Concluding a long investigation, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich announced today he has sued Deutsche Bank for allowing hundreds of foreclosed
properties to fall into serious disrepair even as it worked to illegally
evict of hundreds of low-income tenants.
The bank’s liability could run into the hundreds of millions of dollars.
The complaint alleges Deutsche Bank is “one of the largest slumlords in the City of Los Angeles,” citing 166 properties as
examples of Deutsche Bank’s illegal conduct under local, state and federal laws.
“The lawsuit seeks immediate injunctive relief, including a
complete inventory, registration and inspection of foreclosed properties;
compliance with all applicable state and municipal code requirements; and a
stop to all illegal evictions,” the City Attorney’s office said.
The suit seeks restitution to current and
former tenants for amounts paid in excess of the actual value of their units
and unpaid relocation fees;”reimbursement to the City for costs of repair,
abatement, inspection and investigation; and penalties”
“We must fight blight by holding banks accountable when they
create vacant nuisance properties that pose threats to our residents and
destroy the quality of life in our neighborhoods, and we must protect
vulnerable tenants from illegal evictions,”
Trutanich said.
The bank and its subsidiaries acquired over 2,200 properties in the LA through
foreclosure in the last four years.
Deutsche Bank allowed the vacant properties to become nuisances. In
other instances, Deutsche Bank failed to provide minimum maintenance at
occupied buildings, condemning tenants to live in substandard and dangerous
conditions, the suit says.
Most of the properties are in low-income areas in South LA and
the Northeast San Fernando Valley.
“For several years, the Housing Department has received
numerous complaints of code violations from tenants of Deutsche Bank owned
properties and others who have filed complaints regarding violations of the Los
Angeles Rent Stabilization Ordinance,” Douglas Guthrie, General
Manager of the Los Angeles Housing Department said in a statement. “We are glad to be working with the City Attorney to address these
issues facing tenants in our communities.”
Given the federal lawsuit filed yesterday, Deutche Bank seems to have been approving loans that should have never been given and then letting the properties rot when the loans went bad. Why are there no criminal charges????
I like Trutanich most of the time, but this seems to be a mistake:
One: Will other banks seek to buy low income properties iN LA now that they know they’ll be sued for hundreds of millions? So I assume then the city will buy them…and w/o enough money, will also let them run down. Then what?
Two: instead of suing a bank willing to buy such properties in the first place, perhaps it might have been better to negotiate/help…whatever, in order to encourage more banks to invest in such properties.
Three: In NY, tenants stole wiring, pipes, fixtures, etc. to sell the copper etc. Landlords had a damn hard time keeping up with requirements since tenats and thieves ruined the places. What of that here? Non-existent? Uh huh.
What? Neither a lender nor a borrower be.
The famiies were poorly advised to fall for
the deal, but the bank is totally responsible
and they wanted to make a forune. It is calld
“usury” if I remember correctly. Hope
“Nuch” wins, and the people get some of their
money back.
Re: 4:59
You’re exactly right. This campaign publicity stunt will provide yet another reason for businesses to refrain from investing any money in this city — especially in real estate.
Good for Nuch. . . . I applaud his action.
The action should also include examination of whether the County (and thus the City) were denied Documentary Transfer Taxes owing because of the nature of the manner in which the foreclosure process worked.
A company called ‘MERS’ (Mortgage Electronic Systems) was formed back during the Clinton Administration to become de facto ‘Trustees’ with the authority to foreclose.
These ‘Trustees’ credit bid at the foreclosure sales when, in fact, the transfers of the loans to the Wall Street securitzation machine were never recorded as required by California law. . . In technical terms, this meant that the promissory note and the deed of trust got ‘severed’, rendering the promissory note enforceable, but only via the filing of a lawsuit, not by way of the trustee sale foreclosure which occurred. (Once the promissory note is ‘severed’ from the Deed of Trust, the Deed of Trust is not enforceable).
That brings the efficacy of the sales into question (which may be one reason why the ‘servicers’ don’t care about these properties. . .). It also means that the buyers at the foreclosure sale (the lenders) were not really the ‘lenders’, but legally new buyers who owe documentary transfer tax to the County (of which the City gets a portion).
