Results tagged “city attorney” from Ron Kaye L.A.

It took the Board of Commissioners of the Recreation and Parks Department just 16 minutes to sell out the public interest Monday and trash the City Charter at a special meeting with little advance notice..

Not bad for a few minutes work by the people who are supposed to be the citizen watchdogs on our elected officials and bureaucrats.

The citizens themselves did no better in protecting their interests. Not a single member of the public was present to comment as the commissioners agreed to include the Pershing Square parking garage -- property under the City Charter of Rec and Parks -- in the basket of 10 garages being auctioned off to the highest bidder, or in this case as in most others, the biggest campaign contributor with the most influential lobbyist representing them.

In fact, the only person other than a staff member and the commissioners who spoke was mayoral aide Michael Mullin who was there to make sure the board caved in without raising any thorny issues.

The board complied meekly, raising nothing more than a plea that when the Pershing Square garage is leased for 50 years for a pittance that the operator be asked to make a good faith effort to reegotiate if possible in case anything changes in how the park is operated between now and 2060.

Even that sounded alarm bells to Mullin who wanted to make it clear in the record that the board was only asking for "reasonable good faith requests" to be taken into consideration and didn't really expect to have any control over how its property or the park is actually run.

"Our job is to see that the parks work," the commissioners said apropos of nothing since come Labor Day the parks won't work very well anymore thanks to the mayor and Council regarding them along with libraries as the first services to be gutted.

Back in May, this deal was dissected here complete with a warning from the City Attorney's Office that any effort to lease Pershing Square was likely to end in a lawsuit because it was deeded to Rec and Parks as a revenue stream and resource in perpetuity.

"We also advised that the potential consequences of violating the Charter are that an action for declaratory relief and injunction could be brought by any taxpayer. The likely result of such a lawsuit would be that payment to the RAP Fund would be compelled, with interest, and attorney's fees and costs would have to be paid by the City's General Fund," the City Attorney said then.

"If an arrangement that would violate the Charter is included in the lease, the City Attorney would not be able to approve the lease. If an arrangement that would violate the Charter is included in a public report to the Board of Recreation and Park Commissioners or any other City body, the City Attorney would be compelled to comment on the Charter requirements."

On Monday, the City Attorney's Office offered no more concern about including Pershing Square in the garages lease proposal than to say the Commission has the sole discretion and authority to do what it wants -- as if the public and the public interest is irrelevant.

The commission seemed quite content to expect no more from this deal than the same $2 million a year it gets now plus increases reflecting half a century of inflation.

In a report (pershing square.pdf) submitted by Rec and Parks General Manager Jon Kirk Mukri -- a man fighting daily to keep his job in the face of the abuses and demands of the mayor's offiice - the Pershing Square garage is the city's most profitable and has the "greatest potential for future growth," according to a report commissioned for the city.

"Because of the abundance of development slated for downtown Los Angeles, the location of the parking facility and the amount of excess capacity in the garage, the prospects for revenue growth from an increase in parking demand are very bright. The report indicates that as demand grows and the number of competing facilities shrinks, rate increases will provide another avenue for future revenue growth."

In other words, Pershing Square is the plum in this deal that was supposed to bring in $150 million in a lump sum now plus future revenue but now is worth only $53 million up front, according to city estimates.

So why lease it out at the bottom of the market and expect no more than to keep pace with inflation when their own report says Pershing Square's value will soar?

Why deflate its value by putting it in a basket with nine poorly managed garages that mostly lose money?

Why ignore the intent of the City Charter and sell out the public interest?

Don't expect answers to these and other questions from your city officials. It will take a lawsuit that will tie up this deal in court to have any hope for answers.

Anybody know a good lawyer who cares enough about the quality of life in this city to take on City Hall.-

They call it their "gold in the gutter" -- the pennies, dollars and millions the City Council is using to paper over the massive budget deficits they created without actually reducing spending.

As the Council gets closure on its latest edition of phony budget-writing today, or perhaps Tuesday, the biggest nugget they are counting on is the $53 million in a lump sum payment from leasing 10 city-owned parking structures to a private company for 50 years.

