater affluence and even better educations than we had.

Our parents were the greatest generation, no doubt, overcoming the Great Depression and lack of education to achieve the middle class. We were the luckiest generation, spoiled and indulged, educated and liberated from many of the cultural restraints of the past.

As I skimmed the surface of long-dormant friendships that dated back to grade school, I kept searching for some answers to my own sense of self, then and now, and to who we had become. At times I felt like the same awkward, shy adolescent I was
back then.

I didn't have any moments of epiphany and don't think I found anything profound. Most of my classmates have become like the rich, protective of our wealth and status, desirous of perpetuating what our families have achieved.

But there was an undercurrent of something else in play, a sense of adventure that ran through most people's lives as they followed their dreams wherever they led them. I'm sure there are some people for whom life has turned out badly but 90 percent of my class is still alive and kicking, younger and more vital than our 68 years of age might seem, often deeply involved in charities and community groups.

On the plane home I ruminated about my belief that we're undergoing a fundamental change in American society that goes far deeper than just another economic recession. I couldn't help wondering about how the lives of all those grandchildren will turn out in a world where economic growth has slowed and opportunity for material success become limited.

Two nights of partying with old friends and acquaintances gave me hope that there's more to us than just preserving what we've attained. We are younger than our years and have much to give after spending the prime of our time looking after ourselves.

Once we believed you shouldn't trust anyone over 30. Now, we probably shouldn't trust anyone under 30. Our lives have taught us how to change with the times and maybe, just maybe, we will see how lucky we've been, how much we have to give back to help create a new America where everyone has the same opportunities that we in the Heights High Class of '59 have had.

There's a fundamental difference between a publicly-owned utility like Southern California Edison and a municipally-owned utility like the LA Department of Water and Power.

You can guess which utility is more open about what's doing, more accountable to the public and, in the case of SCE and DWP, more aggressive about going green.

By law, SCE needs to be pretty transparent so that its shareholders and the public through its regulation by the Public Utilities Commission know what's going on. Its management can be held accountable by shareholders and its board of directors, if not always the public in general.

By practice, the DWP is not only secretive but does its very best to obscure what it's really up to and its management is far more likely to be called on the carpet by IBEW union boss Brian D'Arcy than any mayor or the City Council.

Perhaps that's why SCE is approaching 20 percent of its energy from renewables and DWP about half that percentage, why DWP depends on dirty coal for 40 percent of its electricity and SCE about half that.

Certainly, it's why a 75-word press release was issued Tuesday by Tempe, Ariz.-based First Solar announcing DWP had contracted to build a "large-scale solar power project in Imperial County...(that) will have a generation capacity of 55 megawatts."

And why a few hours later, SCE itself put out a press release announcing First Solar will build two large-scale solar power projects in Riverside and San Bernardino counties in Southern California...among the largest of their kind...(with) a generation capacity of 550 megawatts of photovoltaic solar electricity, enough to provide power to approximately 170,000 homes."

SCE notes it "is the nation's leading purchaser of renewable energy and, in 2008, delivered 12.6 billion kilowatt-hours of energy to its customers from renewable resources - about 16 percent of its total energy portfolio. In addition, the utility delivered more than 65 percent of the solar energy produced in the United States for its customers in 2008."

The best boast DWP can make is that it generates more pollution from coal-generating power plants than any other municipal utility in America.

Not to worry, General Manager David Nahai has a plan to catch up. But it's a secret so he can't tell you about it. The culture of the DWP and Nahai's own mindset require secrecy above all else so that only insiders who might benefit personally or politically are allowed access.

All you the public need to know is that it's going to cost you a ton of money.

The DWP, for instance, doesn't mention anything about the First Solar deal on its website or much else of use to anyone who wants to understand what it's doing. The last press release posted came three weeks ago and declared -- prematurely, if not falsely -- that its new water shortage measures "successfully" reduced consumption.

The website Greentech Media  in an article by Ucilia Wang at least supplies some sense of the economic game DWP is playing in signing a power purchase agreement, quoting Mark Bachman, an equity analyst at Pacific Crest, as saying First Solar "is likely to sell the power plant to investors before project completion. But the city has an option to buy the power plant after it's put in service for seven years."

What we're really seeing is Measure B all over again. Except they not only don't want a public debate about what they're doing, they don't want another public vote because they know it would be rejected soundly.