Hopefully Nuch will evaluate whether substantial dollars can be recouped to the County of LA and the City of LA as a result of this financial catastrophe.
For those who decry these borrowers, I remind all of you that we (the taxpayers) found a way to bail out Wall Street’s excessive risk taking (to date, no one has been prosecuted on Wall Street). . . thereby sanctioning what was vicious and brutal speculation and risk. . . all to faciliate the further concentration of economic power on Wall Street (and the concentration of economic power is not good. . . nor is the concentration of government power). The bottom line: Wall Street benefited at the collective expense of the people.
This ‘subsidization’ of the losses, while allowing Wall Street to ‘privatize’ the gains is not fair or right. It is no wonder that the ‘servicers’ and the bankers (who allow the ‘big boys’ to renegotiate their commercial debt all the time) feel contempt for their responsibilities to the tenants and the borrowers. . .. They figure based on past practices that they will get bailed out again in some way, shape, or form.
These lenders don’t want to recognize these losses on their books because it will undermine their capital base.
The Government is allowing it; and the Federal Reserve is subsidizing it via low interest ‘loans’ to the bank (others call it ‘printing money’) secured by these ‘garbage’ loans.
The Fed has done this world wide to the tune of trillions of dollars. . . .
These low interest rates rob seniors and others of their savings. . resulting in a further transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich (call it ‘Trickle-Up’ – Based on the ‘big lie’ that those with the money will favor the rest of us by putting it to work to create jobs. . . Only to a certain extent – As David Stockman has noted, people forget that even Ronald Reagan realized he made a mistake and cut taxes too much; so the following year (1982) he raised taxes, and the economy still grew just fine (and the economy also grew after Clinton raised taxes. . . another story for another day).
So money spent on these properties cannot, from the bank’s point of view, be justified. That’s why the properties look they way they do; and that’s why Nuch is doing a good thing in going after the lenders (these Wall Street ‘Trusts’) and the servicers, both on behalf of the people of LA in general, and the tenants of these properties in particular who apparently were denied the fair relocation fees to which they were entitled.
This is a huge undertaking, and I give Nuch credit and wish him well in the effort.
Noel Weiss
Thank god for Trutanich. He goes after all the sacred cows in this city. He seems to be afraid of no one and nothing.
I hope he runs for mayor. He’s got my vote.
As a former supporter of nuch, i can no longer support him. he is a blowhard
it would be great if the media did some digging and reported all the lawsuits that have been settled within City Hall by ex employees, sexual harrassment suits, discrimination suits etc. I hear there are a lot of them quietly swept under the rug. I use to be a Nuch supporter until he whimped out on filing against the radical Dream Act students who caused havoc on Wilshire for hours. They broke the law but because the issue was immigration Nuch was gutless. Has Trutanich filed on Blanca Martinez-Navarro, Gang Reduction Staffer For Mayor Villaragosa, Arrested At Conga Room For Attacking LAPD Cop? The rank and file are as upset as the people of this city to see hard earned money go down the drain because LAPD now has a weak command staff that are too arrogant to fix the problem.
Good for Tru! One down and an “X” number of foreclosure-slumlords to go.
For your information,the two worst and most powerful slumlords in Los Angeles are LA Housing Authority and LA Housing Department. Can we hope for any action against these two slum-creating rackets?
“He goes after the sacred cows” – HA – what about similar properties now in the hands of Bank of America and Wells Fargo – what about these sacred cows. If there was total honesty in this suit, then there needs to be suits against these banks also. Remember, it is easier to pry assets out of an American bank than a German one – just ask them for campaign donations!
I hope those of you who think he’s doing something heroic will read the entire L.A. Times article on the subject.
Judging from the article, he is blaming the bank for graffiti, prostitution, drug sales, squatting, and other criminal activity.
Pardon my insolence, but isn’t it HIS job to prosecute the people who commit those acts, rather than the property owners whose property is damaged thereby?
What the hell is the bank supposed to do about all that? Hire private goons to beat up local criminals?
This is showboating.
Mr. Moore, how does one satisfy you?
I am glad to see Mr. Trutanich doing
something about DDeutschbank. aren’t you?
