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

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Pacheco's Pay to Play



Los Angeles Wholesale Produce Market

In his last days in office, Nick Pacheco and Jim Hahn pushed through a no-bid sale of the city-owned Los Angeles Wholesale Produce Market that robbed Los Angeles taxpayers of at least $2 million. Now Pacheco’s campaign is being funded by merchants of the market who became co-op owners through the sale.

Pacheco Pushes Produce Market Sale
According to the LA Times, pushed the sale of the Los Angeles Wholesale Produce Market, which the city owned since the mid-1980’s, for several years. In 2002, the Council determined that the sale should go forward without competitive bidding.

The city built the Los Angeles Wholesale Produce Market in the 1980s after local wholesale produce vendors threatened to leave the city in search of a better facility. Since then, 25 vendors have operated out of the market, selling vegetables and fruit.
For the last two years, Pacheco has been pushing the city to sell the produce market, hoping to use the money to finance the construction of the Youth Opportunities Center in Boyle Heights, a facility that would house programs to help at-risk youths.


(Matea Gold, “Some Question Deal to Fund Firefighters,” Los Angeles Times, June 3, 2003)

Produce Market Tenants Contributed $10K to Pacheco’s Campaign

The Times also reported that the deal would benefit Pacheco’s campaign contributors. Tenants at the market had contributed $10,000 to Pacheco.

The sale will benefit a group of Pacheco's political contributors who lease the 30-acre Los Angeles Wholesale Produce Market, a sprawling complex on Olympic Boulevard that the city has owned since the 1980s.
…The tenants include several wholesale produce operators who have donated more than $10,000 to Pacheco's campaigns. Mayor James K. Hahn, and Council President Alex Padilla have also received substantial contributions.

(Matea Gold, “Some Question Deal to Fund Firefighters,” Los Angeles Times, June 3, 2003)

Rival Developer Pledged to Pay $2 Million More

When the Council decided to sell the market, it opted not to conduct an open bidding process to secure the maximum sale price for the market. After the City appraised the market at $18 million, a rival developer pledged to pay $2 million more.

NOW PACHECO RECEIVES THOUSANDS IN CAMPAIGN DONATIONS

Nick Pacheco’s first campaign contributions come from these same tenants who benefited from the no-bid sale he pushed through. Pacheco’s very first campaign report shows him receiving thousands of dollars in donations from the following tenants.

Lena Antoci – Citrus House - $500 - June 30th 2005
Doug Baba – Coast Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
California Certified Farmers Markerts - $500 - June 30th 2005
Cheri Dunn – Coast Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
John Dunn – Coast Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
Richard Gardner – Developer - $500 - June 30th 2005
Candace Gardner – homemaker - $500 - June 30th 2005
Victor Grosso – Umina Bros - $500 - June 30th 2005
Edward Gundry – Umina Bros - $500 - June 30th 2005
Donald La Londe – Valley Fruit & Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
Arthur La Londe – Valley Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
Jerry Murray – Valley Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
Margarita Murray – Valley Produce - $500 -June 30th 2005
Sam Perricone Jr – Citrus House - $500 - June 30th 2005
Tracy Presser – J Hellman Foods - $500 - June 30th 2005
Shiro Tanimura – I & T Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
Geraldine Witt – Property Mngr - $500 - June 30th 2005
Guadalupe Witt – Homemaker - $500 - June 30th 2005
Neil Witt – Cal Flavor Packing - $500 - June 30th 2005
Jean Yamada – Coast Produce - $500 - June 30th 2005
Total - $10,000

(Source: Los Angeles City Ethics Commission)

143 Comments:

Anonymous bring back Pachueco! said:

Let's hear it for Nick Pachueco!

August 24, 2005 10:26 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Chief Parker why do you hide behind a screen name? Everyone knows you're a lapdog for Parke Skelton who's running Jose's campaign.

August 24, 2005 10:29 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Why is the sky the blue?

August 24, 2005 10:32 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

??????Clueless????

August 24, 2005 10:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

old news...get a life

August 24, 2005 10:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parke Skelton vs. godzilla

August 24, 2005 10:35 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Next time scudellari wants to e-mail about nick's contributors he should e-mail me.

As for Gatto -- he should pick on someone that can give it right back to him.

August 24, 2005 10:36 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

This is not old news -- this is from nick's most recent ethics commission filing -- he has received the same money from the same folks he gave the no-bid contract to.

August 24, 2005 10:36 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

to the fabian poster -- i don't care what you write about fabian, but write it in today's "open thread" and leave this topic alone.

August 24, 2005 10:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Chief, why don't you put out what really happened. These were small time produce vendors who had been promised this land in the past for staying put and they were up against Muruelo. Muruelo wanted to buy this property and Nick and Hahn fought for the little guys. Why do you edit the story and leave out that the rival developer was Muruelo. And there wasn't much of a rivalry, he was up against mom and pop produce vendors.

You want a pay to play story, what about Huizar's sister getting above market value for her house when LAUSD bought it. I haven't seen any school go up on this property.

Just another cheap shot by Parke Skelton and his crew. How many contractors involved with new school construction contributed to Huizar?

August 24, 2005 10:55 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

What are they?

Lil Mom and pop vendors or a major campaign donors to nick "pay to play" pacheco?

what is harder to show is how many folks attended this fundraiser because the vendors asked them too - well i can count 10k coming from relatives and folks that work there, how many other friends and relatives and business associates gave money because of the pressure they felt from the no-bid co-op owners.

August 24, 2005 11:00 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

Sine you all like to break things down into different parts here is 80WATCHES PART 1.

Where to start Faker? I've got a whole bunch of holes to poke in this one and it's going to be fun. First, let's look at the price - which you say should have been sold for $20 - not $18 million. Did you read the motion Parker? Probably not since details don't seem to intrest you much. If you read it - or can read at all - you would see that the City accepted a cash payment for this property. That's why they took the $18 million - because it was upfront payment. Here is a portion of the motion:

2. ACCEPT the offer of a cash price of $18 million and a restriction value of $20 million from the Los Angeles Wholesale Produce Market, LLC, for the direct sale of City-owned property at 1601 East Olympic Boulevard as detailed in Attachment C to the City Administrative Officer (CAO) report dated May 27, 2003 (attached to the file).

August 24, 2005 11:01 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

The fact is this -- Nick lost the city $2million forever that could've hired 20 more cops.

Now he wants to go around to non-profits and show them the amenities fund and nickle and dime every non-profit for their support.

August 24, 2005 11:02 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

80WATCHES PART II. Now, you claim that Nick was the one who lead the sale. First, his motion calls for an investigation into the sale, it does not call for the actual sale. If you knew anything about city hall, you would know that there is a BIG difference. Don't beleive me, since you didn't read the motion, here is what Nick's said.