But it's the same blank check for billions of dollars without planning or analysis.

And it has got the same No. 1 goal as Measure B: Protecting IBEW jobs and its industry-leading wage structure, which by the way is set to rise 3.25 percent higher on Oct. 1 thanks to the sweetheart contract the mayor and City Council awarded four years ago with provision for wage hikes as high as 6 percent.

In general terms, the DWP needs to reduce its huge load of carbon pollution and the easiest way to do that is to upgrade coal plants to natural gas, which has the key benefit of preserving IBEW jobs. But that isn't renewable energy, just less polluting.

So wind and solar come into play to meet the 20 percent renewable energy quota by next year no matter what they cost.

It doesn't matter what they cost as far as the DWP is concerned. They have won DWP Commission approval to remove the 4 percent cap on rate hikes for renewable energy, the Energy Cost Adjustment Factor or ECAF.

The ECAF allows for rate hikes to be passed through to ratepayers without going before the City Council or facing meaningful debate or cost analysis.

DWP expects rates to only increase 10 percent a year but they could go far higher since utility officials in their desperation to catch up with other utilities paying above market prices for renewable energy. And that doesn't even taken into consideration rate increases needed to cover the under-funde DWP pension which faces a $450 million annual shortfall -- a fact that officials have done their best to hide from the public.

The council has taken jurisdiction over lifting the cap on ECAF rate increases because it's already a hot-button issue for the citizen watchdogs on the DWP Committee that led the successful fight against Measure B, the kind of issue that is likely to explode in the faces of the politicians when people see their water and power bills soaring higher than their mortgages.

A lot of effort is being put into creating a Ratepayer Advocate office for the DWP but the real solution is to put someone in charge who actually knows how to run a utility, has the short- and long-term interests of the ratepayers as the primary mission and is backed up by city officials who have mustered the political will to bring the IBEW into line with the city's financial realities.

Anything less will lead to a public revolt against policies that cost too much and fail to achieve the clean environmental goals that are widely desired.

Bruno has only two pictures on his doghouse walls: A shot of the woman who rescued me from life on the streets, and a painting of some buddies and me playing poker.

An art expert, I ain't.

But I know a good story when I hear one like the one in the Dog Trainer today on the Los Angeles County Museum Art, not because of the art - I leave that to Big Dog Eli Broad -- but because the guy who runs the place makes a $1 million a year.

And some of that is our money!  And you thought we were broke just because we're letting dangerous criminals out of prison by the thousands and our lives are in danger because firefighters have to take extra time off the job to keep the city's checks from bouncing.

LACMA gets a lot of money from the public, about a quarter of its $74-million operating budget from L.A. County in 2008 -- including $201,432 toward the salary and benefits of Michael Govan, the museums director.

I wonder if he likes pictures of dogs playing poker?

In fairness, and Bruno always tries to be fair, the guy apparently gets high marks for fundraising, which according to him, he does almost every night.

He definitely does not, however, get high marks for media relations. Dog Trainer reporters Alan Zarembo and Mike Boehm asked him about his fund raising schedule.

"Do you have any idea how much that costs in baby-sitting?" he replied.
 
The reporters added that he said it "jokingly," but it sounds to me like the jokes on us.

Bruno has no puppies around the house, but I imagine if I was pulling in a million bucks a year with taxpayer help, he wouldn't joke about paying the teenager down the block $5 an hour for watching the kids - especially to reporters!

And for the record, Govan has only one kid.

If it would help, Bruno would babysit for free and teach the kid to play poker.  Most kids, however, find me kind of scary.

Woof!

Maybe we'd be better off if the mayor was still running for governor.

That way at least he might muster serve energy to pay attention to the city's affairs instead of his own. At least to protect his record.

Ever since he declared he was committed to deal with LA's financial crisis and many other problems, the mayor has been on the road partying.

Africa. Iceland. And now Las Vegas where TMZ got this photo of him with girlfriend Lu Parker, the TV news anchor, at the topless pool at Caesar's Palace last Monday when he was speaking at the Clean Energy Summit. So there may be more to his passion for environmental issues than just political advantage and billions for his pals.

Meanwhile, there's a $300 million to $500 million hole in the city budget, the early retirement deal they cut is falling apart and, like the mayor, the City Council is on vacation, too.

Shameless is taking on new meaning. Just say LA.