That's a lot less than the upwards of $150 million the mayor was looking for a year ago but you can be sure that the mayor's and council's vast army of P.R. spinners will put a smiley face on this back room deal that will make someone very rich even richer.

To maximize revenue, the 10 parking lots are being put up for lease as a package with the revenue earmarked for the general fund to avoid layoffs -- and there in lies the problem.

The Department of Recreation and Parks like libraries and other services provided to the general public is under assault from city officials whose only goal is to protect city jobs, not public services. They already have eliminated 4,000 jobs that provide basic services through early retirement, vacant job eliminations and transfers to special funds and they want to avoid actual layoffs anyway they can.

But that isn't proving so easy to do.

Under the City Charter, the Pershing Square lot is owned by Rec and Parks which gets all the profits from it -- roughly $2 million a year now despite the city's utterly poor management of parking facilities and its high costs for salaries and benefits which are estimated at 50 percent higher than a private operator's, according to a consultant's report.

Back in January, the City Administrative Office and Chief Legislative Analyst offered a detailed analysis of the parking structure proposal, including this passage on the Pershing Square issue:

Pershing Square

RAP states that Pershing Square generates approximately $2 million annually that is used to
support RAP programs, including $500,000 transferred annually to the General Fund in
support of various Citywide programs. The City Attorney has concluded that RAP is entitled to
the "net proceeds" ascribed to this asset through a concession, where "net proceeds" are
gross revenues less expenditures for operation and maintenance. To determine RAP's proper share of the rent derived from a lease for all 10 of the parking structures, RAP and the City must estimate and agree upon the amount of the rent attributable to Pershing Square. The City Attorney has advised that various factors are relevant to this rent allocation, including, but not limited to, the historical revenue and expense numbers for all of the structures. In general, the working group believes that a private operator will generate more value from the Pershing Square garage, and this additional value should be available to support RAP operations within the funding requirements of the City Charter.

I added the emphasis because the problem lies in the determination of revenue to the parks if it's included in the package, an issue the mayor who had demonstrated so little respect for the rule of law would like to ignore.

According to an email from the City Attorney's Office, the mayor wants to know "why the (Rec and Parks) Board of Commissioners could not agree to receive payment from the General Fund during the 50 year term of the lease (e.g., $2 million per year for 50 years)."

"It was explained that monies received from revenues earned by the department are required by Charter Section 593 (c) to be placed in the RAP fund, and that more specifically pursuant to Charter Section 596 (a) (5), proceeds from leasing the subsurface space for operation of a public parking structure 'shall be paid into the Recreation and Parks Fund.' The Charter is clear and does not provide a basis for the Board or anyone else to waive its requirements. The Charter can only be changed by an amendment approved by the voters."

Under the Charter, Pershing Square gets specific protections because it was deeded to Rec and Parks specifically to provide funding to it. Rec and Parks also gets a piece of the city's property tax revenue which provides most of its funding.

In theory, those funds are safe even as Rec and Parks is getting hit with a $25 million bill for water and power and reduced general fund support. But theories are cheap and city officials are looking for even more, thus the attempt to raid the Pershing Square revenue.

The City Attorney's Office advised the mayor and others that raiding that money likely would lead to a taxpayer lawsuit.

"We also advised that the potential consequences of violating the Charter are that an action for declaratory relief and injunction could be brought by any taxpayer. The likely result of such a lawsuit would be that payment to the RAP Fund would be compelled, with interest, and attorney's fees and costs would have to be paid by the City's General Fund," the email said.

"If an arrangement that would violate the Charter is included in the lease, the City Attorney would not be able to approve the lease. If an arrangement that would violate the Charter is included in a public report to the Board of Recreation and Park Commissioners or any other City body, the City Attorney would be compelled to comment on the Charter requirements."

So that leaves the parking deal up in the air -- something City Council members are set to ignore by including the $53 million in next year's budget.

They will undoubtedly try to get around the City Charter by allocating a portion of the $53 million to Rec and Parks but will it be a fair allocation?

Pershing Square is the most profitable city parking structure with the two that are larger -- Cinerama Dome and Hollywood & Highland -- both losing money hard as that might be to believe.

It is the plum in the deal. Private operators would almost certainly raise the daily rate of $15.40, even double it, and sharply cut operational costs, much as they will do to all the other lots.

City Hall has the option of continuing to operate Pershing Square and the other parking lots but that would take investment and skilled management and lower cost structures. But it wouldn't provide all that upfront cash now in exchange for future revenue.

The city could lease Pershing Square separately, leaving the revenue stream with Rec & Parks but that wouldn't avoid having to lay off city workers since the leasing of the nine other structures wouldn't generate nearly as much to the general fund.

Call it the Pershing Square Dilemma, just one example of the many problems city officials are facing because they are incapable of facing the budget crisis head-on.

In a devastating six-page letter Thursday afternoon, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich   accuses Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa of "a remarkable lack of leadership and imagination,that puts "public safety and the protection of taxpayer dollars at substantial risk."

Responding to the mayor's budget proposal that cuts his spending 18 percent on top of a similar cut this year, Trutanich suggests the mayor has "lost faith" in the city's residents and public employees and is engaging in political cynicism.

"Your proposals will only exacerbate the budget crisis looming in the future and appear to be motivated by some agenda other than the continued success of all of the public safety offices in this City, including the City Attorney's Office.

"It is also obvious that your proposals cynically protect political positions at the expense of public safety and essential services. For example, I note with great dismay that the proposed Budget recommends only a 2.6% reduction for the Mayor's Office. I also understand that, despite a so-called 'hard hiring freeze' for other City employees, your office continues to hire political staff, which is not tasked to perform public safety functions."

(READ THE WHOLE LETTER AT OURLA.ORG)

Some people are worried his election will go to Carmen Trutanich's head. Others are asking, "What's all this talk about Nuch already turning into an unapproachable <expletive>?"

Then, there's the matter that goes before the City Council on Tuesday to let him raise up to $100,000 from private interests to pay the costs of transition as he gears up to take over the City Attorney's office with its 700 lawyers engaged in civil and criminal matters and the legal affairs of the city's agencies.

As someone who owes his election to strong support from community activists and is the only city official carrying the torch for positive changes at City Hall, Trutanich has created high expectations, impossibly high expectations for that matter.

On the day after his crushing defeat of Jack Weiss, Trutanich told the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association:

"I'm not going to let you down...We're going to prosecute misdemeanor ethics law violations by politicians...We're going to change the way politics is played in the City of Los Angeles...The future of this city is going to be bright and clean...I want to be your City Attorney. I want to be the people's lawyer..I want to hear what you think is broken and I want to try to fix it. I'm not a politician. God forbid I ever become one."

That's the kind of talk that puts a guy in a fishbowl with everyone watching his every move.

His appointment of former Republican District Attorney Robert Philobosian and former Democratic Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg to head his transition team raises questions among some who note both are connected to powerhouse law firms

His commitment to use private money rather than city money to cover the costs of transition has some people asking whether that will make him beholden to the same special interests who control so much of what goes on in City Hall.

Others worry the City Hall power structure will get their arms around him, flatter his ego and lead him away from his stated goals. They are skeptical he can turn the mammoth law firm the City Attorney's Office represents into a legal engine that puts the public interest first.

All those concerns are legitimate and should come up no matter who holds high office. It's only through the vigilance and participation of the citizenry that public officials will stay true to the course.

For his part, Trutanich needs to bring a cross-section of the community into his world and operate transparently even when his decisions are controversial or disappoint one group or another.

He represents an opening in the great wall of City Hall but will quickly find, like former City Controller Laura Chick did, that you can only push so far without becoming maginalized in a system where power is so tightly held.

Still, he's going to have to keep the community involved and informed and be honest and straightforward in his communication. But he's also going to have to dance with the devils in City Hall to get anything done.

Already, the mayor and council are taking their measure of the man and the City Attorney's staff is gearing up to resist change -- a task no doubt made easier by outgoing City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's decision to put his senior staff on the tenure track that allows them to move from political appointments to civil service protected jobs.

The winds of change are blowing through City Hall but it's going to take a hurricane to clean out the stench of corruption.

Personally, I'm optimistic. Nuch is a start, the Council District 2 election is coming up Sept. 22 and the failure of the mayor and council to come to terms with the budget deficit is a timebomb.