And I thank Mr. Kaye for letting us know\
the details.
Walter Moore seems to know a whole lot for a guy who got his clock cleaned twice running for Mayor. Now what is he, a bitter, arm-chair know-it-all who does nothing but criticize.
It’s time to get a life, Walter. C’mon boy, go and get it.
A frivlous lawsuit and waste of city resources.
It’s amazing how so many people know everything there is to know about the merits of a lawsuit before it has ever been tried. That having been said, it’s also absurd to criticize Walter Moore’s legal evaluations based on the fact that he ran for office and didn’t win. I think he is a better legal critic than candidate — at least his legal arguments appear to be based on substantial knowledge of the law, and he was running for office in a system which is not well disposed towards underfunded conservatives in a city that is about two-thirds Democratic by registration.
If I understand Ron’s synopsis correctly, DB is accused of evicting people illegally. I don’t know what this actually means, but the word illegal sounds fairly important to me. So if DB did something illegal — and many times at that — and if the result of that conduct has been to injure people financially and damage the overall quality of the city, then it may be that injunctive relief is justified. I think that Walter would agree that when crime occurs out of nowhere, such as a robbery at a shopping mall, then the property owner is not responsible; but when there is an ongoing pattern of crime in some private place — let’s imagine the parking lot at a baseball Stadium as a for-instance — then the owner has a legal obligation to warn people and even to take reasonable steps to protect the public. If DB has created a situation due to its illegal acts, and this impinges on the public safety, then legal doctrine will tell us if DB is liable. I invite Walter to explain the legal principles if he likes. Meanwhile, there may very well be economic arguments in favor of keeping life easy for business, but I don’t see them as prevailing over damage to the public safety.
Dear fellow voters, my mayor and Chief of Police Charlie Beck a few days ago instructed me to say something, if I see something. Well I’m saying something:
Is this lawsuit a convenient form of selective enforcement, prior to his run for District Attorney, or was there a deal made with city council or the Housing Department? There’s millions of Housing dollars earmarked for purchasing foreclosed homes. I’m already disappointed with “Nuch” for not prosecuting the protesters who plastered themselves on Wilshire Bl. And, yeah, I campaigned hard for him for city attorney.
He seems to be following the Modus of Operandi of mayoral candidate Wendy Greuel. She gives multiple press conferences exposing inefficiencies of various City departments or programs but doesn’t seem to expose why an inefficiency occurred, or if anyone was fired as a result of her findings. Especially when millions of dollars were involved. There seems to be no follow through. The multi-million dollar black market street vendors continue to conduct business as usual with no fear of law enforcement. Does she nor the mayor’s business development department care that the legitimate business is paying sky-rocketing taxes and fees while competing with these illegal street vendors?
I continue to be skeptical. Why is C.A. “Nuch” selecting these particular homes? And why now? He says they are a danger to residents, cause blighted conditions, and attract crime to the community?
Citing and suing only homes owned by Deutsche Bank is selective enforcement. The usual M.O. of City Hall. Equal opportunity prevails; cite and sue all the homes which are a blight to anyones neighborhood. Can you think of any? Heck, include all structures public and private. And for starters, they can start with the Los Angeles Municipal Code chapter 4, article 14, section 49.84.1 as adopted by city council.
Put LAPD, building and safety, and all code enforcement officers to work. No need for layoffs or furloughs. City revenue is at an all time high since 2006.
I’m former city council candidate David Barron
You can say whatever you want about Nuch Trutanich the candidate. He is not a professional candidate, and he makes more than his share of missteps.
But as a lawyer, he is an all star hitter.
His average for wining suits for the City of LA is astronomically better than Hahn or Delgadillo ever dreamed of attaining. Rocky setrtled everything and paid high prices because he didn’t know how to win; Trutanich is a street fighter and knows hiow to win.
Trutanich would never have recommended millions for some fire fighter who, as part of ongoing hazing at the stations, ate a little dog food.
Do not underestimate Carmen Trutanich. If you do, you do so at your peril.
I like Walter Moore’s and David Barron’s assessment. However, David don’t do anything the Chief or Mayor say. They’ve proven to be the Dumb and Dumber of our City connected at the hip. Rick Orlov just had a piece this week stating that Trutanich will up his profile. This is how they do it, just like Wendy Greuel who spends more time in front of the camera, goes to free lunches and dinners because for the past two years all she’s done is campaign and have others do her audits. Wendy is the biggest disappointed to many. Of all her audits not once has she come up with a solution how to go after money owed, a new checks and balances etc. What ever happened to Nuch and Wendy going after City Council Offices to get them audited? We need to push for that hard
You know, you’re right.
Anyone who has handled civil litigation for 25 years, including winning a premise liability case for a national franchises when all the other defendants settled rather than going to trial, and anyone who “only” finished second in a Mayoral race in America’s second-biggest city, couldn’t possibly have anything intelligent to say about a politician filing a lawsuit.
What was I thinking?
Please forgive my arrogance in daring to criticize a lawsuit that couldn’t possibly be filed for political purposes. I’m sure all the press releases about it were merely a courtesy to the public, and had nothing to do with seeking another office.
You know, you’re right.
Anyone who has handled civil litigation for 25 years, including winning a premise liability case for a national franchise when all the other defendants settled rather than going to trial, and anyone who “only” finished second in a Mayoral race in America’s second-biggest city, couldn’t possibly have anything intelligent to say about a politician filing a lawsuit.
What was I thinking?
Please forgive my arrogance in daring to criticize a lawsuit that couldn’t possibly be filed for political purposes. I’m sure all the press releases about it were merely a courtesy to the public, and had nothing to do with seeking another office.
Never thought I said it but I actually miss Walter Moore posting on this site. At least the guy tackles issues critically instead of just swallowing Ron’s pro-Nuch koolaid.
In the meantime, it looks like Clean Sweep is busy hyping up Kevin James for the next election. James makes Walter Moore look like Albert Einstein. What a joke.
Walter, just ignore the poster who attacked you. It’s unbelievable that somebody doesn’t understand how Villar got re-elected (developers money, union voters, illegal voters etc ).
Nuch is unfortunately a tool. Turned out to be a real disappointment. Bu
Walter puts his name where his mouth is, unlike anon commenters.
To Anonymous on May 5, 2011 1:50 PM: I wholeheartedly agree that the LA Housing Department and Housing Authority are actually the worst slumlords. Especially after having worked at the bastion of corrpution that is LAHD, I realize everything they do is suspect. But can you please provide specific instances or evidence that support your statement? I’m just really curious. Thanks.
To Curious Civil Servant:specific case for LAHD.
LAHD’s REAP Program has had control and oversight of property located at 14614-14618 Vanowen Street, Van Nuys, and adjacent vacant lot, for years.
And the conditions of property have become third-world hellish. Some former tenants included: gypsy-fortune-telling-prostitution racket, auto-chop shop racket, drop-house for illegals racket, drug distribution racket, and a voodoo practitioner who routinely conducted backyard animal-sacrifice.
In this case, LAHD is as culpable as the slumlord property owner and the slum-minded tenants for increasing blight and crime in the neighborhood.
P.S. I’ve been a licensed real estate broker for over five years, and I also handled a case for a family who bought a house had been through foreclosure, and into which squatters moved the night before escrow closed.
But aside from that, and the other stuff I mentioned, I really have zero familiarity with lawsuits, property and politics.
I censor my posted comments yet I yell and scream how much censorship there is in the American media and how much I dislike that. Just thought I’d give you something else to censor to make the day complete.
Walter, can you be honest for one moment. You came in a distant second as Mayor. Also, just because you’ve practiced law for 25 years doesn’t mean you’re not a complete idiot. I know plenty of lawyers, Jack Weiss, David Berger, Rocky DelGadillo to name a few who have practiced law for a long time at prestigious law firms, and they’re all complete idiots.
The fact that you waste so much time posting comments on blogs, rather than doing something constructive with your time demonstrates that you’re a moron. That’s why the community calls you Walter Moron.