The battle lines are drawn for the Council District 2 special election on Sept. 22 and if money talks -- and it usually does in politics -- Chris Essel should be unbeatable.

She's raised nearly $200,000, which is more than the rest of the nine candidates combined.

Her list of 495 contributors includes such luminaries as Barbara Steisand and Vlade Divac and his wife, studio executives and many others in entertainment industry interests, real estate and development interests, construction company and trade unions, lawyers and consultants of various types and even a wives of lobbyists thrown in.

You can read the full story at OurLA.org.

If you're a city official looking for a place to fall in -- or out -- of love, you might want to pick someplace other than Osteria Mozza.

And don't think you can compromise by patronizing the Pizzeria Mozza next door either.

How do say sieve in Italian?  And I'm not talking about the kitchen utensil.  The waiters seem to have a hotline to reporters and the place is usually surrounded by paparazzi, which is definitely Italian for something too vile for even this dog.

It's hard for a dog like me to believe, but I'm told by a very reliable source, who's actually been to Italy, that the best dish at Osteria Mozza is the grilled octopus appetizer. I'm not sure what octopus tastes like (remember, I'm a dog!), but seems to make some men behave like Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.

The mayor is a regular at Mozza, whic is not far from the Hancock Park mansion where he lives. He's been there many times with his pals and his girlfriend, former Miss USA and TV reporter Lu Parker. I'm sure a classy couple like them must like the octopus as they run up those big tabs he signs for.

Just this week, the LA Weekly's Jill Stewart reported our soon to be former Police Chief Bill Bratton had an emotional dinner with his wife Rikki Kleiman that left her in tears, and so upset her that she had to be escorted out by one of his aides.  (Always good to have an armed aide around if you're going to upset your wife.)

But the hottest rumors this week surround Andrew Adelman, our chief of Building and Safety, who has hired big time lawyer Mark Geragos to help him deal with the investigation of sexual impropriety, to put to mildly.

The mayor takes a lot of guff about his broken promise to plant a million trees in the city although it may be the least of his boasts that have gone awry.

The city tree that matters most to me is the one on my tree lawn, a Chinese lantern. For the second time in 10 years, it is dying so my wife called the city to report the problem and ask for a new one.

She got through to a real person and the next day the inspector came out and left a door hanger reporting the tree was indeed dead and needed to be replaced. So she called this morning and reported the tree across the street and several others on our block were also dead or dying -- victims of having being planted when they were stressed and sickly.

The inspector who came out to our house was off today so his boss got on the phone.

"He was great, found my file and said yes it's slated for removal and replacement and went through the list of replacement trees with me," she reported. "I felt he cared very much - but he couldn't say when the replacement would happen."

She picked a tulip tree, a flowering poplar, and couldn't resist twisting the knife a bit.

"I can't complain about the City of Los Angeles. I think the city is terrific, the tree, the library. It's great."

Last week, an ailing Bill Rosendahl had to struggle into the City Council Chambers just so they could muster 12 votes to unanimously rush through one measure.

This week, a third of the nation's highest paid CIty Council members are absent entirely and those who are there might just as well be elsewhere since they spent so little time in the Council Chambers during the abbreviated sessions that lasted less than two hours.

They were in such a hurry to get on with their partying they cut the public comment period from two minutes to one for the dozens of ordinary people who trekked downtown to appeal for justice and common sense.

Council President Eric Garcetti mocked one citizen who complained there wasn't a quorum present, suggesting the missing members were in the toilet but could still listen to the entreaties of the citizenry from that vantage point.

Amazingly, the few votes that were taken came out 10-0 even when only a handful of members were present around the horseshoe -- proving the toilets must truly be well equipped.

And come Saturday, they will all be absent until Sept. 1 from one of their frequent vacations from city business.

From Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's second inaugural speech, July 2, 2009:

"Moving forward we're aiming to get 40% of our power from renewable sources by 2020 and go 60% carbon-free by the end of the next decade."Today, I am directing the CEO of the Department of Water and Power to take every action necessary to reach these goals and eliminate the use of coal by 2020. Meanwhile, we're going to move beyond the clean air action plan - the most aggressive effort to cut emissions at any port worldwide. We are going to electrify goods movement at our harbor."

That's the order the mayor gave DWP head David Nahai just six weeks ago and is the principal reason the DWP is in the process of getting approval for unlimited rate increases that will double or triple electricity bills in the next decade.

So why in the world is the DWP proposing to spend $2.4 million to hire lobbyists with the Conservation Strategy Group-- including $120,000 a year for former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez through his firm Mercury Public Affairs -- to gut enforcement of Assembly Bill 32, the 2006 law that requires reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, the same year DWP will have eliminated its coal dependency?

The DWP already has its own team of expensive lobbyists on the payroll -- including former Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez at $180,000 a year -- even though it's not subject to most state regulations like private utilities.

David Zahniser in the Times reports the DWP's explanation is that they are worried AB 32 will result in a "cap and trade" program that requires utilities that rely on coal power, to purchase expensive pollution credits.

Nahai wouldn't talk to Zahniser abou it but spokesman Joe Ramallo said "cap and trade" could result in a "massive transfer of ratepayer money" away from the utility/

Nunez also was coy about talking but Glenn Gritzner, managing director of Mercury's L.A. office, declared: "It could be implemented in a way that costs the ratepayers a heck of a lot of money."

Who are us poor folks who pay the bills to believe?

The mayor says no coal by 2020. His team at the DWP says penalizing utilities that still rely on coal in 2020 will cost a fortune. Does that mean they aren't really going to achieve his goal and already know it?

Maybe the mayor's plan is phony and DWP officials are just throwing more ratepayer money at insiders like Nunez.

Whatever the truth is -- and you never know either with the DWP or the mayor -- the only certainty is rates will continue to soar and the DWP will remain a cash cow for City Hall.

When the MTA, the LAUSD and the LAPD all lost the confidence of the public because of scandals of one sort or another, the answer was to put in place an inspector general with independence to serve as the public's watchdog.

Needless to say, our elected elected have done their best to water down the independence of these watchdogs over time but they still provide at least some protection for the public interest.

This DWP lobbying contract is just one of a hundred reasons why we need a Ratepayer Advocate -- the organizational equivalent of an inspector general -- to keep an independent and watchful eye on where the money goes and how our utility operates.

The commission that oversees the DWP has stalled this contract for the moment but it has neither the staff nor the independence to be a public watchdog.

That's a lot of what's wrong with City Hall. The commission system is a failure, corrupted by our elected officials to be little more than a rubber stamp system of approving whatever they want, for whatever reasons they want.

This has never been clearer than in the last year. Ever since Nick Patsaouras and Jane Usher resigned key commission positions last year in disgust with what was going on, the mayor with agreement of the City Council has stacked the "juice" commissions like DWP, harbor, airports, planning with people tied to the very special interests that benefit from city policies.

City Hall needs major reforms to bring the public in as a partner and to provide oversight and accountability. A DWP ratepayer advocate is one of those reforms and should be implemented quickly.

UPDATE: By Thursday morning, the video recorded 1,697 viewers and was picked up at laweekly.com and nbclosangeles.com so I think the vote is in: Antonio is fair game.

Reader Matthew Olay recently completed this animated video/rap song making fun of Mayor  Antonio Villaraigosa. Is it funny or over the top. I laughed but my OurLA.org colleague Chelsea Cody thought it went too far for our independent news site so I decided you should be the judge:

 

CD2 Candidates Forum "Big Three Vs The Little 7" from Joe Barrett on Vimeo.

The forum Saturday for the 10 candidates vying to succeed Councilwoman Wendy Greuel filled the Sunland-Tujunga auditorium Saturday with residents from all over the sprawling and cruelly-gerrymandered Council District 2.

Deputy LA Weekly Editor Jill Stewart and I served as moderators for a 2 1/2-hour session in which all the candidates made a positive impression, as far as I was concerned.

Several close observers credited Michael McCue, a Studio City Neighborhood Council member, with being the most impressive. I also thought businessman August Bisan. with his declaration that he's not an activist or a politician, made a strong positive impression with a common sense view of government as an instrument for cost-effective problem solving.

Michael Higby of Mayor Sam sent out a play-by-play of what the candidates had to say and his own POV on Twitter.

Jill Stewart asked the best question, pitting the LIttle 7 -- McCue, Bisani, Mary Benson, Josef Essavi, David "Zuma Dogg" Saltsburg, Peter Sanchez and Frank Sheftel -- against the Big 3 of Chris Essel. Tamar Galatzan and Paul Krekorian. The dividing line is official positions, access to campaign money, connections to special interests versus grassroots and citizen activism.

Writer Joseph Mailander offered his take at Mayor Sam, saying:

"Conventional wisdom is thinking Paul K and Chris in a runoff, but I think this debate may change conventional wisdom. Tamar may eke out Paul K, and I think Chris E is brought more than a little down to earth in facing community groups, which she'll be obliged to do more. A good race and I think it showed its first signs that it's not necessarily going to follow CW.

"Thanks for great work on debate coverage, Michael. David Hernandez made a great point to me before the debate. He said that Internet transparency means that who works for you is more and more of a factor, and the less known the better. That fact helped Carmen and it helped Measure B and it may hurt Paul K most, enough for Tamar to come close if not pull into a runoff.

"Very interesting, because it seems nobody will come close to 40%, let alone 50%. So the top three better be polite to everyone else, Zuma too."

Video of the comments on this question and others will be available later. Here's video of the opening statements provided by Joe Barrett, the event's lead organizer:

 

CD2 Candidates Forum "Opening Statements" from Joe Barrett on Vimeo.

CD2 Candidates Forum NC Financial Disclosure & CC Paycut from Joe Barrett on Vimeo.

Do not deny your city, do not refuse your duty. This is a time of crisis, of great need, and where are you?

In Africa one week, partying with your girlfriend. In Iceland another week partying with your pals. At Mozza wining and dining on too many nights.

Well, I got news for you: The party is over. You've lost your cover story with the departure of Chief Bratton. Your people are hurting, struggling to pay their bills, hoping to keep their jobs or somehow find a new one if they have already lost their last.

You have turned school reform into an empty promise and the "green revolution" into a blank check for untold billions that will surely bounce for insufficient funds. You have bankrupted the city treasury and your solutions only make matters worse.

Your friends say you're bored and depressed or maybe just hung over, irritable and distracted or maybe just paralyzed and without answers to the city's crisis.

Well, the party's over. The crisis is real. You asked for the job not once but twice and if it's too much for you, or you've lost interest, then you need to get out of the way and get on with your life. We cannot afford the luxury of your narcissism any longer. Our troubles are too real, the threats to our individual and collective futures too great.

You have squandered your credibility and the love of the people, become a political showman instead of a political leader, given away the public wealth to opportunists while ignoring the broad public interest.

At a time of crisis, you are invisible.

You knew the deal to balance the city budget was a disaster, yet you went along with it and now that it's blowing up as a fiscal fraud, you are nowhere to be found.

You have run out of excuses. Betrayal of vows of fidelity or the unspoken vows of friendship are serious matters but nothing compared to the betrayal of the sacred trust to uphold the Constitution, the laws of the State of California and the Charter of the City of Los Angeles.

You took that oath as Mayor again just five weeks ago and then you disappeared and abdicated your sworn duty at a time the city faces great challenges and grave dangers.

There are no easy answers for this crisis. No cheap slogans like "shared sacrifice" will make the problems go away.

Humble yourself and admit you don't know what to do. Reach out beyond the narrow inner circle of those who do not see beyond their own self-interest, bring the people into your confidence and face the realities of the situation before it is too late.

We do not have to be two warring families -- the insiders and the outsiders. We can come together and work together. But time is running short, time is being wasted and the city's financial crisis grows more severe by the day.

It's your choice to make now before events make the choice for you.

Sally Choi put her job on the line Tuesday even in the face of threats and intimidation from City Council members who knew very well that their actions violate both civil and criminal law.

The videos below contain evidence that can be -- and hopefully will -- be used against them in  courts of law.

Councilman Bernard Parks, a solitary figure who actually knows what is in the city's deficit budget and has tried to do something about it, made that perfectly clear in his questions and comments to Choi, general manager of LACERS, the city's largest pension fund which is underfunded by a staggering $4 billion -- nearly a year's general fund spending.

Good cop that he is, Parks warned his fellow Council members they were treading into the danger zone by trying to pressure Choi and the LACERS board to violate their fiduciary duty to protect the pension fund's assets for the benefit of current and retired city workers. He even went so far as to warn his colleagues against "lobbying" the board, by which he meant using the back room coercive techniques that are so much a part of the City Hall culture.

Already, the poor stepchild of City Hall unions, the Engineers and Architects Association, has put the city on notice it will sue to block the disastrous sweetheart deal to handsomely reward some 2,400 employees with an early retirement package that will let them go out to pasture in their early 50s with $15,000 in cash and up to 75 percent of their salaries in pensions  and lifetime health care.

This Early Retirement Incentive Program (ERIP) requires city employees to contribute .75 percent more to LACERS, raising their contribution level to a modest 6.75 percent. But that is far from sufficient to cover the $250 million cost of the ERIP without sticking taxpayers -- already facing bills for billions of dollars to keep the fund solvent -- with making up the difference.

Because the Engineers union, under attack from the SEIU and its allies like the mayor, can see that the ERIP will only make the city's financial crisis so much worse and threaten the future of its members, it has threatened to sue to block the deal.

It has a good case. The city cannot legally make workers pay more for their pensions without their consent or at least giving them equal value for their extra contributions. The ERIP increase in contributions only benefits those who get to retire with the sweetheart deal, not those who will pay more for the rest of their careers.

Here's what the union's lawyer told the city in a recent letter (eaapension.pdf):

"Because adoption of an ERIP now will have huge and long-lasting economic effects on the City employees who remain employed after the ERIP has been implemented, a failure to afford the affected employees and the residents of the City of Los Angeles an adequate opportunity to review and analyze the actuarial report is both inconsistent with the City's obligation to bargain in good faith and with good governance.

"Should the City embark on such an ill-advised course, EAA will not only seek
appropriate legal redress, but it will also undertake to publicize the City's failure to afford the
residents and voters of the City a meaningful opportunity to participate in a financial decisionith such a significant, long-term impact on the City's fiscal health and the City's ability to hire and retain competent employees."

So here we are in the second month of a new fiscal year with roughly the same giant hole in the city budget that was forecast six months ago and the only plan our elected leaders have come up with is blowing up.

They knew all that was wrong with it from day one. But they didn't care. They knew the media wouldn't pay any attention. They knew they could keep the public in the dark. They counted on ramrodding it through and trampling all opposition.

But a funny thing happened on the way to making the city's financial position untenable. People like Sally Choi stood up to them. And Bob Aquino of the Engineers union.

And now you know too what they have done and are trying to do. What are you going to do about it?

William Bratton -- City Hall's  most popular figure -- quit suddenly today, leaving the mayor without his most effective political cover.

The Times reported Bratton will "take over as head of a private security firm." He intends to stay until October.

Insiders heard he will join the international police consulting firm Altegrity Inc. based in Falls Church, Va. The CEO is Michael Cherkasky, a close Bratton ally who served as monitor of the LAPD's recently ended federal court consent decree.

The City Hall rumor mill was on fire that there is a troubling back story to the chief's resignation involving information that grew out of CIty Attorney Carmen Trutanich's investigation of the Michael Jackson funeral case. Sources said Trutanich stumbled across information in the course of that investigation that could prove embarrassing to the chief.

Bratton recently put his Los Feliz house up for sale but denied it was with the intention of leaving LA.

The Daily News reported he is expected to discuss his plans at a midday City Hall news conference, which will be attended by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

City Council President Eric Garcetti said he spoke to Bratton Monday night. "He did confirm that, for personal and professional reasons, he thinks this is a good time, that things are in good hands, that there's no negative reason at all for him leaving."

In an extraordinary session two months too late, the City Council was thrown into turmoil Tuesday by facing the facts of the real costs of the sweetheart early retirement deal it offered to city unions.

It took Sally Choi, general manager of the largest city pension fund LACERS, to courageously lift the veil of ignorance and incompetence from the Council members with only Bernard Parks showing the intelligence and common sense to see the deal is a financial catastrophe for the city.

Armed with actuarial information form Segal consulting, Choi faced repeated attacks from Council members who leaned heavily on her to consider the impact on the general fund of her recommendation that the estimated $250 million cost to the pension fund of giving 2,400 employees five years extra credit in their pensions (12.5 percent more) be paid back within five years.

She noted five years is the recommended payback period for early retirement incentives and that the council offer of raising employee contributions by .75 percent to 6.75 percent was inadequate to  provide full cost recovery as the council has claimed.

The increase in employee pension contributions won't take effect for two years and the gap that the city faces paying out of the general fund is about $150 million plus $43 million for cash payments to early retirees. That doesn't count the $4 billion the city must pay to keep LACERS -- one of three troubled city pension funds -- solvent because of investment losses in the economic downturn.