We'll see soon enough what stuff Carmen Trutanich is really made of.
-

Poor Jack Weiss wants to be City Attorney so bad he's blindly done the mayor's bidding for four years and groveled before developers to raise campaign cash.

Trouble is he wants the job alright, he just doesn't want the work that goes with it.

It's clear to everyone in City Hall that Weiss would do whatever the mayor tells him to do if he wins the May 19 runoff against Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich. That alone ought to disqualify him from holding an independent office, let alone the high position of City Attorney where he's supposed to be the "people's lawyer" and a protector of the public interest.

Under the guidance of political hatchet man Ace Smith, Weiss' campaign consists of little more than attacks on Trutanich -- who is backed by District Attorney Steve Cooley and Sheriff Lee Baca, numerous law enforcement and community groups, and all the local newspapers -- for being a lawyer in private practice after years as a courtroom prosecutor.

Wherever he campaigns, Weiss needs to bring along a paid claque to neutralize the boos and jeers he gets.

Wednesday night's debate with Trutanich before the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association was typical. The audience wanted to hear what the candidates stood for and what they will do to make the city better as City Attorney but all Weiss could talk about was who Trutanich represented in his private practice.

A friend of mine reported: "I was amazed at the focus of the audience.  They were mesmerized. No one moved.  They just sat there soaking in the obvious hatred between the two and weren't fooled one bit by any of Weiss' ploys... Weiss was booed at least four times when he kept returning to the subject of Nuch's client list and "association" with the gun industry.  Further, Nuch was the one who wanted the debate to go where it needed to -- to discuss the issues of concern as opposed to personal attacks. So he took every opportunity  to make certain people knew where he stood and what Jack did. He was masterful." Others said the same thing. It's similar to what I heard at the LA Neighborhood Council
Coalition debate two weeks ago. I'll be at next week's debate sponsored by the LA League of Conservation Voters and see if Weiss can get off of his cheap and dishonest personal attacks on Trutanich and onto the issues.

But don't take my word for it. Watch the videos made by Pete Vukovich yourself.

Editor's Note: DWP Commissioner Jonathan Palfrey, director of Green L.A. Coalition and vice president of the LA League of Conservation Voters, and I debated Measure B today on KPFK 90.7 FM on "Uprising" with Sonali Kolhatkar. Listen here.

By ANONYMOUS

Know Jack Weiss.

NO Jack Weiss.

 

Installment #1:

Our City Attorney Matters  

 

THE CITY ATTORNEY IS OUR LEGAL WATCHDOG 

Perhaps you are counting on our City Attorney to protect us from hard core criminals. And to be our go-to-guy against gangs. You should know that the District Attorney, not the City Attorney, prosecutes felons. Ideally, our next City Attorney will be a master of the criminal law system and an aggressive partner to our District Attorney, but crime is only one of the responsibilities of the City Attorney. The City Attorney defends us in the hundreds of civil lawsuits filed against the City. And, every day, the 500 City Attorneys instruct our Mayor, City Council, Police Chief, and City Departments on their legal obligations to the public. The City Attorney is all that stands between us and a rogue City Hall that trades in political backslapping instead of what's right.   

 

THE CITY ATTORNEY DECIDES WHICH LAWS TO ENFORCE

And then there's that other major responsibility. The City Attorney decides which of our laws to enforce. Did you ever wonder why that illegal building is still standing? Or why that sea of fresh billboards is in place? Or why the "club" down the street or that shuttered facility is home to activity at all hours of the day and night? The list goes on and on. You know the volume of unlawful, disruptive activity in YOUR neighborhood. Our City Attorney is tasked with enforcing our laws. Wouldn't it be refreshing to have our laws enforced?  All it takes is a City Attorney whose eye is on serving us, the public. All it takes is for US to elect a new breed of City Attorney. More to come...