FURTHER MOVE that the Community Development Department in conjunction with the General Services Department (GSD) and with the assistance of the Chief Legislative Analyst (CLA) include in its ANALYSIS an ASSESSMENT of the effect on the continued operations of the Produce Market, should the City's sell its interest in the Produce Market Ground Lease to an entity other than the Ground Lessee.
FURTHER MOVE that in the event of the sale of the City's interest in the Produce Market Ground Lease, a line item called the East Los Angeles Youth Opportunities Center be created and that fifty percent of the proceeds of the sale be directed to the East Los Angeles Youth Opportunities Center line item within the appropriate departmental budget for the design, construction and maintenance of a new youth facility within the Fourteenth Council District.
FURTHER MOVE that in the event of the sale of the City's interest in the Produce Market Ground Lease, the remaining fifty percent of the proceeds of the sale be allocated to the proper departmental budget.

August 24, 2005 11:05 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Yeah I have everything on this issue.

And for those record searching you look up file ordinance - 175302

August 24, 2005 11:06 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

80WATCHES PART III

Now, you claim that it was Nick who pushed through the final sale. Not so quick with the trigger there Faker. Actually, here is the motion for the final sale. Interesting, Nicks name is NOT on it. IT WAS A GARCETTI CARDENAS MOTION DUMBASS. Do your homework Faker before you start pointing fingers.

Don't believe me? Here is a copy of the motion authorizing the sale.

9-26-03 - This day's Council session - Motion - Cardenas Mover 2003 / Garcetti - On June 10, 2003 the City Council adopted Ordinance (175302) authorizing the sale of certain real property owned by the City of Los Angeles to the Los Angeles Wholesale Produce Market LLC, located in Council District Fourteen (14). The sale closed escrow and funds are available for projects approved by the Council.

August 24, 2005 11:08 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Nick lost the city $2 miilion? All because he stood up for the little guy. How much did Tony lose because he did nothing on the transportation committee, $7 million?

Chief Parker, you're showing your true colors again. Anything Nick does is crooked in your eyes. Why don't you try focusing on Huizar, he's still named in a lawsuit right. Nick has been investigated over and over again and yet nothing. This must really have your panties up in a bunch.

Wait until the campaign hits really start. Huizar already has demonstrated in the debates that he can't handle the heat. But too bad, he's already in the kitchen, and he is no Tony. Keep up your Nick attacks, they pale in comparison to what is known about Huizar.

August 24, 2005 11:13 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

80WATCHES PART IV (that's a 4 Faker)

In your post, you admit yourself that a portion of the proceeds from the sale of this property went to,

"Youth Opportunities Center in Boyle Heights, a facility that would house programs to help at-risk youths."

Now, I know you didn't do your homework, because it seems ANTONIO had his fingers in this pie too. He signed on to a motion asking for a portion of this "tainted" $18 million to go towards youth programs in CD-14. If it's good enough for him, then it should be good enough for you. Unless you're saying that AV was part of this too? Which is it Faker?

Don't believe me again? Here is a copy of the motion AV signed on to.

On July 14, 2003 the City Council approved Motion (Parks - Garcetti - Ludlow - Villaraigosa - Cardenas - Hahn - Perry) requesting the Chief Legislative Analyst and City Administrative Officer to identify $1 million to augment the LA Bridges II program (Council File 03-1473) and report within 30 days.

THE UNALLOCATED BALANCE FROM THE PRODUCE MARKET SALE may be used to provide funds to the Santee Court project and augment the LA Bridges II program. As such the City Council should instruct the Chief Legislative Analyst and City Administrative Officer to report on the feasibility of utilizing these funds to assist the Santee Court project and LA Bridges II program and report to Council within the allocated time period.
THEREFORE MOVE that the Council instruct the Office of the Chief Legislative Analyst and the City Administrative Officer to report to Council in the feasibility of utilizing the unallocated balance

August 24, 2005 11:15 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What? Chief Parker gets caught with misinformation again? Isn't that strike three already Parker? Get your facts straight dumb ass!

August 24, 2005 11:15 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Well then i suppose our versions differ depending what we believe the word "push" means.

Well nick was the one that "investigated" the sale but wasn't on the final motion - who cares.

Yeah i know something about City Council, and i know if a sitting councilman doesn't want something to happen in his district, guess what, the other councilmembers don't allow it.

The fiefdoms that councilmembers have are consistently respected everday, the facts are clear:

A. Nick received campaign donations from them in 2003.

B. Nick's first donations on this race report include these tenants.

C. The sale went through without a peep of opposition from Nick - which in my book has me include that he helped pushed this issue.

August 24, 2005 11:18 AM  

Anonymous 'hay te watcho' watch said:

HAY TE WATCHO has a photo! He's now an official blogger. Woohoo! The guy was up all night and boy is he tanked on the pop and the hot cheetos!

August 24, 2005 11:19 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

As for the Antonio link, i have those files too, but all Antonio did was try to make lemonaide off of a shady lemon-produce-mart deal.

August 24, 2005 11:19 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You're right Chief Parker. Nick was out there fighting for the little guy against Muruelo. You know, the guy that Huizar let buy Taylor Yard - the once future sight of Glassell Park High School. Will you be around when LAUSD buys that property from Muruelo at a nice profit? Muruelo himself said that LAUSD - when Huizar was school board president - dropped the ball. Well Nick didn't drop the ball for the little guy. Do you think Huizar knows any little guys?

August 24, 2005 11:20 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Again Chief Parke Skelton, trying to get blood out of stone. This isn't 2003, it isn't going to work. As proof of this, just take a look at your poll.

August 24, 2005 11:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parker, you hit another nerve, along with pay(to-play)dirt. I'm makin some popcorn for this one.

Will we still get to see the "Pachueco - the early years" piece you promised?

August 24, 2005 11:23 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

80WATCHES PART V (that's a 5 Faker)

Faker you are just arguing semantics now. What a bunch of bull. But you know, you do have one thing right, this issue went before the council without a peep.

In fact, the 2003 vote passed unanimously. Now remind me, wasn't AV on the council then???

Don't believe me? Here is a copy of the council vote... Okay, Okay, there was ONE person absent, must have been AV.

Meeting Date: October 03, 2003
Item Number: 50
Ayes Count: 14
Noes Count: 0
Absent Count: 1

August 24, 2005 11:25 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

Faker, again you are showing just how stupid you are. You argue that this money could have been spent on 20 new cops. Hardly.

If you knew anything about public safety funding, you would know that the hiring of police officers requires a reoccurring funding source - not a one time installment of cash.

So again, your attempt to make Nick look like he short-changed the city out of cops is both completely bogus and shows us again just how ignorant you are.

August 24, 2005 11:33 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Are any of these vendors from Florida? If not, you don't have a story here Chief Parke Skelton.

August 24, 2005 11:33 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

In terms of squeezing out something old from 2003 - not true, these donations are on Nick's most recent form.

As for the back and forth i've had "80 watches" you point to Antonio's fingers being in the deal.