Parks pointedly noted that coercion of the pension fund, its board or managers could be illegal and tried to distance himself from the pressure put on Choi.

At the end of the session, union leaders insisted the Council live up to the terms of the deal but got no firm commitment. It will be fascinating to watch the mayor and Council regroup and try to get around the problem they created with their imprudent offer to the unions -- a deal they originally said was unaffordable.

The Valley paper that used to compete with The Dog Trainer when my pal Ron ran the newsroom as some kind of benevolent dictator, gets Bruno's creative newsie award for making a story out of nothing.

 

According to reporter Tony Castro, Council District 2 has gone completely to hell since Wonderful Wendy moved up to City Controller. What was that? About 20 minutes ago?

 

Castro, who has written for every newspaper ever published in LA, begins his piece this way:

 

"Dorothy McHugh is angry about trash, a homeless encampment and other eyesores near the Sherman Oaks home where she and her family have lived for three decades - and even more upset that there's no City Council member to hear her complaints.

 

McHugh lives in Council District 2 in the San Fernando Valley, which has been without representation since July 1 when Wendy Greuel gave up the seat to become the city controller and which may stay empty until the end of the year.

 

This pup has a lot of fun with Miss Wendy, affectionately known around City Hall as Tinkerbelle. She was roasted a few months ago at some big political bash (Bruno was not invited to be a roaster) and about the worst thing anyone could say about her was that her hairdo was old fashioned. 

 

And although she had a good reputation representing her district, it's hard to believe the place has gone to hell in a month.  And if it was the Valley's version of Calcutta before she was elected controller, why did the voters give her a promotion?

 

Castro writes that McHugh typifies the mood of anger and frustration among some District 2 residents awaiting the next City Council member, who might actually live in the district once elected.

 

Then Tony impresses us with his vocabulary.

 

"While the wait may not compare with the uncertainty of a papal interregnum, the extended period after a council member's departure before a term expires and the selection of a successor is always a difficult time, both administratively and for constituents, say experts."

 

Interregnum??  No one has tried throwing words like that into a Daily News story since Mark Barnhill - and he left more than a decade ago.

 

Meanwhile, Bruno was very flattered this morning when he opened The Dog Trainer.

 

Last week, I barked about the city even considering devoting $30 million to retrofit the Kodak Theater to accommodate Cirque du Soleil, a French circus that doesn't even have animals! 

 

This morning, The Trainer, made many of the same arguments in arguing against the plan: The jobs are phony (the editorial writer did a helluva job on that point) and it's dumb to think hordes of French-Canadian circus fans are going to flock to Hollywood for a show they can see anytime in Vegas and occasionally in Santa Monica.

 

A half dozen activists gathered in a small meeting room Monday behind the DWP's cafeteria to hear top officials explain why they need a blank check for electricity rate increases that will drive up bills by 50 percent or more in the next five years -- and far higher in the years ahead.

It was a rushed last-minute snow job to pretend to meet the DWP's legal obligation to allow 90 days for public debate on rate hikes. Chief Financial Officer Jeff Peltola matter-of-factly laid out with elegant logic why the utility's management needs billions of ratepayer dollars to rebuild the aging electrical infrastructure, buy renewable energy at market prices or above, doesn't need to contain payroll costs and, most importantly, doesn't ever need to ever engage again in these cumbersome public debates over policy and practice.
 
Today, just 24 hours later, DWP Commission will give the green light to lifting the 4 percent annual ceiling on pass-through increases for renewable energy and the City Council's Energy and Environment Committee will rush the radical policy change to the full Council for approval.

It's everything Measure B was about -- green power no matter what it costs, no detailed planning or analysis, no public scrutiny or debate -- and more, many billions of dollars more, because it allows the DWP to spend whatever it wants any way it wants.

Peltola actually used the five-year study of DWP by PA Consulting to help make his case for the caps on pass-through rate hikes even though the report's sharp criticisms of dozens of policies and practices has been totally ignored.

It's desperation time at City Hall. The ship of the city is sinking under the weight of falling revenue and soaring costs. They will do anything to get their hands on your money to survive another day.

Last week, Council President Eric Garcetti boasted why public subsidies were needed for the W hotel in Hollywood and how it would create temporary construction jobs (mostly for non-residents) and permanent living wage jobs (mostly for residents).

Today, it will pitch lending $30 million to insiders at CIM Group to rebuild the Kodak Theater in Hollywood so it can be home to a Cirque du Soleil troupe with its $110 tickets and living wage jobs (putting aside the boon it will provide experts in waxing).

The Kodak Theater is a monument to the failure of city policies, a financial disaster that provides only a single moment of excitement a year, Oscar Night -- something that will almost certainly move to the Nokia Theater at LA Live if this sweetheart deal goes through.

It is the centerpiece of the Hollywood & Highland shopping and entertainment complex, the city's greatest white elephant (or maybe second greatest after the LA Convention Center if long-term costs to the public are factored in).

The city bestowed a $90 million direct subsidy to this project that cost $600 million to build but lost two-thirds of its value by 2003, just two years after it opened. Millions more was poured into it in parking and other subsidies.

Now, the council is about to throw good money after bad at it. But it's federal money so who cares?

The timing of these two actions is not coincidental.

City Hall is in such terrible financial straits it is slashing services to the public even as it is offering sweetheart deals to city workers  -- deals that threaten to leave city pension funds insolvent and taxpayers on the hook to make them good.

City Hall is in such terrible shape politically that it can do know better than to throw public money at political slogans like "green energy" and "creating jobs" and "affordable housing".

You can write them blank checks if you want. You can trust them to spend them the money as they promised. But then you have no one to blame but yourself when your money goes into city workers' paychecks, sweetheart deals for developers and contractors and you get luxury hotels and poverty-level jobs.  

Just don't say you weren't warned.

This dog has a confession to make: I just love Antonio! 

I'll leave the policy to old boring Ron.  Who wants to read about pensions? Give me a guy who goes fishing in Iceland with the entrepreneurial Keith Brackpool - right after returning from Africa with the beautiful former Miss USA Lu Parker - any day of the week.  I see some reporter at KTLA used the California Public Records Act  (I didn't think TV reporters had ever heard of it) to find out who paid for the Africa trip.  The mayor's office then used the California Public Records Act to refuse the request. I just want to know how many fish my mayor caught in Iceland.
...
Bruno's post last week about Controller Wendy's office bouncing $6 million in checks attracted some interesting comments, with only one or two alleging that City Attorney Nuch is more dangerous than swine flu.  Bruno did forget to ask the question: Why didn't the bank just pay the checks?  Didn't they think the city was good for the dough?  I'm sure DZ will get to the story as soon as finishes putting the Dog Trainers readers to sleep with yet another pension story.
...
Big news in the kennel over the weekend:  Zuma Dogg, whose antics in the City Council have led to an effort to ban him there, was banned from the Mayor Sam blog over the weekend.  You're not even allowed to mention his name there! Zuma Dogg says the divorce was mutual and he wants nothing to do with the MS crowd anymore. Somebody should just give the guy a job, maybe the mayor can find something in Iceland and get him out of his hair.

UPDATE: The LACERS pension board delayed a vote today on the city's planned early retirement program as union leaders stepped up their campaign to derail a controversial proposal for making the city pay off the program's cost 10 years sooner than expected, the TImes reports. LACERS will convene a three-member panel to discuss the payment timeline for the early retirement initiative.

Publicly and privately, the mayor was saying not so long ago that the sweetened early retirement deal city unions wanted was unaffordable.

For once, he was right. Too bad, he lacked the courage of his convictions.

Even as the pay-to-play corruption of public policy reaches new heights, City Hall has stepped up its reliance on a play now, pay later philosophy of fiscal mismanagement.

For years, City Hall has carried forward a structural deficit -- it was committed to spending more money each year than it actually was expecting to take in -- so it begged, borrowed and stole a couple of hundred million dollars to cover its overspending. For most of two years now since the economy started to slide, it has stepped up its borrowing against the future while displaying its lack of political will in its inability to make substantive cuts and focus on basic services.

Facing a $530 million deficit going into this fiscal year -- and now a $200 million additional hit thanks to the gross dysfunction of the state government -- LA's elected leadership has chosen to juggle the books, reward 2,400 or so senior city workers with a lucrative buyout/pension deal and mortgage the city's future for years to come in a way that escalates the level of risk from high to catastrophic.

Even in the bureaucratic language of Sally Choi, head of LACERS, the underfunded pension fund that covers most city workers, the strategy of "smoothing" repayment of the cost of the early retirement package is not "fiscally prudent."