Comment on this post

One More Lie from AEG, One Less LA Convention

AEG’s TIm Leiweke has good reason for pulling out all stops to block anyone from suing over his NFL stadium plan in downtown LA — lies aren’t perjury if you didn’t swear on a stack of Bibles in court to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

No sooner did Leiweke bamboozle the City Attorney’s office and the City Council into signing off on a Memorandum of Understanding that gives away the farm to AEG for next to nothing, then we learn a key element wasn’t the way AEG said it was.

aegnfl.jpg

It took the Society of Critical Care Medicine to figure out that the framework stadium plan just approved is not what it was supposed o be with regards to the promise that the new wing of the LA Convention Center — a $2 billion white elephant heading towards its fourth disastrous incarnation — will be completed and operational before the old wing is demolished.

The medical association on Thursday canceled plans to hold a gathering of 5,000 members at the Convention Center in February 2014 after the group’s CEO David Martin was “told by officials with the Los Angeles’ convention and visitors bureau, known as LA Inc., that part of the new building would overlap with the existing one, so the latter would have to be removed before the former is built,” according to Associated Press reporter Jacob Adelman..

“We really can’t risk our largest event of the year on construction,” said Martin, who added that the group had not changed an existing plan to hold its 2021 convention at the Los Angeles venue. 

LA Inc. spokeswoman Carol Martinez could not immediately account for the discrepancy between the construction schedule related to Martin and the plan that was approved by city officials, AP reported. She said she regretted the medical group’s cancellation, but saw it as an acceptable loss in light of what would be an improved convention center campus that can attract bigger events once work is complete.

“In the long run, this will be extremely beneficial,” she said.  

Don’t expect anyone involved in this sham to lose much sleep over the exposure of this deceit, certainly not ambitious state Sen. Kevin DeLeon who is holding a dog-and-pony show Friday for Leiweke’s stadium plan to drum up support for the legislation needed to exempt the deal from legal challenge under the state’s tough environmental laws.

The event from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. at the Ronald Reagan State Building’s auditorium (AEG-DeLeon.docx) is headlined “Community Impacts of Proposed Stadium Weighed by State Senate Select Committee on Sports and Entertainment.


Since the departure of the Raiders
for Oakland in 1995, Los Angeles has not had an National Football League team.
Friday’s hearing will examine the latest plan to bring football back to Los
Angeles,” the press release says. “This proposal must be fully scrutinized to expose any financial risk
to taxpayers and to reveal potential environmental impacts. This project
will be thoroughly vetted to ensure that any action improves the local
residents’ quality of life.”

To fulfill his commitment for scrutiny and vetting, DeLeon who surely must be headed to the City Council has set up six “panels” starting with NFL defensive great Michael Strahan as a solo act on Panel 1 called “The Need for Football Downtown” and Leiweke as a solo on Panel 3.called “Minimizing Taxpayer Risk, Stadium Financing and the Return of Football.”

In between them, CLA Gerry Miller and his assistant Mark Whitaker who negotiated the MOU with AEG will defend what they have wrought. Panel No.4 features four union leaders answering the topic question “Will Farmers Field Create Jobs?” in the affirmative based on Leiweke’s claims.

There might be some concerns expressed in the last two panels but I doubt if they will be very loud. They bring together experts for “Examining Land Use and Environmental Concerns” and community people for “Balancing the Event Center and Community Needs.”

It’s probably worth noting that immediately after shilling for Leiweke, DeLeon is rushing to Vernon where the Chamber of Commerce of the notoriously corrupt town is staging a rally in support of his plan for “reform” instead of Assembly Speaker John Perez’s nuclear option of dissolving Vernon and making it an unincorporated part of the LA County governed by the Board of Supervisors.
This entry was posted in City Hall, Hot Topics, Los Angeles, NFL Stadium and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

51 Responses to One More Lie from AEG, One Less LA Convention

  1. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Hi Ron, According to the MOU on page 16, “Other Issues:
    The MOU provides that AEG would compensate the LACC for any construction period
    disruptions that result in reduced convention or trade show revenues and that they would not
    schedule events into the Event Center that compete with LACC events. These measures ensure
    that construction activities prior to opening of the Event Center do not degrade business at the
    LACC, nor would the operation of the Event Center itself.”