10:01pm No need for personal attacks on here. unless its for a politician. Either respectfully disagree of go someplace else. Unlike other blogs I believe the posters here are more mature. Now, I just read this and laughed my ass off. This goes to show how out of touch Beutner is in our City. Give kudos to our friends at laobserved. This is an email Beutner sent to friends. I posted snippet. WE should all boycott LA Magazine. They do a story on this clown who deceived the public while at DWP
“”"I’m not a natural politician; I don’t have a career in LA City politics to bank on. I need your help to talk to people, tell them who I am, a little bit about what I’ve done and what I want to bring to this city. Mayor Riordan’s op-ed will help – and so will the current issue of Los Angeles Magazine. This month Los Angeles magazine put out a profile of my work for the Mayor while at City Hall. It’s a well-timed profile for the campaign
Phil –
You’re so, so, so very right. I mean, winning cases for 25 years, including real estate cases, and getting 72,000 people to vote for me, is of absolutely no significance when it comes to the merits of expressing opinions about lawsuits filed by politicians.
Plus, anyone who posts comments on a blog is also presumptively “differently abled.”
But you, Phil, are clearly far more qualified to opine on the lawsuit that Trutanich filed against the bank, because you. . . wait, remind me, who the hell are you, and what do you know about anything?
That’s the beautiful thing about politics in Los Angeles. People never actually discuss the merits of any given issue. Instead, unable to do so, they simply call you “racist,” or “stupid” or whatever.
Can anyone here explain why a bank — rather than the City government — should be blamed for rampant crime, vandalism, prostitution, etc.? Because from my perspective, we pay taxes to have the police and prosecutors go after criminals. Banks, based on my primitive understanding, are supposed to make loans to borrowers and pay interest to depositors. I was not aware that they were also supposed to police any neighborhood where they happened to have customers.
But then again, as Phil McCracken notes, some lawyers are dumb, and I “only” received 26% of the vote, so I clearly know nothing about law, land, litigation and politics.
Now I remember who “Phil” is: the same person who posts again and again, under hoaky names, because disclosing his real identity would immediately reveal his bias and, possibly, his paid position to “spin” blogs on behalf of his employer.
I just learned about another bank that
needss an appraisal of its books and
business practices. Bank of America. I
just learned what they did to someone I know.
Nobody in City Hall wants to do the job they were elected for. It took the Feds to start cleaning the rot within, which a certain elected had used as an election pledge.
Hi Walter
I think that the city is going after DB for what it is doing as a landlord, not for what it does as a bank, where banking refers to things like making loans to other landlords. You may disagree with what the city is saying, in particular the idea that we can blame the property owner for what random criminals do to its property. That is a legal issue and I must defer to the legally trained on its merit or lack of merit. I suspect that local governments do have considerable power in terms of enforcing land use regulations, even though we might disagree with them on principle. I suspect that the tension between ownership rights and city enforcement authority comes up most often with regard to rental places that are used for criminal activities such as sale of illegal drugs. I suspect that the city’s legal authority is also used quite a bit in enforcing habitability standards. Again, we may have personal opinions as to the wisdom of these enforcements, but I tend to suspect that the legal basis is not in question.
Let us know if these guesses of mine are contrary to established law.
Walter, with that amazing track record, and all those supporters out there, why don’t you run for City Attorney? Then you can do things your way, and the rest us can second guess everything you do. Until then, STFU. You’re part of the problem, not part of the solution.
OMG now I read it all knowing Mike Hunt is now posting on here and I won’t even go into how he’s perceived in this city. Trutanich going after the bank is confusing. I don’t think any of the tenants in any of DB buildings have filed a lawsuit. Trutanich just gave the ambulance chasers cause to go after those tenants to file against the City now.
No:
Trutanich is finally doing what he said he would do. . . Be the ‘people’s attorney’. These tenants will not sue because they don’t have the resources to defend their interests in situations such as this. . . . And if anyone believes it is in the broader public interest for anyone to abide slum conditions, ignore their legal responsibilities, and fail to attend to the needs of the properties they own or effectively control (particularly when that ‘someone’ is Deutche Bank), then that’s carrying the idea of ‘freedom’ too far.
The tension between those advocating for unlimited ‘property rights’ and those advocating for ‘personal responsibility’ in how those property rights are administered is a constant theme throughout American History. Similar arguments of ‘property rights’ controlling were made against the minimum wage (business should be free to set whatever wage it wants. . . after all, the business owner needs to be ‘free’ to do what the business owner wants – ‘competition’ will take care of any problems); likewise when it came to the use of racial covenants (a property owner should be ‘free’ to decide to whom he rents or sells his property). . . .Ditto with regard to product safety (a business owner should be ‘free’ to produce his product however he wants. . . the ‘marketplace’ will take care of the problem (Theodore Roosevelt took care of that one). . . or how about the contention that a business owner should be ‘free’ to concentrate as much economic power has he or she can. . . the marketplace will provide a ‘check’ and a ‘balance’. (The anti-trust laws (from which Major League Baseball are exempt) are designed to mitigate against that particular ‘freedom’. In the case of MLB, the owners contend they should be ‘free’ to do what they want regardless of the impact on the broader public interest – Including precluding ‘citizen ownership’ of Major League teams (although they do allow the people as a non-profit collective (as distinct from the government) to own Minor League Teams). . .
Again, not so. . . Theodore Roosevelt took care of the ‘freedom to monopolize’ argument by breaking up Standard Oil. . . John D Rockefeller was never richer than after Standard Oil got broken up into six different companies. The law also encourages private enforcement by mandating triple damages (the cynical would say encourages ambulance chasing).
The only reason Baseball is exempt from the anti-trust laws is because of a 1922 US Supreme Court Ruling which said that baseball is not a ‘business’, and is therefore not subject to the anti-trust laws. As such, this ruling can be overturned by an Act of Congress. If anyone believes baseball is not a ‘business’, then that same person probably believes that we never landed on the Moon, or that Elvis just left the building.
All of these ‘freedoms’ have been circumscribed over the years, and properly so by law, as reflected by either custom or by our honoring and applying what collectively we determined were higher social values.
Same thing here. The laws are there to be enforced. It is the responsibility of the City Attorney to enforce those laws because the City Attorney is the ‘attorney for the people’. . . and as beneficiaries of the social contract between the people and their government, it is Nuch’s responsibility, as the attorney for the public trustees (the City Council, Mayor, Controller) to enforce the terms of the ‘trust’ for the benefit of the people (the beneficiaries of this public trust we call the City of Los Angeles).
For those who don’t like the laws, they are free to advocate for a change in the law. I don’t believe Nuch is free to ignore the law’s clear mandate in these situations.
So the use of the pejorative ‘ambulance chaser’ is really a misnomer and a deflection away from the core issue. . . which is under the social contract between the people and their government. . .and between the people and each other. . . when that contract is violated (and it cannot be said the allowing slum conditions is permissible under any core social values we profess to practice), who and under what circumstances is the contract to be enforced.
Nuch is sending a message to these Wall Street institutions that they have social responsibilities to the communities in which they operate. . . When they own property, they have to maintain their property in accordance with certain standards. . . When they deal with tenants, they have to respect the tenants’ rights. . . When they deal with their borrowers, they have to respect the borrowers’ rights. . .
That is all that is going on here. . . and I applaud Nuch for his work (so far) in this case. A good start leads to a good end. . . But a good end is not guaranteed unless there is the follow-through.
In that regard, I suggest to Nuch that he amend his lawsuit to ask the Court to appoint one or more Receivers to take possession of these properties and be authorized to spend whatever is reasonable to get them into shape, and to get them occupied.
Capitalism is great. . .but it is not perfect. . . The marketplace of individual freedom is the foundation of our democracy (it is, after all, economic democracy. . . people voting with their dollars). . . But that does not mean that when applied in a way which undermines our core social values, that enforcement is precluded.
On the contrary, to preserve our freedoms, we must be prepared to respect the boundaries set in the social contract where we all give up some of our freedoms to the greater whole in return for stability, predictability, and fairness consistent with our core social values.
This is and will remain a moving target. . . There is no precise formula on where to draw the line. . . That’s what the political process is all about (those who choose to participate at least). But in the meantime, the laws need to be enforced. . . and in this case, at least, Nuch is there doing what he said he would do.
I wish him well in the effort and I hope he succeeds in obtaining restitution, damages, penalties, and results for the tenants whose rights were violated and for the surrounding communities in which these properties are located.
Isn’t it funny how, in this instance, the rights of the tenants align with the rights of the surrounding property owners.
That’s the real overlap here. . . Divided we fall. .. United we Stand. . . . And United we should be. . . around the core concept of getting the right result, for the right reason, in the right way.
Noel Weiss
OK, Mr. Noel,…in the meantime the laws need to be enforced.
So will CT also defend and protect the greater public welfare if the miscreants are City agents? For example from LAHousing or LABuilding&Safety?
Our Van Nuys area has been notified by various B&S inspectors that since we “live in the decrepit part of town…anything the property owner wants to do will probably be an improvement” and “we are not citing those code violations”. The areas of LA suffering the most horrific blight and crime are where City operatives are willfully refusing to fulfill their sworn duties. Who will protect us from corrupted government bureaucrats?
Noel Weiss is running scared since he exposed the ACE program.
I’m with Noel Weiss, he is the “good Weiss” and this is why I voted for him.
Trutanich just settled a case with HealthNet, and directed the proceeds from the settlement ($600,000) to be distributed to homeless shelters, and other charities. Bravo!
Trutanich just settled a case with HealthNet, and directed the proceeds from the settlement ($600,000) to be distributed to homeless shelters, and other charities. Bravo!
To 1:55. . . You bet the laws need to be enforced. . . The City Attorney should do so. . . However, Nuch feels he is conflicted out because he represents the City Council and City Officers and feels he can’t investigate his own client.
I strongly disagree with this position. . Nuch cites an old 1985 opinion critical of Ira Reiner for taking issue with the Police Commission at the same time he was defending police officers in Court. There is also a state bar opinion saying it is unethical for the City Attorney to take information from his ‘client’ (say a Building & Safety Inspector) and use that information against other members of the City.
This is not as complicated as it sounds. . . For the following reasons:
1. This is an old State Bar Opinion. . . Nuch can and should ask for it to be revisited;
2. The City Council can give direction here by authorizing the City Attorney to undertake the necessary investigation of fraud, waste, and abuse;
3. The City Council itself has subpoena power under Section 217 of the Charter. . . The problem, it never uses it to get at fraud, waste, or abuse (so does the Mayor. . . he doesn’t use it either);
4. The City Council can officially waive any and all selected conflicts of interest and thereby obviate any state bar concerns;
5. The state legislature can pass a law which says that the City Attorney of Los Angeles can investigate waste, fraud and abuse within the bowels of the City bureaucracy without it being considered an ethical violation; and most importantly,
6. An office of Public Advocate/Inspector General can be created under the Charter with the power to cut through the bureaucracy and make the system work for the people. This office would also be empowered to provide objective advice to the Council and to the people without it being considered a violation of the attorney-client privilege. This is critical to getting the system to work for us.
My belief is that the City Attorney occupies a special and unique position. He is elected by the people and paid by the people. . . Like an attorney for a ‘trust’, who owes legal and ethical duties to the beneficiaries of a trust, the City Attorney owes the people a fiduciary duty to ensure that the objectives of the trust are fulfilled.
The City of Los Angeles is not a ‘corporation’ (despite the fact that the Charter refers to the City as a ‘municipal corporation’). That term is not defined and in any event. Its use is a bit of misnomer because the City Council members are not considered ‘directors’ sitting on a ‘board of directors’ and the people are not considered ‘shareholders’. So to view the City as the functional equivalent of a business corporation is not accurate.
What is more accurate is that the City of Los Angeles is a public trust and the members of the City Council are public trustees who preside over the public trust. . . for the benefit of the people, who are the beneficiaries of that public trust.
The distinction is important because the ethical duties an attorney bears to a ‘corporation’ are different from the ethical duties an attorney bears to the ‘trustee’ of a trust. There is a lot of case law that says an attorney for a trust owes ethical and fiduciary duties to the trust beneficiaries. The same relationship does not exist between the attorney for a corporation and the corporation’s shareholders.
This has relevance when the role of the City Attorney is examined in various contexts. How, for example, can the City Attorney simultaneously represent the pension plans (creditors of the City) and the City (the debtor of the pension plans)? That is a clear conflict of interest which Nuch abides (and I believe wrongly).