                                                

Do NOT vote for Jack Weiss for City Attorney on March 3

Installment #2 of 7:

The Subject was Rape 

 

RAPE VICTIMS COUNTED ON JACK WEISS FOR HELP

When he first ran for City Council in 2001, and again in 2005, candidate Jack Weiss made this pledge: he vowed to make the female victims of violent crime his priority. When he spoke to the National Council of Jewish Women, he reaffirmed his promise. But Jack's post-election inaction was deafening. By September 2007, our expectations had dimmed. We sat with Weiss and a thousand others at the annual Santa Monica Rape Treatment Center brunch. Now chairman of the Los Angeles Public Safety Committee, Weiss had yet to lift a finger. Rape victims spoke movingly about their personal ordeals and heroism. Civic leaders told us about the volume of untested LAPD rape kits. Perhaps this time, on this late date, we could goad or shame Jack Weiss into action. We approached Weiss, yet again, for his help.

 

 WEISS TURNED HIS BACK UNTIL RAPE COULD HELP HIM 

Jack brushed away our September 2007 appeals like so many flies. That is, until late 2008, and the ramp up of his campaign for City Attorney. Jack Weiss and the City Council directed $250,000 from the City street furniture fund to test the waiting rape kits. Reports stated that as many as 20% of the DNA samples had degraded to unusable. Weiss publicly proclaimed himself the white knight, rescuing rape victims from the City's dallying. We cringe at the avalanche of television ads broadcasting the "leadership" of Jack Weiss in the fight against rape. City Council Members Jan Perry and Dennis Zine, and rape victims, have called Weiss on his deception. Why did Jack Weiss make victims wait seven long years? Grateful for even his tardy, manipulative attention, they (and we) will never know. More to come...

 Do NOT vote for Jack Weiss for City Attorney

 

 

The LA Times Editorial Board under Publisher Eddie Hartenstein and Editorial Page Editor Jim Newton have launched their endorsements for the March 3 election with kind words for all five candidates for City Attorney, even Jack Weiss of all people.

But Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich gets their strong endorsement: Here's some excerpts:

"...we believe the best package of civil and criminal know-how, and the right combination of savvy and arm's length distance from City Hall politics, are offered by Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich. The Times endorses Trutanich for city attorney.

"Trutanich presents a strong vision for the office, with tough prosecution of violence tempered by a real-world recognition that gang crime must be answered with alternatives for youth. He supports and would enhance the neighborhood prosecutors program, one of Delgadillo's best ideas. He has the civil practice background to get a handle on Los Angeles' penchant for agreeing too easily to settlements, and impresses us as a man who would be willing to take a risky case to trial -- and suffer the political consequences if he loses -- in order to serve notice that the city will not roll over at the merest threat of a lawsuit by a billboard company or a disaffected employee."

Councilwoman Wendy Greuel gets the Times' nod over former DWP Commission President Nick Patsaouras in a tepid endorsement that contains more warnings than praise:

"...her ability to work within the system sometimes veers into a fear of alienating others in power and a willingness to take cheap shots at those she knows won't retaliate.

"We're unimpressed, to say the least, with Greuel's campaign commercial, in which she takes on a program at the Housing Department and rails against "the city" for its failure to track loans. As for the loans, she has been a member of the council's oversight committee and bears as much responsibility as anyone. As for the department, she would do well to ensure that every city agency is as efficient and effective, and as good at resisting political pressure from council members who would rather the department offer special deals to favored developers than conduct business in an evenhanded, transparent fashion. The department should be her model, not her target.

"We believe Greuel can be better than her campaign. We urge her to prove it."

Life is so unfair even for wannabe City Attorney Jack Weiss, the councilman with the lackluster record of public service who wants to ride the mayor's coattails into the City Attorney's Office.

Poor Jack has worked so hard to lock up the race without actually doing anything by raising a fortune from the same people buying favors from the mayor but people in his district and all around town keep referring to him as Jack Weiss(el) or Jack the Weasel.

And now Rick Orlov in the Daily News reports "Someone bought the domain name jackweissforcityattorney.com and linked it to the Recall Jack Weiss Web site that started more than a year ago."

Weiss campaign manager Larry Levine -- a master of political dirty tricks -- laments: "We didn't buy a domain name. It's just a dirty trick. I guess someone thinks it's important or clever."

There are viable alternatives to Weiss in Assistant City Attorney Michael Amerian and Harbor area environmental attorney Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich. Videos of them talking recently to the Saving L.A. Project are worth watching.

With the irony and mean-spiritness of a grizzled newsman, I often would declare that long-time Northwest Valley Councilman Hal Bernson lived under a rock -- and developer Ted Stein owned the rock.

That truly was unkind of me because for all his devious ways and pandering to special interests in that old-fashioned political way of one hand strokes the other, Bernson knew how to keep his constituents happy for the most part -- probably due to his chief of staff and successor, Greig Smith.

Not so with Jack Weiss. With the irony and mean-spiritness of a grizzled newsman, I often have said Jack lives in the pocket of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and every special interest that will fund his ambition to be City Attorney or invite him to their parties

Jack who has represented Council District 5, which straddles the Westside and the Valley, is no Hal Bernson.

His constituents hate him. That's not too strong a word for it. They hate him so much they got 20,000 signatures, which is three-fourths of the votes he got in the last election, to recall him but didn't have the time or the money to qualify it for the ballot.

They set up a website that accused Jack of being a stooge of developers, and ignoring the interests of residents. And they filed a complaint with the City (Un)Ethics Commission over allegations of illegal fund-raising.

I would have focused as much on his absence during most council meetings, his ducking of critical votes and his ineffectiveness about getting things done even when he takes strong public stands on important issues.

Here's just a few examples:

Let's start with Jamiel's Law, the attempt to force the city to get tough on illegal immigrant criminals.

Weiss, who wants to be the city's chief law enforcement officer, ignored the groundswell of support for the measure until the pressure got great enough. Then, he relented and agreed to hold hearings -- but stalled for another two months so the hearing won't be held until October).

Law-and-order Jack also jumped on the LAPD's huge backlog of testing DNA samples in criminal cases, something that would take $10 million to fix.

As head of the Public Safety Committee he promised last December to "hold hearings every week...until every woman and man in this city is outraged'' by the failure to find the money to fix the backlog problem and lock up hardened criminals.

As the Daily News recently commented, "Nice sound bite, but ultimately empty" since that would have required Jack to actually do some work which is not his strong card.

Then, there's his claim to be king of the anti-billboard effort. Weiss staked his claim to succeed Rocky Delgadillo in part on accusing the City Attorney of failing to fight against the explosion of billboards in the city and the lack of enforcement against billboard companies. Yet, Weiss rolled over with the rest of the council last week and support the sell out of public interest in the deal to give Phil Anschutz's AEG the right to create massive visual blight with 75 billboards and flashing electronic signs at the Convention Center.

Typical of Weiss, he introduced a motion July 29, calling for the city's planning department, Department of Building and Safety and City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's office to revise and toughen the 2002 ban on billboards. Meaningless as it is, the motion won't be heard by the council for months.

Now Jack wants to be City Attorney and has the support of the mayor and council leaders Eric Garcetti and Wendy Greuel who know better but are too weak and ambitious themselves to face up to the punishment they would face if they stood up to the political machine that passes for L.A.'s city government.

Weiss must be stopped.

With Villaraigosa as mayor, Weiss as city attorney and Greuel succeeding Laura Chick as city controller, the public will have no voice at all at City Hall.

The last pretense at this being a democratic society will be gone. There will be nothing in the way of a system that cuts sweetheart contracts with public employee unions, rolls over to billionaires and special interests of every type and fails to deal with the city's problems.

There are alternatives to Jack -- Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich, an environmental lawyer from the harbor area, and Assistant City Attorney Michael Amerian, who works out of the Van Nuys office.

Here's video of them made by Michael Cohen talking recently to the Saving L.A. Project:

 

EDITOR'S NOTE: As honorary chairman of the Saving L.A. Project, I am going down to City Hall on Wednesday to object to the City Council going behind closed doors to discuss in private what is nothiing but a political fight between Controller Laura Chick and City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo. I hope others will join me in the council chambers to protest this unlawful closed door meeting that is a slap in the public's face.


Who are they? Your Los Angeles City Council, who else fits that description?

OK, they could be anybody elected to city office in a system that's so rigged an honest person doesn't stand a chance and, if they did by some miracle fluke into office, they wouldn't be able to stay honest very long.

Here's the story of the best political catfight in L.A. in ages -- call it "The Tigress vs. The Rock." Here's a City Council that prefers to do business in the dark under rocks and act like a pussycat in public and this is a story they want to suppress:

City Controller Laura Chick who's earned a reputation as a maverick crusader without quite trampling on the tulips of City Hall's corruption keeps on demanding City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo get out of her way and let her audit how he has handled worker compensation cases.

Calling herself "a tigress," Chick "insinuated that Delgadillo was trying to block the audit because he feared auditors might find that the workers' compensation division, including the hiring or outside attorneys, is inefficient and wasting taxpayer dollars," as the Times put it.

Not to be outdone, Rocky claims she's intruding illegally on his authority and is up to the kind of "political mischief" she's engaged in before. She has nothing but a "personal politically-motivated purpose" in seeking to conduct the audit, he says..

She said, he said...it started back in March when pro-gang Councilman Tony Cardenas wanted to derail the mayor's efforts to take over the city's failed gang intervention programs by questioning whether Chick would have the authority to ever audit the programs success.

Which is funny when you think about it because one of the criticisms of her is she refused to audit the L.A. Bridges anti-gang program -- an audit many believe would contain explosive revelations.

Rocky quickly issued a legal opinion that controller does not have the authority to audit programs run by other elected officials because it's not explicitly given in the city charter.
That same day, Chick allegedly questioned the legal opinion at an anti-gang group meeting and followed up by declaring she wanted to audit the workers compensation program -- something that is well-know to be out of control.

Flash forward to Aug. 11, when faced with renewed pressure from Chick, Rocky filed a complaint in Superior Court seeking a court order backing his position.

Chick told the Metropolitan News-Enterprise: "What is he afraid of? What doesn't he want the public to see?"

Enter the Council. The very next day Councilman Jack Weiss -- the wannabe City Attorney who has a hard time actually getting to council meetings and casting votes --  intervened by proposing an emergency motion that has led to Wednesday's closed door session intended to make this political quarrel go away while keeping the public as ignorant as possible.

Weiss, as usual, wasn't actually at the meeting to introduce his motion or even vote for it but the courteous Greig Smith did his job for him while Eric Garcetti and Wendy Greuel, who loathe any public quarreling as much as the mediocrity of their colleagues, felt uncomfortable with the public knowing what's going on so they co-sponsored Weiss' phony effort to play the absentee peacemaker.

The heart of the motion says: "There appears to be significant confusion as to the intent of both commissions and the meaning of the language that was ultimately submitted to the voters in this regard. Legal action between two City elected officials is an extreme avenue to resolve disputes and spending taxpayer money, including the hiring of outside counsel for the Controller that would be required if this litigation proceeds, should be a last resort, All other avenues for resolving this issue should be explored. It is imperative that the Council receive a complete briefing from both the City Attorney and Controller and explore options for resolving this issue in a manner that best serves the public."

 

Despite some talk about letting voters decide in the March primary, Councilman Dennis Zine couldn't keep his mouth shut about what was really up -- headlines that let the public know just how messed up city government really is. That kind of thing could destroy the whole dirty political machine, bankrupt developers, force workers to earn no more than their worth and lead to actual public servants replacing the self-servers who now hold public office.

 

"It's fodder for talk shows, but does it accomplish anything? I don't think accomplished anything," Zine declared.

 

Which brings us to Item 15 on Wednesday's calendar. The council, refreshed from two weeks of vacation that included party time in Denver for many of them takes up the motion behind closed doors about how to make this political issue go away by pretending it's a legal issue.

 

There is no excuse for a closed door meeting except for the cowardice of the council to stand up in public and say what they mean.

 

This is a council that engineers unanimous votes with back room deals, routinely squelches debate on public controversies, inflicts rules for public meetings on neighborhood councils that they don't obey themselves and refuses to listen to the public's concerns while pandering to special interests who keep them in jobs that are better than anything they could earn in the public sector.

 

That's why I'm going down to City Hall on Wednesday to challenge the legality of going behind closed doors.

 

Let Delgadillo and Chick make their case in public.

Let the council debate and discuss it in public.

Let the public be informed about who -- if any of these people -- is serving the public interest and who are tools of a corrupt system that must be reformed.