What you seem to be trying to do is say -- "Well i know Nick did something wrong, but i won't let you take Nick down without a shot at Antonio."

Well then, Antonio did something wrong than, but what he did wrong was 10% of Nick's shady 90% deal.

And you the proof is in the campaign checks that the Pacheco campaign happily cashed.

Nick PLayed -- and the Co-Op owners PAID.

They know whose greasy palm they owe, and his name is Nick Pacheco.

August 24, 2005 11:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Nick saved these produced vendors' businesses - and against a big time developer. How is this wrong. And what is politics without a little gratitude? In this case, well deserved gratitiude!

August 24, 2005 11:37 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

"80 watches" I think you should be calling up Wendy Greuel's office whose motion passed council and was signed by Hahn -- which set up an account to hire cops with.

In fact, your beef is also with the Daily News, because they Editorialized about it and have been counting the cops that fund could hire.

And while the salary of a cop is less than 100k -- when you add their benefits package and everything else, 100k is a sound number to use. I add this last part just in case you are going to attack the math i use on the number of cops $2 million could have hired.

August 24, 2005 11:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

WHy don't you have City Ehtics launch another investigation Parke Skelton. I'm sure you still have a lot of credibility there after your past four or five misfires.

August 24, 2005 11:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Hay te watcho" said he had a job, didn't he? Doesn't look like it. Could he be...Nick Pachueco??
Sure sounds like him!

August 24, 2005 11:40 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How many cops can we get for $7 million, the amount that Tony lost. Or for that matter $750 million, the amount that Huizar went over budget. You have no clue Parker, your desperation is showing. I guess you were privy to Huizar's poll.

August 24, 2005 11:40 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

I love the spin on this thread.

"Nick saved these produced vendors' businesses - and against a big time developer. How is this wrong. And what is politics without a little gratitude? In this case, well deserved gratitiude!"

Nick this is why you lost in 2003 -- you truly believe this is "gratitude" when its blatant PAY TO PLAY.

If you still think this way, give a call to Jim Hahn, he may have learned a lesson. Maybe not.

August 24, 2005 11:43 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Yeah that pesky 7 million.

Yeah i think that was a Jim Hahn Hire - Wayne Tanda who was handed his pink slip (resignation letter, riiight) because of his $7 million fuck up.

August 24, 2005 11:44 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

There was a "back and forth??" Must have missed it.

As far as % of shadyness - you are hardly one to judge. What's that saying about the teapot calling the kettle black?

This isn't about shadyness or play to play. This is about the City selling property and receiving cash up front - which is rare - for valuable programs that people need Faker. Nick and AV figured it out - so how long is it going to take to beat it through your thick skull?

While you would like to turn this into pay to play, it's nothing but a real-estate transaction, pure and simple.

I haven't even touched on your campaign contribution allegations yet, but don't worry, I'll hit that up too.

If you are all Huizar has in the area of opposition research, then he's totally fucked.

August 24, 2005 11:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Wasn't FloridaGate all about gratitude. Nick stood up for the little guy, when has Tony or Huizar ever done this. Is there anything illegal about these contributions? All were within the limits and it's not like Nick voted on this issue yesterday - the way Tony did with FloridaGate. You're barking up the wrong tree Parke, what's that saying about living in glass houses?

August 24, 2005 11:46 AM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Hey dumbass -- it wasn't a Huizar poll.

It was a labor poll.

And yes i am privy to EVERYTHING.

And no there is nothing to worry about -- ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA -- will win this campaign for Huizar.

I think your lil pacheco poll said the same thing.

So really - keep on attacking, keep on pissing me off -- keep on bringing the dogs of hell on your ass.

August 24, 2005 11:48 AM  

Anonymous the peanut gallery said:

Good fight dudes.

August 24, 2005 11:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Chief Parke
Ooooh, I wouldn't want to do that, piss you off. You might come up with a real dirty scoop on Nick.

A labor poll my ass. Maybe it was done by Ludlow but it wasn't a labor poll. Not with the questions they were asking. It was a CD14 Huizar poll, so where are the results? Do they mirror Nick's 49% to Huizar 19% results.

August 24, 2005 11:50 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Antonio Villaraigosa will win this campaign?!!!! Just like he won that debate last Thursday when Huizar was heckled at the mere mention of his name. Did Huizar actually cry or was that giggle just covering up his tears? Or maybe just like Tony the Liar won it for Griego in '99. You may be privy to EVERYTHING but you sure don't know whats going on in the field. Do you see Nick sweating?

August 24, 2005 11:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Chief Parker

If you are privy to everyhting, then you will know that Nick "little" poll was confirmed by Fernando Guerra - when you guys went crying to him. It's a valid poll and the results are bearing this out. We know it made Parke Skelton nervous. And the shit han't started to fly yet, this is, aferall, an eastside campaign. Get ready.

August 24, 2005 11:56 AM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

Faker give it up already. Wendy’s motion does attempt to find money for sworn personnel by finding cost saving efficiencies in city departments. But for the most part, those are one time funding sources, and you can’t hire officers off of a one time source. Sure, okay, you could hire them, but then you have to train them and keep paying their salary. A few million dollars will only last you so long.

So really, what her motion does – and it’s a good one - is call for an investigation into finding a recurring funding sources. Most of the money that’s found goes to training existing sworn personnel and providing them with equipment.

Shit Faker, are you done embarrassing yourself yet?
Again, you are forcing my hand. Don’t believe me? Here is an excerpt from her motion.

2. Direct the City Administrative Officer (CAO), Chief Legislative Analyst (CLA) and Personnel Department, in consultation with the Police Department, to develop a comprehensive plan to identify the resources needed to recruit, train and hire sufficient numbers of sworn personnel to achieve a force of 12,240 police officers, as soon as possible; and to report to Public Safety, Personnel, and Budget and Finance Committees of the Council within 60 days.
3. Direct the City Administrative Officer and the Chief Legislative Analyst to report to the Audits and Governmental Efficiency Committee within 45 days with recommendations on where the City can eliminate waste and inefficiency through eliminating unnecessary positions, consolidating departments with duplicative functions, and instituting policies that carefully consider how the City implements benefits and cost of living increases.

August 24, 2005 11:58 AM  

Anonymous Hot Buttered Popcorn said:

The Pachuecos have obviously regrouped under their reorganized management team. They clearly still consider this blog -- or blogs in general -- an important front in the contest. There's a whole campaign story here before Labor Day.

Pass the popcorn...

August 24, 2005 11:58 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hot buttered popocorn,

You don't have to regroup when you are already organized. This blog is just prep work for canvassing. Thanks for giving us some more ammo for Nick, Chief Parker, the public sure loves the little guys.

August 24, 2005 12:04 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

80 Watches says:

"Faker give it up already. Wendy’s motion does attempt to find money for sworn personnel by finding cost saving efficiencies in city departments. But for the most part, those are one time funding sources, and you can’t hire officers off of a one time source. Sure, okay, you could hire them, but then you have to train them and keep paying their salary. A few million dollars will only last you so long."

Good lord man -- am i right or wrong?

The fact remains that the account well set up to look for permanent funding sources (true) it's very first donation to it was a $500,000 one time expenditure inserted into the account. The Daily News editorialized about it and the account is set up to allow all types of scenarios by which money can be deposited.

As for 20 new cops - the fact remains 20 news cops could be hired, which i think folks in LA would want, which inherently would create the political will to keep them in the next budget.

or fire them.

August 24, 2005 12:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Hay te watcho" has exposed himself as a Pachueco operative (if not Pachueco himself). He's left the "80 watches" issue behind for now to counter the pay-to-play hit.

The Pachueco campaign has been preparing to respond to Parker's promised hit pieces for some time. They got a war room going.

August 24, 2005 12:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Chief - So you are advocating shady budget practices? That's why we needed the 18 million to begin with

August 24, 2005 12:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:06

All campaigns have a war room. And if you're up against Parke Skelton, you need a truth squad also. It doesn't take much to prepare for Chief Parker, just look at all his posts which have been blown out of the water. There are bigger fish out there in Huizar's ocean. Look for a lawsuit against Parke before this race is through.

August 24, 2005 12:11 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

I suppose their war room consists of Steve Afriat and Tom Topping.

What zany/insane story are you working on next Tom?

Word on the street is you are working on a WHOPPER of a lie.

August 24, 2005 12:16 PM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

PARKER - really, honestly, you are making me laugh out loud. Now that you are caught with your pants down - and wow there isn't much down there - you are trying to say that we agree? This could be your worst story yet.

You know what your problem is - and always has been - it's your arrogance. You think you know everything without taking the time to do your research. You then throw un-researched garbage like this shit up on the blog and can't support it.

First, you claim that Nick pushed through the sale. When I point out the motion that has Garcetti and Cardenas's names on it - NOT NICKS - you come up with the great argument "Well then i suppose our versions differ depending what we believe the word 'push' means." Stellar. You really took my breath away with that one.


You want to say that Nick screwed the city buy short changing them out of $2 million when the reality is that he did the city and it's residents a favor. By getting the payment in cash, he allowed for immediate turn-over to programs that need it - like L.A. Bridges.


Then, you want to claim that the money could have been used to hire cops. When it turns out that can't be true, because you can't hire cops off of a one time installment, you want to point to Wendy's motion.

When it then turns out that Wendy's motion says the same thing I'm saying - which is essentially that the $2 million couldn't have been used - you say, "Good lord man -- am i right or wrong?"

I've answered that question already, you're wrong. Completely wrong, and I've shown it over and over again.

Go call Ace for help Faker, cause I'm getting tired of kicking the shit out of you.

August 24, 2005 12:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I, unlike most of you jokers, have actually seen the toplines of two recent polls in the 14th. Both show Pacheco with a lead, as expected, but Huizar has already closed it up to about 10 points. One survey was 41 Pacheco - 32 Huizar. Another was 43 Pacheco; 31 Huizar.

Huizar is closing fast.

And what both polls show is that the Pacheco support is very soft and based on higher name ID, and that when people get even a minimum of information about Jose, the race closes to even.

If Pacheco is such a slam dunk winner, why is NO ONE who supported him in 99 or 03 with him today (with the exception of 1/2 of Lee Baca.)

August 24, 2005 12:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Puzzling. Why do you think one of the city's largest lobbyists, Steve Afriat, would want to take on the Mayor and the Council President and 8 other Council members, labor, the Democratic Party and just about every elected official in the city to run a campaign for Pacheco. Afriat doesn't make his living doing campaigns and he makes plenty of money represneting strip clubs and developers, he doesn't need the work. And on top of that he's going to get crushed. Doesn't seem like a very smart move.

August 24, 2005 12:35 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hmmmm. Pacheco gets a donation from people he's helped out.

No big deal to me considering that Nick Patsouras gave AV some hefty donations and now he and his wife is on the DWP and LAX commission.

It's all good.

August 24, 2005 12:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:26

These aren't the polls that we've seen. And if Pacheco's support is so soft, why is Huizar so nervous.

Regarding why nobody is with him from 1999 or 03, don't you think Parke's slime machine has scared people. Look at what they did against Nick in 2003 and Hahn this year. Any guess on when any of these idictments will come down. They slime people with lies and half truths and they have gotten away with it. Don't you think that people that really have something to hide - like Padilla, like Romero and even Roybal-Allard, will endorse whoever Tony the Liar endorsed just to be on the safe side. These are consumate politicians, just out to protect there asses.

The main difference in this campaign and why Nick will win is that Huizar actually has to convince people - not an easy task given his record, Nick just has to raise enough money to harvest the votes that are already out there for him.

August 24, 2005 12:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

All this says is that Nick is no different than Antonio.

August 24, 2005 12:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Nick is different. Tony the Liar would have squeezed $30K from these vendors.

August 24, 2005 12:45 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

ok so Nick is not as sharp and slimy but he's right in there with the Mayor.

August 24, 2005 12:47 PM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

Faker, are you there or "out to lunch?" (I guess that saying could go either way for you.)

So, as I promised, let's talk about some of those so-called "dirty contributions." The second name on your list is Doug Baba.

So, yes, he gave money to Nick, But wait, what's this? What's the third name listed under his contribution list?? Nooooo tell me it aint so, it's AV!!! The Mayor?? And he didn't just take money from Mr. Baba once, he's taken it numerous times adding up to a number in the thousands.

So it's not okay for Nick to take it but it's okay for AV? It doesn't really matter that AV took his money. What matters is the fact that you are trying to make these donors look like they are special to Nick, when they give - and have given - to a number of different candidates.

I can't wait to hear your explanation.

Oh yeah, and incase you don't believe me, here is just one page of research from the City Ethics Commission.

p.s. isn't it cute that we are using the same sources?