The same is true with regard to the proprietary agencies (DWP, Harbors, Airports), the Housing Authority, and the CRA. . .All of these agencies are ‘at odds’ with the City Council and the people. . . To have one attorney represent all sides is simply wrong. . . Even if unethical. . . No attorney can faithfully serve two masters. . . Yet that is what is happening. . . The result? The City Attorney is barred (either practically or legally) from going after fraud, waste, abuse, or corruption in these agencies.
This seems crazy. . . and it needs to be evaluated. These agencies can get their own lawyers; and they should. . .No one has a monopoly on wisdom and having multiple opinions and views is a good thing. . . The public would be better served and we would get better decisions.
As for Nuch’s ACE program. . it is, and remains, a terrible idea. . . Not well thought out and subject to incredible abuse. There needs to be a mediation component, accountability to the Neighborhood Councils (thus empowering them) and a more creative use of other civil enforcement avenues (including (believe it or not) small claims court). We need to have a better understanding of why the current enforcement regime is not working well. . . We have a ‘glimmer’ with the corruption the US Attorney has found in Building & Safety.
Giving the people (via public nuisance abatement ) standing to take care of their neighborhoods by the use of private attorneys who, acting as ‘private attorneys general’ could move vigorously and aggressively on behalf to ‘abate’ publicly declared ‘nuisances’. This has the private sector working in sync with the public sector (a new kind of ‘public/private partnership’).
We have administrative enforcement in Planning. . . It is called nuisance abatement. Why isn’t it working? Is there political influence at work here? What are the City Council members doing to effectuate more vigorous enforcement? When was the last time any City Council committee asked for a report on the subject. . . or undertook a detailed inquiry?
Why not challenge the N/C’s to do so by invoking Section 908 of the Charter and asking the N/C’s to hold Citywide hearings on the subject of administrative enforcement? You’d get piles and miles of stories. . . all of which would make the City Council members look bad and ineffective. . . so the City Council refuses to empower the people with the responsibility of helping them do their jobs better (another example of too much ‘ego’, not enough ‘imagination’).
So in the context of this quagmire, do you really think having the City Attorney enforce Administrative Code citations is going to accomplish anything? What will the City Attorney do when his ‘client’ (the City Councilperson) calls him up and tells him to ‘go easy’ on his friend or special interest patron. . . He we go again with the conflict of interest problem. . . If the City Councilperson is the ‘client’ (again something I dispute), then what is the City Attorney to do? Under Nuch’s current theory, isn’t Nuch supposed to honor the wishes of his ‘client’ (the Councilperson)? Or is he supposed to represent the interests of the people (the broader public interest. . . the beneficiaries of the public trust)?
What about those instances where businesses or properties are declared ‘nuisances’ and remain so (and thus devalued) so that insiders and friends of the council person can buy the property for a greatly reduced value? It happens.
So can you all see how these issues are intertwined?
That it is not so easy just to wave a magic wand and ‘poof’, there goes the problem of Administrative Code Enforcement. It’s a great way to pander to the people; but a terrible way to undertake the public’s business and do justice to the social contract between the people and their government. .
In short, it is challenging to divorce or separate the political interests of the Councilmembers, Mayor, and Controller from the broader public interest. We (the people) need to have this discussion before rushing to pass an ACE law. My hope is that discussion can incorporate these other core questions about the role of the City Attorney in our system and how the Office of City Attorney can be made to work better given the current (perceived) ethical constraints (real or imagined); and the possibilities for a change or better definition of the City Attorney’s role.
Short of that, our problems are going to continue and we are not going to get at fraud, waste, abuse, or corruption. The DA can do it; the US Attorney can do it; but my contention is the City Attorney should be able to do it.
But until these other elements get worked out, having an ACE program will turn into yet another bureaucratic nightmare of untold proportions.
Noel Weiss
I’m with Noel Weiss on his latest excellent analysis.
While you may censor some items, some seem to be getting by ya. Check the names on this blog:
Haywood Jablowme – Hey would you blow me
E Nourma Skock – enourmous cock
Mike Hunt – my cunt