  2. Scott Zwartz says:

    No honest person seeks to be excepted from the civil courts. Could there be a louder declaration that AEG plans to break the law?
    With no District Attorney and with the City Attorney being legally forbidden to prosecute a fraud involving members of the City Council n o matter how obviously, the only resort citizens have are the courts. And AEG is demanding that for its project, the courts must be abolished.

  3. James McCuen says:

    Mr. Dell’abte,
    AEG has no obligations, there is no agreement – Remember it was non-binding.
    But the withdrawal of Society of Critical Care Medicine is real. It has already happened.
    The City and the taxpayers have already taken a loss thanks to AEG.
    AEG want pay for this loss.

  4. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Mr. McCuen, yeah fully understand that, yet once the EIR is complete and “IF” a team moves to Farmers then it becomes binding agreement.
    Also, does Microsoft with 15k visitors come and spend 38-40 million for the first time this past year without LA Live? What about the X-Games? What about 2 NBA all-star games in 10 years (the only Arena to get that). E3 convention? ESPY’s? Etc…
    Before 1999, the South Park area of DTLA (and actually all of DTLA wasn’t a place to go). AEG has helped bring more conventions and major events to DTLA. Lots of parts of the City and County have benefited from this. Not everyone decides to get a hotel in DTLA.
    AEG will complete the convention before even touching Farmers Field.

  5. anonymous says:

    I have this visual in my head of every politician who has a vote on this, drool coming out their mouths as they envision campaign contributions, fund raisers and mailers coming their way.
    I sure hope Leiwke’s final performance will be that none of them gets a penny from him. They all deserve to be as screwed as we’ve been. It’s only fair, equal protection and all that.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I like the Majestic plan so much better and many others do as well. It makes logical sense not to bring in hoards of cars into an already congested downtown. Secondly with the violence up at Candlestick Park with Raider fans it absurb not to think it will happen here. Fans stated they will stay away from football games until its cleaned up. Look at the Dodgers, no one goes like they use to. If that happens with AEG stadium the City will be left holding the bag.These politicians and AEG have been lying about this corrupt deal. When you have the City Attorney Trutanich at a community meeting touting Lieweke thats unethical, questionable and deceitful. If Trutanich even thinks of running for DA we will campaign hard against him. He lost tons of votes on that. We are campaigning for Lacey. Why isn’t anyone asking Majestic to come to meetings in LA to show their plans? Why is AEG having free reign all over the City as if they own it? I say people need to go to the village idiot De Leon meeting and ask the tough questions.
    Look at this beautiful stadium for City of Industry
    http://www.losangelesfootballstadium.com/

  7. anonymous says:

    Just for the record, it’s really ugly. Does Council really think it looks nice? They talk the graffiti talk, yet, meanwhile, they just voted to deface the city with this ugly monstrosity.
    Whatever happened to classic gothic structures with some real art? We’re gonna be a mix of convention center Anaheim plus skid row.

  8. Anonymous says:

    “with the City Attorney being legally forbidden to prosecute a fraud involving members of the City Council no matter how obviously—”. Cite the Charter section where it says so.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous on August 26, 2011 9:21 AM
    “with the City Attorney being legally forbidden to prosecute a fraud involving members of the City Council no matter how obviously—”. Cite the Charter section where it says so.
    If the pols write their own rules this is what
    we get. Who said the City Attorney cannot rule
    in court against the charter? Is that in the charter as well? How about the Supreme Court?
    The pols are asking for a major rebellion like
    in Libya and Cairo if they insist they get to
    do what they wish to do. People are people all
    over the world and enough is enough.

  10. Rick Abrams says:

    Zwartz is right.
    The city charter says that the City Attorney’s function is to advise the City, the council and city staff and agencies including the Neighborhood Councils.
    The law prevents an atty from taking a position adverse to his client and requires the atty to keep confidential any information he learns from the client. Thus, as the Attorney for the city, the City Attorney may not prosecute anyone in the city.
    The County for example has the County Counsel to advise the County and a separate District Attorney who could theoretically criminally prosecute county officials.
    The DA has the power to investigate and criminally prosecute the son of the ex-DA for a host of corrupt business activities, but don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
    The City, however, does not even have an attorney who could prosecute corrupt officials even if it wanted to do so.

  11. Rick Abrams says:

    Zwartz is right.
    The city charter says that the City Attorney’s function is to advise the City, the council and city staff and agencies including the Neighborhood Councils.
    The law prevents an atty from taking a position adverse to his client and requires the atty to keep confidential any information he learns from the client. Thus, as the Attorney for the city, the City Attorney may not prosecute anyone in the city.
    The County for example has the County Counsel to advise the County and a separate District Attorney who could theoretically criminally prosecute county officials.
    The DA has the power to investigate and criminally prosecute the son of the ex-DA for a host of corrupt business activities, but don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
    The City, however, does not even have an attorney who could prosecute corrupt officials even if it wanted to do so.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Rick Abrams, if your interpretation is correct then it follows that the City Attorney is no more than staff to the City Council. Please elaborate on why this is an elected position. If he is not representing the people then remove this body from an elected position. The City Council can appoint any sucker they want to.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Well, I do not understand. If someone is cheating on the city and the taxpayers, who do
    we have to take our side against them in a court
    of law? If you or I or both wished to sue our
    city councilman, the Mayor, or any official in
    the schools, the DWP, the police or fire depts, what is our representatived called? Is there
    no one to protect the city?
    If the answer is no, how do we vote for someone
    to represent us? Anyone know? I had heard of
    the city being sued but the complainer hired a
    private atty. What if he could not afford one?
    Is he out-of luck?

  14. Anonymous says:

    The City Attorney we all vote for will fight you with your tax dollars to defend the corrupt City. Yes, you have to hire a private attorney at yor personal expense to defend against a city attorney you pay for with your public money. Get it?

  15. Anonymous says:

    Thanks, now I get it -
    Our city is honest!
    We need to protect our city government including
    its officers from harm. They can do no wrong!
    Dream on, Baby…

  16. Anonymous says:

    Our tough environmental laws on one hand demand tax payers to pony up in the name of coal reduction and on the other hand, the path to NFL requires the City, State and local officals to over look Environmental Laws; an environmental injustice. What will it take then? It will have to take complete satisfaction.
    legal challenge under the state’s tough environmental laws
    “This proposal must be fully scrutinized to expose any financial risk to taxpayers and to reveal potential environmental impacts. This project will be thoroughly vetted to ensure that any action improves the local residents’ quality of life.”

  17. Anonymous says:

    Surprise, surprise! From all the places, a State CLA has the following statement on the AEG Stadium. Shame on our CLA and City Attorney who was kissing Lieweke’s butt just the other day.
    “A new football stadium in downtown Los Angeles may not generate the economic benefit predicted by its backers because consumers would simply spend less on other activities, a state legislative analyst said at a state hearing on the project Friday.
    Mark Whitaker, a senior fiscal policy analyst in the state Legislative Analyst’s Office, told a Senate committee that the studies by the city and developer “overstated the economic benefits” of the $1.2 billion project.
    “Most consumers have a fixed entertainment income,” he said. “The dollars that they are spending at the stadium, they aren’t spending the money elsewhere.”

  18. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Anonymous on August 26, 2011 5:35 PM,
    So you are telling me if either developer (AEG or Majestic) gets an NFL team (or what they both want 2 teams), there won’t be two NFL Superbowls (in the next 10 years), PAC-12 Championship Game, possible Pro-Bowl Game (or Games. Hawaii doesn’t drive enough revenue anymore, as the NFL placed the game in Miami 2 years ago), and more FIFA friendlies, that there will not be an INCREASE in revenue because we are getting events that take place outside of the state? Also, AEG’s site can allow for NCAA Basket Ball Final Four. Possible move of Comic Con (from San Diego). More opportunity for private and tax revenue to grow.
    All of those events above cannot and will not take place if either stadium is denied. This isn’t a debate of what developer should get the bid to build, yet just saying that Mark Whitaker is wrong in regards that there won’t be be events that draw new visitors to our State, County, and City. How many people in Southern California allocate a budget for the Superbowl? If LA gets a Superbowl how many people will visit our State, County, and City? Each stadium will fit about 75K. Also, all the corporate support, global media, etc that don’t even go to the game.
    Mr. Whitaker is right that there will be some cannibalization of sport/entertainment budgets from locals, yet there will be new events that will generate business.
    Also, either project gets built, the infusion of much needed jobs (from temporary to full time, union to non-union).

  19. Anonymous says:

    6:08 p.m., can’t understand head or tail of what you have written.

  20. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Anonymous on August 26, 2011 6:23 PM
    So, if you are telling me, that AEG or Majestic (Roski) gets to build a stadium, there will not be new, organic business (and revenue) to the State, County, and City? Superbowl, Pro-Bowl, PAC-12 Champion game, NCAA BASKETBALL FINAL FOUR, FIFA friendlies, etc?
    These are events that draw people from nationwide (and global) and therefore there will be new infusion of (plus) capital to both the private and public sectors.
    This isn’t going to cannibalization of sport/entertainment budgets from locals, as these events will bring in NEW VISITORS from outside our area.
    Do you understand now?

  21. Anonymous says:

    No. AEG Cool aid that you’ve drunk. Get over it. Leave statistics to people who understand it & are honest enough to interpret it in community interest, unlike people who just regurgitate BS they read somewere and try to pass it on as facts.

  22. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Anonymous on August 26, 2011 7:02 PM,
    Thanks for being respectful. Sorry I am not up to your standards of debate and public conversation.
    Either way, AEG or Roski will get a stadium built (Roski is ready to dig BTW and AEG is right behind him). Both Developers are very good at what they do.
    And I thought this blog and Mr. Kaye believed in an open forum for the community and taxpayers? I believe someone is an elitist–
    Enjoy the end of your Summer.

  23. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Anonymous on August 26, 2011 7:02 PM,
    Thanks for being respectful. Sorry I am not up to your standards of debate and public conversation.
    Either way, AEG or Roski will get a stadium built (Roski is ready to dig BTW and AEG is right behind him). Both Developers are very good at what they do.
    And I thought this blog and Mr. Kaye believed in an open forum for the community and taxpayers? I believe someone is an elitist–
    Enjoy the end of your Summer.

  24. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Anonymous on August 26, 2011 7:02 PM,
    Thanks for being respectful. Sorry I am not up to your standards of debate and public conversation.
    Either way, AEG or Roski will get a stadium built (Roski is ready to dig BTW and AEG is right behind him). Both Developers are very good at what they do.
    And I thought this blog and Mr. Kaye believed in an open forum for the community and taxpayers? I believe someone is an elitist–
    Enjoy the end of your Summer.

  25. Anonymous says:

    Don’t hit the submit button three times. As you know yor BS is adequate one time. It is nothing to do with Ron Kaye’s opinions. It is an open forum. Defend your opinions that are contrary to mine. The general public are unwilling to accept a taxpayer rip-off and neither are they willing to accept an inevitabilty in life. That is a philosphy for losers who can’t cope with the hard fight to keep our quality of life intact against big developers who’ve bought off all our corrupt politicians.

  26. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Hi Anonymous on August 26, 2011 7:41 PM,
    The blog’s servers crashed. I didn’t hit it 3 times.
    Well, you told me “Leave statistics to people who understand it & are honest enough to interpret it in community interest, unlike people who just regurgitate BS they read somewere and try to pass it on as facts.”
    And I am a taxpayer of this Country, State, County, and City and have a fair say on this and any issue placed on this open forum that Mr. Kaye has placed.
    So, if we don’t move forward with either Stadium Plan, what do you think we should do to stimulate the local economy?
    Or do you just like being a Monday morning QB?

  27. Scott Zwartz says:

    If the AEG stadium is such a great financial winner, the Anshutz should be willing to pay the city to build. The contrary is the situation. The city will be giving Anshutz hundreds of millions or even a billion under, over, through and around the table.
    Due to the reign of the unholy CRA/LA for decades, free enterprise development of significant projects is dead in Los Angeles. The only things that are built are where they tax payers are ripped off. The Hollywood-Highland Complex for the Oscars should be able to pay for itself and if the CRA/LA had not existed, perhaps it would have. Due to the involvement of the CRA, it cost $625 M to construct and then the City sold it to CIM Group for $201 plus giving CIM Group an extra $30 M to rehab the new Kodak Theater.
    As the California Supreme Court recognized in 1935 “‘new schemes which the fertility of man’s invention would contrive’” are limitless. (American Philatelic Soc. v. Claibourne (1935) 3 Cal. 2d 689, 698 The ways Anshutz can rip off the taxpayers through more scams and schemes are limitless. That is why he wants to nullify the courts as that is the sole place where such corruption can be stopped.

  28. Scott Zwartz says:

    If the AEG stadium is such a great financial winner, the Anshutz should be willing to pay the city to build. The contrary is the situation. The city will be giving Anshutz hundreds of millions or even a billion under, over, through and around the table.
    Due to the reign of the unholy CRA/LA for decades, free enterprise development of significant projects is dead in Los Angeles. The only things that are built are where they tax payers are ripped off. The Hollywood-Highland Complex for the Oscars should be able to pay for itself and if the CRA/LA had not existed, perhaps it would have. Due to the involvement of the CRA, it cost $625 M to construct and then the City sold it to CIM Group for $201 plus giving CIM Group an extra $30 M to rehab the new Kodak Theater.
    As the California Supreme Court recognized in 1935 “‘new schemes which the fertility of man’s invention would contrive’” are limitless. (American Philatelic Soc. v. Claibourne (1935) 3 Cal. 2d 689, 698 The ways Anshutz can rip off the taxpayers through more scams and schemes are limitless. That is why he wants to nullify the courts as that is the sole place where such corruption can be stopped.

  29. Gary Dell'abte says:

    Hi Scott Zwartz,
    OK, then let Roski build his stadium in the City of Industry. Is that OK? Or are you against that?
    Mind you that LA will not upgrade the convention center (much needed). Also, LA will not get additional development that the stadium will bring (NON-AEG properties).

  30. Anonymous says:

    Liars , crooks , and idiots work in the Council Chambers who have sold to AEG.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Trutanich, where are you hidiiiiiiiiiiiing? Has AEG also bought you? Hmm , it seems like it.

  32. James McCuen says:

    “Analyst casts doubts on economic benefits from downtown L.A. stadium”
    [Link below at the end of my comments]
    I don’t see the LA City Council or Mayor changing direction on the LA Stadium deal since they have been bought off years ago.
    But if the stars are aligned right and there is a major corruption probe for the City of LA, there is still an opportunity for a future City Council (or a shaken up existing City Council) to “Opt Out” of this whole deal by pointing out that the MOU was non-binding on either party.
    AEG may argue that the City of LA did not “barging in good faith,” however the City could legitimately that the MOU was non-binding and it is not in the economic interests of the City to continue. (Despite any PR propaganda from the AEG team stating otherwise).
    “Analyst casts doubts on economic benefits from downtown L.A. stadium”
    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/08/analyst-casts-doubts-on-economic-benefit-from-downtown-stadium.html

  33. James McCuen says:

    In terms of Trutanich and the City Charter, Trutanich’s office has taken the position of attorney-client privilege – His office represents the City Council and Managers of the City and can’t do anything that would harm those office holders and managers since they are his client.
    Members of his office (City Attorney’s) have taken proactive positions in response to Perry (on the AEG Stadium Deal) in some cases and Garcetti (on daily City Council and Committee meetings) that are not in the interests of the people of Los Angeles.
    Your point about the City Attorney being independently elected is a good one. But the current City Attorney puts the City Council’s interests above the people’s interest.?
    I assume if a blatant crime had been committed, some entity outside of the City Attorney’s office would have to “turn in” the offender. But it won’t be Trutanich’s office, although some that argue that is should be.
    You cannot count on the LA County DA even though they should be the first choice. You could consider either the CA Attorney General or the Feds.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Kevin de Leon is a piece of Antonio Villaraigosa’s belly button lint. A light weight scumbag who will do the bidding of the Democratic political machine. He has no brain — none. A complete airhead who wjo I think the people of Los Angeles are starting to grasp what a cancerous tumor AEG and Time Liewicke are on the City of Los Angeles.
    And all the back room scum of Labor have been parading poor construction workers at public meetings to create the illusion that the “public” supports this complete boondoggle.
    Who can run against Kevin de Leon in the next election