06/30/05 Doug Baba
(Produce Merchant, Coast Produce)
Los Angeles, CA 90016 Nick Pacheco
Council Member - CD14
1277206 - Pacheco For City Council A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 01/01/05-06/30/05]
$500.00 [Election: 11/02/05]

08/24/99 Douglas Baba
(Consultant, Baba & Associates)
Los Angeles, CA 90016 Lauro Pacheco
Council Member - CD14
990504 - Pacheco for City Council - G99 A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 07/01/99-12/31/99]
$500.00 [Election: 06/08/99]

04/06/05 Gwendolyn Baba
(Private Investor, Office of Gwendolyn Baba)
Los Angeles, CA 90027 Antonio Villaraigosa
1275257 - Villaraigosa for Mayor 2005 - GENERAL A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 04/03/05-04/30/05]
$250.00 [Election: 05/17/05]

03/02/01 Gwendolyn Baba
(Investor, General Partner)
Los Angeles, CA 90027 Joel Wachs
Mayor
990836 - Joel Wachs for Mayor A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 02/25/01-03/24/01]
$250.00 [Election: 04/10/01]

04/04/01 Gwendolyn Baba
(General Partner, Gwendolyn Baba)
Los Angeles, CA 90027 Antonio Villaraigosa
Mayor
991904 - Villaraigosa for Mayor A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 03/25/01-04/04/01]
$500.00 [Election: 04/10/01]

04/02/01 Gwendolyn Baba
(Homemaker)
Los Angeles, CA 90027 Conrado Terrazas
Council Member - CD13
991728 - Friends of Conrado Terrazas A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 03/25/01-04/04/01]
$150.00 [Election: 04/10/01]

05/23/01 Gwendolyn Baba
(General Partner, Gwendolyn Baba)
Los Angeles, CA 90027 Antonio Villaraigosa
Mayor
1234344 - Villaraigosa for Mayor - General 2001 A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 05/20/01-05/30/01]
$1,000.00 [Election: 06/05/01]

August 24, 2005 12:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

^Great Information find.

August 24, 2005 12:53 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Any news of Huizar ridding himself of his inept staff?

This Day Three calling on him to rid himself of the 4 stooges so that he can bring in folks who will help him, because he is the best candidate, but might have the crappiest staff.

August 24, 2005 12:57 PM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

And, don't think I'm done! Then there is the name Richard Gardner on your list of supposed "dirty contributors."

Just like you, I used the Ethics Commission page - you've gotta love it - and it turns out that this guy has given to everybody on God's green earth Faker.

The list starts out with Padilla, and then lists the most recent donation to Nick taking place in 2002.

Look, the bottom line to all this is that your "pay to play," allegation is totally bogus crap.

You listed these people's names on this blog to imply that they are involved in some kind of pay to play scandal, and that they are somehow indebted to Nick.

In reality these are citizens who have the right to give money to who ever they want. That's their right, and they shouldn't be punished by a brainless and ball-less anonymous blogger like you.

Oh yeah, and incase you don't believe me, here are Mr. Gardners contributions - you'll probably see some of your friends there Faker including Wendy and Tom.

10/01/01 Richard Gardner
(President, The Gardner Group)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Alex Padilla
Council Member - CD7
1230095 - -Alex Padilla Officeholder Account A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 07/01/01-12/31/01]
$500.00
02/08/02 Richard Gardner
(Real Estate, The Gardner Group)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Wendy Greuel
Council Member - CD2
1241099 - Wendy Greuel for City Council - General A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 01/20/02-02/16/02]
$500.00 [Election: 03/05/02]

02/13/02 Richard Gardner
(President, The Gardner Group)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Tony Cardenas(Los Angeles)
Council Member - CD6
1241217 - Tony Cardenas for City Council - General A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 01/20/02-02/16/02]
$500.00 [Election: 03/05/02]

05/22/02 Richard Gardner
(Catellus Development Corp., Realtor)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Lauro Nick Pacheco
Council Member - CD14
1238918 - Pacheco for Council A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 01/01/02-06/30/02]
$500.00
06/05/02 Richard Gardner
(Real Estate, The Gardner Group)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Wendy Greuel
Council Member - CD2
1237261 - Councilmember Wendy Greuel's Officeholder Committee A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 02/28/02-06/30/02]
$150.00
10/18/01 Richard Gardner
(Real Estate, Catellus Development Corp.)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Tom Labonge Los Angeles
Council Member - CD4
1237970 - Tom LaBonge For City Council - General A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 10/18/01-12/31/01]
$250.00 [Election: 10/23/01]

11/02/01 Richard Gardner
(Real Estate, Catellus Development Corp.)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Tony Cardenas [City Of Los Angeles]
Council Member - CD2
1237509 - Tony Cardenas For City Council A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 10/28/01-11/24/01]
$500.00 [Election: 12/11/01]

08/24/99 Richard Gardner
(Owner, The Gardner Group)
Los Angeles, CA 90021 Lauro Pacheco
Council Member - CD14
990504 - Pacheco for City Council - G99 A - Monetary
(IND - Individual)
[Period: 07/01/99-12/31/99]
$250.00 [Election: 06/08/99]

August 24, 2005 1:02 PM  

Anonymous Cyberlady said:

80watches,

Impressive to say the least. How can you not love that.

August 24, 2005 1:04 PM  

Anonymous Cyberlady said:

I have enjoyed reading the posts today, very interesting. A long, long time ago, I once said, "Keep in mind, Parke Skelton and crew do read these posts, don't ask how I know. I will not tell. This site will be used as training ground research to see what type of stuff might be said against him and they prepare ahead of time. They put bait out, people bite, they analyze, research, and then they legally find out if they can cover up with fabricated answers. I love my job!"

August 24, 2005 1:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anyone else hear the crickets hanging out with Faker. HELLO!!!! Where are you?

August 24, 2005 1:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:06 PM
This means what? Huizar is not prepared?

August 24, 2005 1:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Faker is walking around with his tail between his legs just like every other dog that's been beaten down by someone stronger and smarter.

August 24, 2005 1:30 PM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

Okay, now that this is getting boring I have a few suggestions for the battered, bruised and misinformed chief of bull shit.

Like my name implies, ummm where exactly are those 80 neighborhood watches Faker? Then, as it is now, nobody ever should have expected you to come up with anything factual.

Time after time you cook up stories that are nothing more than smoke and mirrors easily flushed out with a little bit of research and ingenuity.

My advice is this, stick to your hot list or posting questions like your comment at 10:32 this morning, “Why is the sky blue.” That question is the only valid one you’ve posted all day.

Maybe if you keep things simple, you won’t have to worry about facts and accuracy.

People that read this blog want stories, not “stories.” If they wanted storybook hour, they could turn to their local book store or library.

Anyway, if any of you out there want to talk about continuing to hash out some of the crap that Faker posts, you can reach me at eightywatches@yahoo.com

August 24, 2005 1:42 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

"The Pacheco Blog Rapid Response Team"

Yeah i went away to get some lunch crazies. It's so much fun to sit here at the Starbucks on Alameda and just keep on hitting you guys. You guys are on staff and some yocal like me (who doesn't work for Huizar at all) is able to get you guys scrambling.

As for Baba - OK you got me she gave to Antonio whoopdy freakin deal.

Her first donation was in 01 long before the Wholesale Produce Shady Mart deal was finalized or even hatched by Pacheco.

Her second was for 250 during the GENERAL -- Antonio was getting contributions from everyone, hell he even got Tony Cardenas endorsement. Everyone saw the case of whoop-ass Antonio was delivering and she wanted to have her name on the list. He raised 5.3 million -- and he wouldn't know her donation from anyone elses.

As for Gardner - I don't care what other politicians this shady guy is trying to buy off. The point is he was able to buy off Nick "pay to play" Pacheco.

Hell even a broken clock gets lucky twice a day -- Gardner found his lucky charm in Nick.

August 24, 2005 1:42 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Starbucks on Alameda? It's more like the westside right Faker?

August 24, 2005 1:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The EL CHIEFO went on a break to get Ace Smith to help out.

August 24, 2005 1:45 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Wow,

How can i be in so many places at once.

And you are right, i am actually outside Quizno's not starbucks. But not many people know of the Quiznos.

August 24, 2005 1:50 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

The shady wholesale mart Co-Op no bid owners are almost 1/7th of every contribution Nick Pacheco has reported thus far.

Baba's contribution was 1/21200th of the money Antonio raised.

Let's see one out of every $7 dollars -- do i listen to them?

Or one out of every 21,200 dollar.

Yeah I can see where "80 watches" makes his solid point.

August 24, 2005 1:56 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parke Skelton Paid me $5,000 to sleep with him. I have proof.

August 24, 2005 1:57 PM  

Anonymous fight-fan said:

Whatever Starbucks, "Hay Te Watcho" had more joe in him today.

Long way to November, fellas. We'll see who holds up.

August 24, 2005 1:57 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

The one on beverly is decent enough.

But i like to get my coffee when i post, so sitting here next to the random sports bar, quizno's and starbucks does me just fine.

August 24, 2005 1:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I must say that it's unbelieveable how much time all of you (yes, including Chief Parker) dedicate on a daily basis to this blog.

I pity whoever are your bosses. I'm sure that they'll have to get some other workers to pick up your slack for not working and just blogging away.

August 24, 2005 1:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

1:57 - Are you worth $5k?

August 24, 2005 1:59 PM  

Anonymous pay to play pacheco said:

This series of hits has been one of the most memoriable in a while

August 24, 2005 2:03 PM  

Anonymous pay to play pacheco said:

How much do we have to pay to see round II?

Where you next post 80 watches?

August 24, 2005 2:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

When you work for Villaraigosa, you don't really have to do anything. Free money. He taught us well. Migra NO, Raza SI

August 24, 2005 2:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Brad Sherman is a congressman who needs to get rid of his combs.

August 24, 2005 2:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I am pissed at Mayor Frank -- screw him, why did he do that to the lil girl?

August 24, 2005 2:08 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Wrong thread, weirdo.

Go e-mail or blog to Frank.

August 24, 2005 2:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Chief,

He broke your rules of engagement, how can you let this stand.

August 24, 2005 2:10 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Listen spammers,

IF you are going to try to get stuff through i will delete.

This isn't to the cut and paste crew, we know you guys already, there are folks just putting stupid spam on the site.

I hesitate on deleting you guys, because we make errors and delete regular posts sometimes.

August 24, 2005 2:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Of course this isn't the cut and paste crew.

Some of us are actually asking questions and asking, Why the hypocracy?

August 24, 2005 2:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Great stuff 80watches. The fund that Wendy Gruel set up for left over revenue from cty departmentts is a joke. Like Hertzberg has said a dozen times the city has 14% MORE revenue so why not take some of that extra money for more cops.

I say go after those damn special event waivers that our tax dollars pay. Daily News did a story and stated that the city spends $9 million in those FREE permits. Special event waivers were implemented for non profits but now city council members are giving them away like candy. Bitter Bernie has tons of them for USC (richest school in nation.) Padilla gave free permit to LA Marathon for $100,000 knowing full well the org. is worth millions. And little Antonio gave away another $80,000 free permit to the Broadway Fiesta again that was sponsored by corporate companies. As much as I don't like Weiss he's the only one speaking out and saying the special event waivers are being abused.

August 24, 2005 2:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hi,

I am looking around many blogs to see how and what to write about. I like what you have here and was wondering if you can help me out. I know that this is not on the subject you are talking about, but any help would be appreciated.

I was thinking of writing about hamptons long island What do you think? Check the site and let me know.

Best regards,

Lon

August 24, 2005 2:24 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

READ THE POST ABOVE ME.

WE ARE GETTING HIT LIKE 10 TIMES EVERY 30 MINS WITH THIS CRAP.

August 24, 2005 2:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Great stuff 80watches. The fund that Wendy Gruel set up for left over revenue from cty departmentts is a joke. Like Hertzberg has said a dozen times the city has 14% MORE revenue so why not take some of that extra money for more cops."

Really, where can I find this bit of info and where is this money coming from? Is it from trimming departments down? Property Taxes? And with that in mind I think Hahn didn't do to bad a job of taking care of the city but he was careless.

August 24, 2005 2:27 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

It's deleting the posts above that sometimes lead to other posts being deleted.

This happens more than we like, because the way the administrator work its easy to catch more than just one post.

And if you do get deleted you crazies end up getting whatever you wanted in through.

August 24, 2005 2:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Fabian Pay to Play
Who is Fabian Nunez

Go to this link

http://www.americanpatrol.com/04-FEATURES/040809-NUNEZ-BANDITO/040809_Feature.html

Click on "Watch this video."
There is your answer.

August 24, 2005 2:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hi Chief Parker/Team Pacheco:

What role did Richard Meruelo play in this development?

You'll love the answer. Start digging.

August 24, 2005 2:31 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Another spammer right above.

Every 3-4 minutes they keep on hitting us.

August 24, 2005 2:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Moron- it is Team Huizar/Team Pacheco.

If you don't get it by now, you are a lame moron!

August 24, 2005 2:33 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

"Hi Chief Parker/Team Pacheco:

What role did Richard Meruelo play in this development?

You'll love the answer. Start digging"

Already know the answer thanks.

August 24, 2005 2:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Please reveal the answer. What did Richard Meruelo tell you?

August 24, 2005 2:36 PM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

Sorry to break the news to Parker, but I will keep posting as long as the Faker keeps posting b.s. - which I suspect means I will be posting for as long as this blog is up and running.

And, sure, he'll say "bring it on," but really I know that he's sorry he put this one up. Trust me I know.

When your not loyal Parker, payback's a real bitch isn't it?

August 24, 2005 2:36 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

Loyal?

Loyal to who?

I am fake Faker remember?

August 24, 2005 2:41 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"When the Council decided to sell the market, it opted not to conduct an open bidding process to secure the maximum sale price for the market. After the City appraised the market at $18 million, a rival developer pledged to pay $2 million more."

WHO'S THE RIVAL DEVELOPER?

August 24, 2005 2:42 PM  

Blogger 80Watches said:

I couldn't have said it better myself! You are loyal only to yourself. Not to your friends, not to your employer, not to anyone that doesn't serve your purpose. Even those that have helped you along the way - you leak their information on here, and don't think that I don't know it. Fake away Faker, but I've got your number in more ways than one, and I'll be watching every step of the way from Beverly Hills.

August 24, 2005 2:46 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And an epic battle has begun.

August 24, 2005 2:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Better than watching all 5 Star Wars movies

August 24, 2005 2:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

When is the sequel?

Tomorrow?

August 24, 2005 2:54 PM  

Anonymous 80 watches number one fan said:

you rock brother man. to have access to that much city archives you must be inside the darkside.

love it!

August 24, 2005 2:55 PM  

Anonymous 80 watches number one fan said:

The way you go right into Parker's soul, was awesome.

Its like you were his mentor back in the 1800's and he went astray.

great story for a book.

but alas, you are all cartoon characters that can't ever be traced. anonymous bloggers of the world unite!

August 24, 2005 2:59 PM  

Anonymous the critic said:

There seem to be a number of dark figures in this drama, but posters don't agree on which is which.

Pachueco and "Hay te watcho" are two peas in a pod, if not the same person. They both seem obsessively driven by lust for power and revenge. "Watcho" came off like a would-be assassin at 2:46.

Parker's not nearly as committed. He wouldn't want to ever run into "Watcho" in an alley, although the reverse seems true. "Watcho" seems like he would also like to literally slit Skelton's throat.

August 24, 2005 3:06 PM  

Blogger Chief Parker said:

80 Watches

Nice to know Nick has a woman spinning for him.

August 24, 2005 3:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Chief Parker,

Do you love the answer about Richard Meruelo's role in this development? I think you do. Why don't you share with us?

Have you fully vetted the nexis between Meruelo and Pacheco? Some people have.

August 24, 2005 3:13 PM  

Anonymous another critic said:

"Watcho" as you call him comes off like DeNiro in Cape Fear. Definitely a stalker streak here. Can probably be way charming when he wants to. Could he have served time somewhere?

If Watcho is a woman, as Parker just seemed to imply, we seem to be seeing the hellish fury of a woman scorned. Perhaps an old fling of AV's?

August 24, 2005 3:14 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Who are the guys that most hate AV/JH/PS, and now the Chief?

Pachueco, Torres, Marty G.

Who else?

August 24, 2005 3:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

BREAKING NEWS...

Chief Faker FOUND the 80 Neighborhood Watches!

Ooops, I was on crack. Never mind.

August 24, 2005 3:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Who is Marty G?

August 24, 2005 3:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"La Colectiva" -- that Marty? Hmmm...he does blog here alot (but denies it; he checks it out all the time, for sure). He could be Watcho, but he doesn't seem to be that committed to Pachueco these days.

August 24, 2005 3:35 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I think the name "80 Watches" was taken over by a Pachueco staffer. The original Watcho is still out there, but he doesn't have the password to log on as "80 Watches." Blogger ID theft!

August 24, 2005 3:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

80 watches is one of Chief Parkers multiple personalities to rally up the ranks on this blog site. Dum Dums.

August 24, 2005 3:57 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ha Ha. Never believe a Pachueco.

August 24, 2005 4:30 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Any Huizar staffers fired yet.

Day Three and still waiting.

August 24, 2005 4:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Thanks Chief for the removal of the salsa comments.

Way to keep it clean!

-Chespirito

August 24, 2005 4:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

We all know how hard it is to get salsa stains out.

August 24, 2005 5:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Pay to play, HMMMMM. Well, Huizar's last rally I hear had over 90% students as participants by receiving school credit. Let's give a "holler" to Delgadillo...are you cryin'

August 24, 2005 6:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How is the Pacheco campaign doing?

How is the Huizar campaign doing?

Any Polls?

August 24, 2005 7:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Unopposed, School Board Leader Still Raises Funds

L.A. Unified's Jose Huizar collects more than $330,000, much of it from the building trades.

August 24, 2005 7:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Scudellari?>>>

Is a new, as-yet unconfirmed city commissionar already doing AV's bidding on Huizar's behalf?

Say it ain't so, TONY. AV ignored YOUR community, too for two years.

August 24, 2005 7:30 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

OKAY, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS with a brand NEW "80 Watches" surfacing with NEW data to screw up Chief Faker/Parke's little ongoing character assasination, but I just want it known I DON'T HAVE A PICTURE, but I DO HAVE A JOB -- and it's NOT in government (I earn my pay).

I started the "80 Fake Neighborhood Watches" slams against Faker weeks ago and THAT's my main point. OVER AND OVER AND OVER!

If "80 Watches" with the pretty picture wants to narc Faker's consistently lousy facts and one-sided innuendo -- go hawg wild.

Two clear heads are better than one dazed and corn-fused Faker with his head up ADV's ass.

More power to you "brudder" -- nail the bastard, but I STILL WANT TO KNOW WHERE FAKER'S "RESEARCH" on the fake 80 Neighborhood Watches is -- that's LIE #1 and needs to be opened up like the scab that Faker is:


"Right now I have found over 84 neighborhood watches, i need to know how many were in the district before Tony Villar became a Councilmember.

I am finding most of the Neighborhood watches by calling Hollenbeck and Northeast pretending to live in different neighborhoods, it's working. I don't want to call the Villaraistas mainly because i think they will feed me biased info."

(Chief "Parker" April 15, 2005)


"To help them (the Hahnwatch blog) -- I plan on releasing my Neighborhood Watch report on their blog -- it's a one time guest spot. So don't get used to it!"

(Chief "Parker" April 26, 2005)


"And my Neighborhood Watch investigation has reached over 100 neighborhood watches..."

(Chief "Parker" April 29, 2005)
"

August 24, 2005 7:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

OKAY, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS with a brand NEW "80 Watches" surfacing with NEW data to screw up Chief Faker/Parke's little ongoing character assasination, but I just want it known I DON'T HAVE A PICTURE, but I DO HAVE A JOB -- and it's NOT in government (I earn my pay).

I started the "80 Fake Neighborhood Watches" slams against Faker weeks ago and THAT's my main point. OVER AND OVER AND OVER!

If "80 Watches" with the pretty picture wants to narc Faker's consistently lousy facts and one-sided innuendo -- go hawg wild.

Two clear heads are better than one dazed and corn-fused Faker with his head up ADV's ass.

More power to you "brudder" -- nail the bastard, but I STILL WANT TO KNOW WHERE FAKER'S "RESEARCH" on the fake 80 Neighborhood Watches is -- that's LIE #1 and needs to be opened up like the scab that Faker is:


"Right now I have found over 84 neighborhood watches, i need to know how many were in the district before Tony Villar became a Councilmember.

I am finding most of the Neighborhood watches by calling Hollenbeck and Northeast pretending to live in different neighborhoods, it's working. I don't want to call the Villaraistas mainly because i think they will feed me biased info."

(Chief "Parker" April 15, 2005)


"To help them (the Hahnwatch blog) -- I plan on releasing my Neighborhood Watch report on their blog -- it's a one time guest spot. So don't get used to it!"

(Chief "Parker" April 26, 2005)


"And my Neighborhood Watch investigation has reached over 100 neighborhood watches..."

(Chief "Parker" April 29, 2005)
"

August 24, 2005 7:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Damn, Parker, the "watches" people are multiplying faster than.... um, CD14's fake neighborhood watches.

August 24, 2005 7:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey Chief, BOY are you off base.

Tom Topping HATES Pacheco! But he's also just about the only honest, fairly even-handed journo on the Eastside, and when something get's DONE, he reports it (too back for AV and his hamfisted get-lost-driving-down-the-110 staffers).

Damn straight.

P.S. I hear AV's staff re-organized, AGAIN, and the made the DUMBEST, most inept staffer the LAND USE deputy... in an area where LAND USE is the most convoluted issue around.

Born to lose, CD14. Sorry!

August 24, 2005 7:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Two "80 watches" posters now -- four by next week.

By election day we could have almost as many people screaming at Parker about the fake 80 neighborhood watches as there are(n't) neighborhood watches.

August 24, 2005 7:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parker, these "dirty contributors" you keep outing have lives, and reputations and MONEY.

Are you really buried that deep up the mayor's backside that you can't be touched by a high profile defamation suit -- this "guilt by contribution" shit died when Av refused to call down Richard Murelo's IE a few weeks ago, and let DICK RIORDAN... NASTY, DIRTY GIRL DICK RIORDAn, be the spokesman!

August 24, 2005 8:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The Big Difference between the Times swallowing Parke's hooks a few years ago and Parker putting this crap up atraight off Skelton's grimy etch-a-sketch, is that the Times actually asked a few questions first.

Parker jst takes every poison dribble out of Parke's lips as FACT, and then gets busted BIG TIME on his own blog as a weaseling moron.

August 24, 2005 8:09 PM  

Blogger Parque Esqueleto said:

Sorry about giving you that bum information about the Pacheco "pay to play" that never was, Chief. I was just testing it out to see how stupid someone would have to be to believe it, before I tried it out on the Times, or even the Ethics Commission (Daddy Garcetti?).

I guess only you were dense enough to bite.

I'll be back with more unrelated slime -- I'm trying to draw a dotted line now between the alligator in the lake and Janice Hahn buying a new pair of shoes in San Pedro.

Were they 'alligator" shoes? Is she taking graft from the croc hunters?

August 24, 2005 8:56 PM  

Blogger Parque Esqueleto said:

OH, and Parker, I'm still working on fake names and fake locations for the fake neighborhood watches started under Tony's "term" as councilmember (HA! That still makes my laugh, "Councilmember" Antonio - like he ever gave CD14 a seconds thought), but I want to have a list of "Eastside" sounding bogus names, just in case this "80 Watches" expose keeps up on the Blog and runs over into REAL media.

I'll run a few more bogus names by you shortly.

How does "Alta Boyle Valley" Neighborhood Watch sound to you. It'll fool all those morons up in the Northeast that still think Antonio's going to actually DO something about saving the Southwest Museum -- especially now that he's going to be the "honorary" chairman of the Autry Board, just like Hahn was.

Your Pal, "P"

August 24, 2005 9:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Has "PE" ever been in the SW Museum?

August 24, 2005 9:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

JOSE HAS ISSUES (finally). . .


But still no "record" -- oh well, we're only halfway to the primary vote. There's time!


José Huizar - Fighting for Reform in the LA School District

Elected to serve our community on the Los Angeles School Board in 2001, José Huizar took on the failing downtown bureaucracy and fought for better and safer schools, stronger fiscal accountability, greater opportunities and educational justice for our children.

* Huizar forced the school district to raise academic standards and make college preparatory classes available for all children.

* Huizar fought to build new schools to relieve overcrowding in our neighborhood for the first time in over 20 years.

* Huizar demanded that highly qualified teachers were assigned to every community.

* Huizar exposed the LA School District's shameful dropout rate and forced the District to begin addressing the problem.

José Huizar - For a Safer Community

As a School Board member, José Huizar added many new School Police Officers and expanded anti-gang programs. As our City Councilman, José Huizar will make hiring more police his top budgetary priority. José Huizar will also expand after school tutoring and recreation programs. He'll work to identify potential gang members early and get them the additional help they need to make better choices.

José Huizar - For Educational Justice

José Huizar will continue his fight to reform LA's schools as a member of the City Council. He will join with Mayor Villaraigosa to hold the school district accountable for the academic success of our children. He'll work with the School District to jointly develop library, parks and job internship programs.

José Huizar - For Better Transportation

José Huizar will work for a rapid completion of the Eastside Gold Line light rail and the extension of the Pasadena Gold Line. He supports making the MTA the nation's most advanced and cleanest bus system and expanding neighborhood DASH bus services. José Huizar will work for common sense solutions to traffic gridlock, like prohibiting road construction during rush hours, improving traffic signalization, creating more left hand turn lanes and expanding car and van pools.

José Huizar - For Quality Affordable Housing

L.A. needs more and better housing that working families can afford. He'll support programs to rehabilitate existing rental housing for families and workers and fully fund the LA Housing Trust Fund to assist first time homebuyers. José Huizar will work to crack down on slumlords and enforce health and safety codes. And José Huizar will work for innovative solutions, like the reuse of historic commercial buildings, for housing and mixed-use zoning.

August 24, 2005 9:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar has issues, all right, but those aren't them. He's a "mama's boy" and Antonio's his "mama!"

August 24, 2005 9:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey Anon 9:58 pm:

I see your point about Huizar. Ok, let's now take a look at what Nick Pacheco says online about what his issues are.

Hmmm, ok... nothing there.

Looks like while Huizar needs to add a window to finish his house, Pacheco is barely working on the foundation on the lot.

* In other words, while Huizar has almost completed his website, Pacheco has barely begun to edit his cookie-cutter website *

Choose your attacks better next time before you end up getting smacked down. If you don't know how that feels, ask Nick.

August 24, 2005 11:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

11:08 p.m.

Pacheco HAS a reputation in CD14 -- a damn good one, and name recignition. Huizar has neither and he served for the same number of years. Pacheco had top activitist from every single community in CD14 stand up at his kickoff and each recite dozens of benefits to their community while Nick was in office.

When you have that kind of a record of accomplishments -- a Website is icing on the cake (Huizar's cake is still a BUN in Parke Skelton's oven).

Ask people what Huizar has done in four years, and they can't even begin to answer. He isn't missing a window in his house -- he's just a pane!

August 25, 2005 1:09 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

John Talmadge is a poof.

August 25, 2005 2:29 PM  

Anonymous Sick of Pacheco said:

Pacheco would sell his____________ if the price is right!

Remember he not only took $$$$$$$$$$ from a Wholesale Produce Market, he also took $$$$$$$ from poor vendors too.

He is such a fucked up jerk!

August 26, 2005 12:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Villaraigosa would sell his____________ if the price is right!

Remember he not only took $$$$$$$$$$ from a Wholesale Produce Market & Florida Fake Employees, he also took $$$$$$$ from poor vendors too.

He is such a fucked up jerk!

August 26, 2005 9:02 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement