Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Chick Blasts ITA

CHICK FAULTS ITA CONTRACTING

Audit Finds Lack of Accountability and Circumvention of Process
Potential for "Misuse or Abuse of Public Dollars"

Los Angeles - The City's Information Technology Agency (ITA)
"systematically skirted" contracting requirements and avoided scrutiny
according to an audit released by City Controller Laura Chick.

"ITA cannot demonstrate that the outsourcing of work is awarded
through fair and open competition, that the decisions are beneficial to
the public, and that the agreements are detailed to ensure the public
receives full value for what they are paying. This lack of oversight
led to increased costs and the potential for misuse or abuse of public
dollars, " wrote Chick in a letter to the City's elected officials.

The ITA is charged with providing the City government with
information technology and infrastructure. The Agency has an annual
budget of $100 million.

Chick's audits of the contracting process include the Airport,
Port, Water and Power, Public Works, and CRA. Her audit of
Fleishman-Hillard Public Relations spurred a recent cash settlement
agreement of $4.5 Million to the City of Los Angeles.

Re-elected overwhelmingly last month to a second four year term,
Chick has worked diligently to save taxpayer dollars, improve city
services, eliminate waste and open up the City's books to greater public
scrutiny.

The complete ITA audit, as well as all of the Controller's
audits and reports, can be accessed on her web site at
www.lacity.org/ctr.

26 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So, how many of those IT firms who received contracts are on Yahn's donor list?

-Mustang

April 26, 2005 10:40 AM  

Blogger Mayor Sam said:

Man you guys are fast. Not much happening on either the 3rd or 4th floors these days?

April 26, 2005 10:41 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Interesting this was done at this time. Again, if Chick is saying tax dollars are not being spent wisely why didn't she do this a long time ago? Mayor Sam, amazing you are posting threads so rapidly. Could it be you are trying to avoid the Anti-ADV from posting stories at this crucial time? Can we all say CENSOR? What happened to 1st ammendment rights?

April 26, 2005 10:43 AM  

Anonymous 3rdFloorGuy said:

Mayor Sam does not guarantee you first amendment rights. Only the government. You can say what you want, but he doesn't have to let you do it on his blog. Some blogs don't even allow comments.

If you want to say what you want, start your own blog. Mayor Sam only seems to censor what he thinks is bad for his blog, which is usually the work of people who don't have anything to say other than push their agenda by copying the same message over and over.

April 26, 2005 10:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I agree with 3rd floorguy. The repetitious posting, time and time again of the vile sexual and scurrilous epitaphs about Antonio are a turn off. Enough already.

What is important to voters is the cost of doing business in government. Stuff like is contained in Laura's report translates directly into higher taxes or reduced services, neither of which are desireable.

These are the important things; jobs, traffic, potholes, business friendly economic environment, education, safety.

Who really cares who sleeps with whom, and who's wife sleeps with what other person?

That crap belongs in the scandal sheets, not in an intelligent discussion of what is best for Los Angeles.

I think this is an unusual election; because of the spirited primary, the people have already decided, most unusual for an election in Los Angeles City, but I think it is true this time around.

All that is left is the mudslinging, of which thre will be planty, but it is already pretty much a given that Jimmy has nothing else to go with at this point, so put on your old clothes, it's gonna get dirty.

The losers are the people of Los Angeles, who will receive a wounded Mayor, no matter who wins the election.

April 26, 2005 11:12 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

To the posters who say that who cares who's sleeping with who and the scandalous stuff is not worth anything. I think it goes to poor judgement calls. Lets face it both candidates have made them. The difference is who's still making them this late in the game?

April 26, 2005 11:25 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Funny how you Democrats give some a pass and attack others. Clinton sure got a pass, and you never question his judgment. He had the button in his hand to destroy the world.

But Antonio, who is not proven to have done anything, only innuendo, gets hammered in this pages by you guys incessantly.

Maybe you need a blue dress and some DNA to give him a pass?

April 26, 2005 11:36 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

But Antonio, who is not proven to have done anything, only innuendo.

I think starting a letter campaign for the U.S.'s biggest drug distributor who got off is something not to be taken lightly. Its a fact and documented heavily all over the internet and more recently in all LA media.

April 26, 2005 11:59 AM  

Blogger Athena said:

The story of the day is this:

Villaraigosa is up on broadcast starting today with a big buy and a positive message. He has been up heavy on cable for two weeks.

Hahn is completely off the air.

Villaraigosa passed the $1.8 million threshold 9 days ago. Hahn has yet to reach $1.8.

Hahn's campaign is now totally dependent upon a series disparate Union IEs, some doing field, some mail, some cable. His campaign, his re-election, is no longer in his hands or under his control.

No wonder he's flailing about and throwing desperation bombs like the La Fonda charges. For which the Daily News took his head off today. Quite a conumdrum for an incumbent to be in.

April 26, 2005 12:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Her audit of Fleishman-Hillard Public Relations spurred a recent cash settlement..."

Clever wording to try and take credit for someone else's settlement (Delgadillo). She is a girl after ADV's own credit-stealing heart!

April 26, 2005 12:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And even bigger CON-nundrum (good choice of words) for a past-loser, wannabe mayor is to be AFRAID of all mass media except the canned spots he paid for... he not only HAS more money, he HAD to have it, now that he's hiding from any legit journalist with question mark on their notepad.

Hahn is supposed to be the "dirty" one, and he's faced the media since day one. ADV is "Mr. CON-cents-us" who can't go before a camera unless the crowd's been screened and the questions sanitized. DIRTY is as DIRTY does (hide out).

How's he going to communicate with the city if he becomes mayor -- buy everybody a Blackberry?

This little conman is afraid of his own shadow -- the shadow of his sordid past and the direct questions he's NEVER answered honestly.

No one HAS to put that stuff out there, ADV did it, himself, and he's left more enemies behind him in politics than Hahn has direct reports.

(Hey, bible-thumper. . . "Be sure, TONY's sins will FIND HIM OUT!")

April 26, 2005 12:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Completely OFF the AIR? Who are you kidding. He's been on radio practically every day for 30-45-60 minutes.

Tony's ads will be playing catch-up for weeks.

April 26, 2005 12:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Laura WHO?

April 26, 2005 12:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It's amazing that Laura Chick was supporting Hahn's reelection just six months ago and praising him as an outstanding mayor. Why do I think she switched sides and started criticizing Hahn when she decided someone else was going to win.

April 26, 2005 12:45 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Two words, previous anon:

Am Bition (or AM BITCHIN'?)

April 26, 2005 12:50 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Five column inches below the fold in Section B of the Times, 3 weeks before the election.

April 26, 2005 12:52 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

EVERY L.A. Times story now contains the same line -- people are starting to get it.

"Villaraigosa's lackluster term on City Council. . ."

Isn't this supposed to be the messiah that ADDS "luster" to the Mayor's office?

Nope, not even a reasonable facsimile... TOLD you so!

April 26, 2005 1:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey CD 14ers: The news on May 5th at 5:00 P.M. will be wonderful (depending on who's side you are on).

Be sure and get some KY Jelly or Vaseline, because your lover boy Mayor will be explaining to you why he is losing the race in a disgraceful manner.

It ain't gonna be fun, but you'll be better men and women for it. You may actually learn something about elections so you can do it better next time.

Payback's a bitch, ain't it?

April 26, 2005 1:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Here's the Daily news Article - they tell you what they think of Vignali and other B.S. charges.

Read it and weep, suckers.


Los Angeles Daily News

Hahn's new low
Desperate mayor attacks Villaraigosa for defending his mother

Monday, April 25, 2005 - During the final mayoral debate on Saturday morning, Mayor James Hahn said he is "an agent of change" and his rival a supporter of the status quo.

He must be joking.

Then Hahn reached 28 years into the past to come up with an accusation that Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa was charged with a crime and benefited from the constitutional guarantee of due process after getting into a restaurant tiff to protect his mother.

Hahn must be desperate, too.

It would appear that, with three weeks to go before the runoff election, the mayor has lost all sense of proportion - or maybe just all sense.

Hahn actually had the gall to compare the current local and federal investigations of possible corruption in his administration with a 1977 misdemeanor assault case in which Villaraigosa got into a fight with a man annoying his mother and sister - a charge that was dropped after a jury deadlocked 11-1 for acquittal.

Bringing it up in the context of Hahn's unrelenting claims that the councilman is soft on crime only serves to underscore the panic that appears to have gripped the Hahn re-election campaign.

Imagine the glee that Hahn's political strategists must have felt when they unearthed this ancient tidbit about Villaraigosa - an item that already was in the public record, much like the letter Villaraigosa wrote for a convicted drug dealer and other worn-out charges.

You can almost see the Hahn team scrambling to find a way to fling this mud in the final mayoral debate, which was broadcast on Spanish-language television, and make it seem like a logical and reasonable deflection of any remarks about the ongoing public-corruption investigation of Hahn's administration.

On the scales of justice, a 28-year-old assault charge that was dismissed is not the moral equivalent of an 18-months-long public-corruption probe. It is simply a tool in Hahn's continuing suppress-the-vote strategy that narrowly got him into the runoff in the March 8 primary. We can only hope that the full due process of law applies to everyone in the Hahn administration, including the mayor himself, and that the investigation is thorough.

The other Hahn strategy - to claim he is the agent of change - is laughable. Hahn's predecessor, Richard Riordan, got the City Charter reformed, created neighborhood councils and won public support for bond issues for libraries and to rebuild the city's infrastructure. Riordan's achievements are about 90 percent of the changes Hahn claims credit for.

Hahn, an agent of change for Los Angeles?

Sure, chump change.

April 26, 2005 1:27 PM  

Anonymous Lou Cypher said:

You've got to be kidding. A full broadcast buy combined with weeks of cable television is "catch-up" because Hahn has been race-baiting on AM radio for the last coupla weeks?

You people DO live in fantasy land. No wonder Nick got stomped so bad.

And I hear Janice is getting flooded with resumes AGAIN.

Rats off a sinking ship...

April 26, 2005 2:00 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

what's on May 5th?

April 26, 2005 2:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey Lou. We in the 14th were promised a LeCoutre got a Swatch (minus a battery, it seems) and lost a Rolex.

April 26, 2005 3:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Antonio spent $3 million more then Hahn in 2001. It didn't help him then and won't this time. Athough the Daily News wrote that op-ed piece interesting that every TV outlet plus print newspaper wrote about the story in Sunday's paper. We all know 3 weeks is a long time in election time.

April 26, 2005 3:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

actually, LABOR and other IEs spent that extra money in the IE.

so using your twisted logic and keen grasp that the political landscape has not changed at all, Jimmy will lose because of that.

April 26, 2005 3:24 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Lou Cypher... here's the lowdown.

FREE on "Programming" (which is what people tune in FOR!

Beats the (your place) out of:

PAID for on "advertising" (which is when people leave the room to go "potty" and make a sandwich).

ADV would have killed to be able to go on free media for hours on end.

Blame the ACLU!

April 26, 2005 3:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No, blame the yellow streak down his back! Hahn's stands on the tough issues are nearly the same, but he has the brainpower to speak for himself and defend what he believes in.

ADV needs cue cards. some hack's hand up his back, and someone to "kiss away the bad reporters' boo boos!"

April 26, 2005 3:50 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement