Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Friday, September 23, 2005

The Calm Between the Storms in CD 14

The Downtown News chats up CD 14 again...

The Calm Between the Storms

by Jon Regardie

The race for the 14th District City Council seat has hit a weird stage. The initial excitement over who will gun to replace Antonio Villaraigosa has faded. The main competitors, ex-councilman Nick Pacheco and school board member José Huizar, announced their candidacies in May, which at this point is virtually paleolithic.

Yet the election is still more than six weeks away, and neither Pacheco nor Huizar have kicked their campaigns into high gear. Instead, this is sort of the calm between the storms, with each hoping to stay on the radar screen but not wanting to begin the heavy ad and mailing blitz and risk peaking too early. All of which is likely fine with voters, who at this moment probably care a lot more about who will be voted out on "Survivor" than who they'll vote for on Nov. 8.

Click for the rest of story


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Well, with abysmal name recognition and the distinction of having served on the Board that oversees one of the most dysfunctional school districts in the nation, Huizar doesn't have the luxury to wait.

Better start hitting home runs instead of sacrafice fly balls, Jose.

September 23, 2005 7:06 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

When will we see a picture of the other canidates?

Go " Jimmy Jay "...........

September 23, 2005 7:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Both are great. We know what to expect under a Pacheco management. With Huizar, he did what he could under an administration that was 20 years into failure. The drop out rate was not a new thing, it had been visible only to LAUSD officials since the early 80's. After evaluating each candidate, both are fine, but I have to choose. Huizar in his short time at LAUSD has accomplished more than any other LAUSD board member. Construction of new schools is important, it is a start.

September 23, 2005 8:01 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You gotta be kidding me. Jose is one of the least effective board members.

If you are not going to blame Jose for the high drop-out rate at Roosevelt, you surely can't attribute the school construction to him. The construction was Romer's idea and the 7 boardmembers did their best to stay out of Romer's way so he could get the work done.

September 23, 2005 8:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:05 Fact is Huizar is not responsible for the drop out rate. The unacceptable drop out rate did begin in the early 80's under what ever board members and administration was functioning at that time. Over the years, little has been able to combat this decline, the unions are huge and fight any major changes the board has brought to the table. Romer was not the first to mention or act on construction of new schools, there is a difference from getting the idea started and actually doing it. Romer is in charge of LAUSD, his name will be on everything under the sun in LAUSD, but Huizar has always pushed and fought for the new construction.

September 23, 2005 8:19 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Drop out rate at Roosevelt began in the early 80's. Tell me what happened during that time, who was the administrators, teachers, counselors, LAUSD superintendent?

Why did LAUSD allow this to continue? When the outrages drop out rate began, Huizar must have been in elementary. How can you blame him for the failure LAUSD has had since the beginning of the 80's. Why not see what changes he has fought for during his time as board member. Some changes he pushed, he won, other's he had opposition by fellow board members and union. You concentrate on a problem that was long, long ago a problem and making it out to be like it happened last year. It is unfortunate that we as public citizens have to endure this type of bureaucracy, but with those LAUSD unions, only so much can be done. He took the guts to push and pass that higher class requirements so students can compete with other districts for college entrance, new schools, and so on. I want someone that can work with all departments of government to help LAUSD become a good functioning district, Huizar can do this.

September 23, 2005 8:27 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I will stop blogging, I might give away all of my passion.

September 23, 2005 8:28 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ok, let's look at something more recent. Huizar supported the move of the District's offices to 333 Beaudry which costs the District nearly $80 million (side note: a federal grand jury is examining L.A. Unified's aquistion of this property; See Los Angeles Times, Jul 23, 2004; pg. B.3).

That's right, spend millions to move the bureaucrats (or burrocrats) at the expense of classroom instruction.

A pleasant reminder to folks: Jose also supported the construction of the $100,000 bathrooms for each boardmember in the 333 Beaudry building. This sort of uninformed vote is what killed Caprice Young's re-election bid to the Board. Jose should meet the same fate.

September 23, 2005 8:39 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey previous poster: check this out:

School Board's Royal Flush
Los Angeles Times; Jun 19, 2002; pg. B.12

September 23, 2005 8:45 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Scope and Methodology:

This review was performed in accordance with the generally accepted principles and quality
standards for offices of inspector general. Our review addressed Beaudry Building construction
work and related expenses from the inception of the project through November 10, 2003. To
accomplish the review we:
1. Interviewed Beaudry Building construction project and program managers and Facilities Services Division management personnel. 2. Reviewed and documented the functions of the project team assigned to supervise the construction. 3. Reviewed and analyzed the construction budget, budget summaries, contractor requests for progress payments and other documentation provided by District
management and the project oversight personnel.

This Special Review was performed pursuant to the Los Angeles Unified School District
("District") Board of Education (“Board”) Resolution offered at the Board Meeting held on
September 25, 2001, and adopted on October 9, 2001, directing the Office of the Inspector
General (“OIG”) to perform project management reviews of the progress of the construction of
the various improvements to the building located at 333 South Beaudry, Los Angeles, California,
the Beaudry Building (sometimes referred to as “Beaudry”).

In July 2001, at the time the Beaudry Building was recommended by a project team assembled to
locate and recommend a new District headquarters building, the Board was advised that the total
expenses associated with the acquisition of the Beaudry Building, including construction, would
be $154,200,000. The expenses were set forth in eight line items, as follows:

July 2001 Building Acquisition: $74,500,000 Building Improvements: 15,000,000 Tenant Improvements (hard/soft): 39,200,000 Work Stations/Signage/Graphics/Security: 7,800,000 Relocation Costs/Telecom/Data Center: 8,000,000 Cost of Issuance: 3,000,000 Earthquake Insurance: 700,000 Surety Bond: 6,000,000 Total: $154,200,000

September 23, 2005 8:47 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I will look into the articles that you cited. These topics you brought up I have heard before, although I will read what you cited and make my own decision on that subject. The administration and unions are corrupt, but only in a collective fashion. Why do you think Huizar has left the board? I wouldn't stay there if I was paid 500k a year. I don't blame him for seeking an other office where he can make a difference. Under LAUSD you can only do so much, otherwise you might end up in a ditch somewhere. You know, THE UNION. Either you play with them, or you are out, this is the real problem.

September 23, 2005 8:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Unions are the problem!

September 23, 2005 8:54 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So, the most you can say for Huizar is that he could not produce in a difficult enviornment. That's not a ringing endorsement (and, don't kid yourself, the City will be even less forgiving).

September 23, 2005 8:58 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Why was Superintendent Ruben Zacarias voted out in 99'?

Did he find out more corruption?

"Zacarias was the district's fourth superintendent in 10 years. He had only two years to attempt to fix problems present long before his selection. He still has broad support among many administrators, teachers, parents and students throughout the district.

Even if Zacarias was an ineffective policy maker, the school board should have respected his position and given him a formal evaluation before subverting his authority, as well as the public's will, when it hired Miller in a closed-door meeting. Instead, the board members who took this action - viewed by many as simple pawns for Mayor Richard Riordan - irresponsibly placed all blame on Zacarias, hiring Miller by unprecedented means."

"These actions prove that LAUSD's problems go far beyond the job performance of just one person."

From article

September 23, 2005 8:59 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:58 AM No, absolutely not. I feel Huizar did a good job considering all of the difficulties the union and LAUSD beauracracy can create, and we all know it is bad.

Huizar is more effective as a political figure. He has good intentions and fights for good initiatives, but the issues of bad spending are a collective matter. I want to know who benefited directly from the outrageous spending habits of LAUSD (ex: bathrooms). Keep in mind, I have nothing against the other candidates. Pacheco has good intentions too, but his grudge game against the mayor will cause the friction which is not constructive in our political arena. We need democrats that get along and help each other, not democrats that hold grudges and are out to block every initiative that will benefit CD14.

Our "little" CD14 needs help, and Huizar under the present circumstances will have greater results than other candidates. Pacheco has a good heart for the constituents, but his grudge against certain politicians and his lack of participation in other areas such as Boyle Heights, El Sereno, etc... has created an atmosphere that nothing can be accomplished with this turmoil under Pacheco.

September 23, 2005 9:10 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The only accomplishment Jose can tout in 4 years is building schools. But wait, isn't that what the BOND we voted for suppose to do? Yes, so Jose stop taking credit. Jose has no experience with the community. That's a major factor to many in the community. Jose has never been to meetings, events, etc. until this year. How would you know what their issues are and have answers to solutions?

September 23, 2005 9:13 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This might be amusing to some of you. In my household we are 8. Evenly split in half in support for Huizar & Pacheco. The near mention to my family that I was going to volunteer for Pacheco, I had the other 4 screaming down my throat. When i found out my sister helped out in a Huizar event, us 4 did the same to her. It is turmoil at my home. The poster who said turmoil at LAUSD, well it can't be as bad as it is in my house, that is bad.

September 23, 2005 9:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I agree Jose has good intentions. The problem is he just can't produce. I don't know if the problem is (1) him, (2) his staff, or (3) him and his staff.

In any event, he's been about as ineffective as past board members Vicky Castro and Leticia Quezada.

September 23, 2005 9:30 AM  

Blogger NO_JUE_JOSE said:

Not in high gear?

Jose just announced another ringing "endorsement" from 8-10 more of AV's neighbors in Mt. Washington, the "Northeast Demi-gods" (same basic cast and crew as the NE Open Space Cadets). It don't get any better than that.

And he's got every city councilmember Antonio's (potential) influence can buy him.

Jose's in overdrive. Not that the community's even noticed yet. You can hear the screams from neighborhood to neighborhood as people shout across their back fences "tell that damn Huizar kid to get a muffler on that thing!"

Not another divisive election, THANKS for nothing, Antonio!!

September 23, 2005 10:00 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar saw that the dropout rate problem existed since the 80's. In truth, the dropout rate got better in the 80's and is now at the level just before the Chicano Blowout of the late sixties and early seventies. He saw the problem, and after five years, hasn't even made a dent in solving it. By contrast, Nick saw a problem in CD 14 and was very succesful in solving problems. In fact, Huizar himself has acknowledged Nick's success when he endorsed him in 2003.

Huizar is a nice guy but he won't be able to stand up to the attacks on his questionable city permits, his sister's house sale to LAUSD and to the attacks on Parke Skelton's formerly public street now private cul de sac. And these attacks don't even scratch the surface of Muruelo, Belmont, the hidden bond fund, the 3/4 billion over budget and the attorney he hired for LAUSD. And unlike the attacks Skelton has perpetrated against Nick, there is proof for all these ill deeds.

September 23, 2005 10:05 AM  

Blogger Tofu girl said:

To the 9:10am Anon-
You obviuosly don't know Pacheco. He has not one ounce of grudge for the Mayor. Infact he has told some of his supporters who DO have a grudge for the Mayor to let it go. Furthermore, he has told them that it is important that we support the Mayor and make sure that we can do what ever it is that is in our grasp to make sure that he is successful.Moreover,Pacheco also added that the Mayor has opened a huge door for all Latinos in Los Angeles politics and that supporting the Mayor and his success is a support for continuing the growth of latinos in important positions. In terms of blaming the unions for not letting Huizar do better at his job I don't think Huizar see's it that way he's cozy in bed being supported by those same unions.

September 23, 2005 10:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Unions are a problem, district management is a problem, the board is a problem -- but something very different is majorly involved in the dropout rate. The proportion of kids in LAUSD schools from immigrant households has skyrocketed since the 1980s -- and the vast majority come from backgrounds in which education is a much lower priority than working and short-term earnings, in addition to language and other related issues involved.

Just look at the stats and see who drops out.

September 23, 2005 10:06 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

For Huizar, this is mid-Katrina. He's not going to get much more steam than he already has. No significant endorsements left, and people still don't care how many school buildings he's banged the gavel down to approve of in recent years -- it just means more tax money spent on bad education.

Every major school district in the country goes through this same swing -- build them up, then about the time the buildings open up the population has already shifted, so you consolidate and lease out the excess school space at a loss to the taxpayer. . . then start the cycle over.

By the time anyone notices they need new schools, it's too late to get them up and running before the shift down begins.

BAD, bad civic planning. You BUILD when your trending DOWN, not up.

This is a HUGE boondoggle, and 8-10 years from now we'll be awash in empty classrooms and heavy bond indebtedness, thanks to Huizar and the rest of the current board.

Meanwhile the MILLIONS lost could have been spent on affordable housing, which can be up and running in one-third the time.

Doesn't anyone teach (or study) history at LAUSD?

September 23, 2005 10:10 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Pachueco holds no grudge? That doesn't pass the laugh test.

Tofu can sub for lots of things, but not brains or candor.

September 23, 2005 10:15 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Pacheco holds no grudge, GUARANTEED -- and I'm not on Tofu. I eat meat.

It's you Pacheco-haters and name manglers that are the ones who need to get "over" something.

Obviously you think Nick owes you some kind of apology for being highly competent in office and making AV's two years in office seem so "lackluster" (L.A. Times), by comparison. If his term wasn't much more "progressive" by comparison to the horrid AV years, then he wouldn't even be in the top two in this race already.

YEAH, I hold a grudge against do-nothing AV, but I'm not Pacheco.

September 23, 2005 10:24 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So let me get this straight...Jose takes credit only for the positive aspects of LAUSD and RUNS away from the negative while under the same watch...his. Nice going I just wish life worked the same way.

September 23, 2005 10:31 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10:15 ANON-
Tofu girl is right. I know for a fact Pacheco holds no grudge against AV. I support Pacheco and can't stand AV. I don't know who else Nick told that it is important to support AV and help him succeed, but I can tell you this I was a personal reciepent of that advice from Pacheco. Even though I can't stand AV it was a point I took well from Pacheco and even though AV still bugs the crap out of me I tend to bite my lip when I'm in public. so anon maybe if you ate more vegitarian you wouldn't be so full of stinky shit!!

September 23, 2005 11:16 AM  

Blogger joseph mailander said:

Why doesn't Ruby de Vera have a website? I think she has the potential to rise in the polls. It doesn't cost much to put up a website, and it would be helpful to print media and blogosphere alike.

September 23, 2005 12:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I second that 11:16am. I too can't stand Antonio because I think he's a do nothing mayor as he was a councilman. Pacheco has pulled me aside and advised it would be better to try and work with AV instead of the negative attitude. When Nick sees anyone one of us at a meeting making negative statements or snide remarks he tells us that we need to move forward. I told Nick maybe in time but not right now and I will try and hold back the attitude.

September 23, 2005 1:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Can anybody give me some details on this supposed grudge Pacheco has against Villaraigosa? This charge is getting a bit old and never with any facts backing it up.

September 23, 2005 2:00 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anon 2:00. I'll give you one. Pachueco changed the district boundaries to keep Antonio out of the 14th District.

September 23, 2005 2:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How about his last-minute contribution to Hahn just a few months ago?

September 23, 2005 2:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How campaign charges via a close pacheco supporter through a anon hit piece say AV's kids weren't his not just the grown ones but the little ones too. I know their kids and that really hurt them. Just watch, it will turn from issues to mud slinging real soon. I bet those hit piece fliers on Jose are ready to go. Stick to the issues, the needs of CD14. The future, not the past.

September 23, 2005 2:30 PM  

Blogger Tofu girl said:

Look here you dumb shit 2:10pm Anon. When Antonio won the Cd 14 seat Nick changed the cd14 boundry to INCLUDE Antonio's Mt. Washinton home so that Antonio and his family wouldn't have to move from Mt. Washington into the 14th district when Antonio's term as Council Member began. Alot of people told Nick NOT to that to go ahead and SCREW Antonio and make him move. Nick wouldn't do that.Nick's thought was that the race was over Antonio won and there was no reason to fuck with him just because he had beat him. So Nick DID NOT AND DOES NOT hold a grudge against Antonio. The way you worded your comment it seems like Antonio is the ONE with the grudge not vice versa. If you layed off the animal products and ate more tofu your head wouldn't be so dense!!

September 23, 2005 2:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

tofu: how could AV run for the 14th if he did not live there?

September 23, 2005 3:01 PM  

Blogger Tofu girl said:

It's called carpet bagging. Antonio's not the first nor will he be the last to do it. With term limit's whats an honest polititian to do?

September 23, 2005 3:14 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Bet that if Pachueco gets back on the Council, he'll work with Janice to help set up her mayoral challenge in '09.

September 23, 2005 3:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That last one really shows you've got Tofu-for-brains, girl. AV lived in the district until he was sliced out to protect Nick. He moved his family over the new line to challenge your hero and beat the Tofu out of him.

Grant Nick the minimal graciousness to support a re-re-drawing of the district line to let AV move his family back home.

September 23, 2005 3:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

My my my, boring Friday - ain't it?

So any reports from either front on how many volunteers will be sent out this weekend?

Tofu Girl, will you be walking? Come over to Eagle Rock and we can have some fun!

Will Pacheco be waisting his time again and flipping burgers for his volunteers or will he be facing voters and getting doors slammed on his face?

Are there any campaign grunts out there???

My walking shoes are ready, I have a full bottle of water, and my precinct kit has a new map - I'll see you out there!


September 23, 2005 3:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What everyone fails to remember is that Cedillo was the first one to cut AV out of a seat. Cedillo cut AV's home out of SD 22. AV moved into El Sereno - which he had represented a portion of in the Assembly.

War is war and the people in power get to make the rules. Anyone out there would have done the same to screw with an opponent.

For the ****th time, this is not AV's campaign against Nick. Nick is losing this campaign all on his own. Nick has NOT been able to develop a message that clearly states why he should be re-elected. His site and volunteers just spin AV's past messages and their weak hits on Huizar.


September 23, 2005 3:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Let's gossip! Who is dating in city hall these days?

September 23, 2005 3:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It's amazing to me the sort of mental gymnastics people engage in to justify their support of Huizar. Yes he's a nice go; yes he is well-educated; yes, he's done nothing to distinguish himself on the board.

A nice disposition and a good education shouldn't get you on the Board. If you served in elected office and cannot point to results, don't be surprised that people think you are weak. In a nutshell, that's Jose.

September 23, 2005 3:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The Truth Will Out -

I will check the mayor's voting history and past boundary changes and get back to you. It shouldn't be too difficult to know whether it's Pacheco or Villaraigosa misinforming us.

September 23, 2005 4:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:22 p.m.

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Another Parke Skelton LIE exposed.

Antonio lived in CD1 BEFORE redistricting, and he lived in the SAME damn district AFTER redistricting took affect. In fact his house in ritzy MW was NEVER in 14 until AFTER he won the council seat and moved back into is from his $3K per month, empty, temporary rental pad near the El Sereno/S. Pasadena border.

FACTS, can be our friends, just try to embrace one now and then.

A WHOLE GROUP of people decided where district boundaries should be NOT just Pacheco.

What was Pacheco supposed to do, run around to all potential oppononents (even BEFORE they announced), and say "HEY, do you WANT to live in my district -- now, for the first time? That would be pretty tough considering a dozen high profile pols live up on that little in-bred hillside. "Do you WANT to run againts me?" Was he supposed to SHOW AV preferential treatment?? (AV lovers would say "YES, yes, oh, GOD YES!!!")

YES, Mt. Washington was cut up into more than district during redistricting. GUESS WHAT, so was just about EVERY other community in the NE over 5-10K in people... Highland Park - cut in two; Glassell Park - 70/20/10 cut between THREE districts CD13, 14 AND CD1; Cypress Park 90/10 between 1 and 14; Montecito Heights, El Sereno, Eagle Rock, Downtown, etc. etc. etc. All left with bits and pieces in separate districts, sometimes just across the STREET for god's sake.

Is Mount Wash. SPECIAL? Should they have been allowed to be one of the ONLY intact communities in Northeast L.A.?

Why? Just because AV lived there? Because they're RICH compared to most of the Eastside? Because they're loud and obnoxious when they don't get their way? Because they have the FIRST L.A. museum on their hill? (oops, sorry AV, HAD the first!) Too bad about THAT, AV-lovers.

Does that ONE community get to stay in a single piece -- if anyone can actually figure out where the damn community boundaries are -- just in case their most famous resident wants to run for CD14?

What if AV had wanted to run in CD1 and the lines had been adjusted differently? Then the Lovers would be screaming today that Pacheco had done a dirty just tohelp Ed Reyes.

HELL, everyone in town knew AV was just waiting to run for mayor again in '05. Who KNEW he was going to waste two years of CD14's time and resources pretending to be a CM!?

September 23, 2005 4:35 PM  

Blogger joseph mailander said:

Regarding the grudge, Urteaga told me a couple of weeks ago that Pacheco holds no grudge and early on tried to extend an olive branch or two to the then Councilman, but they have been declined.

He also told me that if I called the NE station or other stations in the district that it's unlikely they would say that they were in touch with 80 new neighborhood watches.

But what about RUBY DE VERA? Is she gaining any traction? Where is her website?

September 23, 2005 4:42 PM  

Blogger Parque Esqueleto said:

That was one of my FAVORITE little twists, and people still believed it.

AMAZED even me.

Antonio's home was always in Council District 1 -- before the boundaries were adjusted all over the city by a nonpartisan committee, and afterwards as well.

And I ACTUALLY had people saying all over the city that Pacheco had redistricted Antonio OUT of a district he had never once lived in, namely (CD14). And the little simpletons repeated it like it was from Lao Tsu.

I like to call that "GERRY-PANDERING."

DAMN, I am good. (Or Antonio's followers are just that stupid).

Probably both. Hell, even the MEDIA bought that. I owe some of those folks another case of Scotch.

September 23, 2005 4:46 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Oh, Ruuuuuuby, don't take your votes to town!"

Ruby gets 2-3 percent in a low turnout... TOPS, on Nov. 8. (But more actual votes than Paul Gonzalez did last time).

Hey, what do you expect for someone lists themself on the ballot as a "COUNCIL OFFICE MANAGER." That's akin to saying you're the "night manager" (only one on duty), at a fleabag hotel.

"No thanks, I'll wait and talk to the REAL managers, in the morning."

Jimmy Jay get's 50 total votes, less than Ruby. His supporters are putting out TOTALLY illiterate, incomprehensible e-mail messages on local listservs in CD14. Sounds like the skidrow homeless are writing them for him.

September 23, 2005 5:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What kinda Scotch, Parkay?

September 23, 2005 5:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Scotch TAPE -- to keep their mouths shut about how much of this crap he tips them off to every two years.

September 23, 2005 6:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Pacheco is on board with issues in the community and that's why they are supporting him. Public Safety, illegal vendors, LAUSD and education, development, outreach, communication. When Nick was councilman everyone knew when meetings were happening way in advance. When ever there was a press release, information etc. the community received it on e-mail and then pass it out to those who don't have one. There is absolutely NO communicaton with CD14 reps now. Jose wouldn't even know how to start that networking.

September 23, 2005 7:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Council File Index: It's Council File 00-1073.

Initiated with a Pacheco-Walters-Padilla motion, the City Council awarded a contract to Viacom Decaux. The company would be allowed to install automated public toliets, transit shelters, kiosks, and newsstands around the city, and charge for the placement of advertising on them. It's a 20 year contract with a minimum guarantee to the City of $150 million over the life of the contract.

Viacom paid some upfront to get the program started with inspectors and administrators.

The problem appears to be that some of the suggested locations aren't being approved by some City Council offices, so the City and Viacom are not getting the revenue that had been expected. The Chief Legislative Analyst has recommended a renegotiation of the contract to correct the problem.

September 23, 2005 7:14 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

anon 3:20. proven that you don't know what your talking about. a certain lady may have tofu for brains but obviously youve got shit.

September 23, 2005 7:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Now we know Mike Bonin reads this site, perhaps he can tell us the process Bill went through to endorse Jose Huizar? Did he meet with the candidates? What did he ask them? Why did he decide on Jose from among the others?

Mike, I hope you are as forthcoming on this item? Man thanks.

September 23, 2005 9:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yeah, I'm one of Bill's constituents and I want to know how and why he endorsed Jose. He probably didn't even know or work with him before. If Bill just did it to please Antonio then we all need to know. It shows the lack of character Bill has and I question his integrity making that decision. C'mon Mike tell us how this happened.

September 24, 2005 8:24 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Are we not important enough to know Bill's political thinking. Or should we assume Antonio told him to endorse Huizar? Of which there is no defense.

September 24, 2005 7:38 PM  

Anonymous Tom Bradley said:

I'm endorsing Nick Pacheco.

September 24, 2005 10:42 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Why should Nick hold a grudge against Antonio?

Wasn't it NIck who did the sliiming of Antonio in the 2001 Mayoral election?

All that Indian money, brought to the table by Cardenas was spent in Nicks's little slime operation to depict Antonio as a crack dealer.

Yes, it did beat Antonio, but it lowered the public's esteem for Latinos everywhere. It was a clear "race card" play. Shame on Nick. (And his good buddy, Ricardo III)

Nick lost his seat in the payback. Antonio is right to hold a grudge; it was dirty politics at its worst.

Nick was an abusive and arrogant Councilman, and those who sought his help and received his haughty demeanor instead will not forget when the polls open.

CD 14 is a small place. There is nowhere to hide.

Huizar is the next Council member.

Nick's 15 minutes are up.

September 25, 2005 5:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Why hasn't Jose released his poll numbers? The fact that he's holding on to them says they were not good news for him. IF the numbers were good he would have immediately released them. Goodbye Jose

September 25, 2005 8:17 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Tony holds a grudge against Nick because Tony helped out Vignali.

Tony holds a grudge against Nick because Tony is not a good family man.

Tony holds a grudge against Nick because Tony's past lowered the public's esteem of Latino elected officials everywhere - as if it could get lower.

Just like Tony and his supporters to blame someone else for Tony's lack of character and integrity.

September 25, 2005 8:31 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

To all those interested, Ruby de Vera does have a website: www.rubydevera2005.com
It has ALL her accomplishments, visions, and hopes to work together with you as a community for the betterment of CD 14.
The campaign apologizes that we don't have time to be 'blogging' on this arena- we are working FULL FORCE to ensure that Ruby is elected to be your next Councilwoman.

September 25, 2005 11:03 AM  

Blogger Toby1234 said:

I took the time to read everyone'e thoughts and here a few responses that I know of to be truth.

MALDIF recommended the boundries for CD14, they are who drew AV out of CD14. Being that AV moved into CD14 to run he is the one with the grudge.

Nothing untrue was said about AV, if the shoe fits wear it...If you make choices, stands on issues and votes in you political career you must own up to them. Accept the controversay and move on.

It's true Jose has had a very unremardable career as a LAUSD member and president. As a latino wanting to make it better he should stay on the board as our voice, follow through and make sure the changes happen to improve the quality of education for our children. We didn't swim rivers and walk miles to be ignore the benefits our children could receive.

It puzzles me that AV would rip LAUSD state he wants to take it over and endorse the president at the time to run for CD14 when he was not effective. It's a double speak here.

Nick made decisions as a councilmember previously not everyone agreed with, but a good leader must have the strength and conviction to make those hard decisions. And constituent groups need to realize they do not always get what they want, sometimes other constituent groups get what they want.

There are many issues and decisions our elected officials must decide, look at all the all the ones you agree with not the single one you don't. Taking your marbles and going home is so childish.

We latinos want to elect quality latino role models not just a latino. Let's not be shallow here.

Jose is a nice person but he needs to stay at LAUSD to fix it. He just can't use it as a stepping stone to a better paying job.

Nick can hit the ground running and bring us residents of CD14 the services and attention we deserve and need. Let's face it, AV began running for mayor as soon as he was elected to CD14. We haven't had real attention since Nick left.

For those of you who don't live in the 14th stay out of our race, it's for us to decide. You wouldn't want me to involve myself in your district deciding who would represent you.

If there is a little friction between Nick and AV so be it. That's actually a good thing. It will allow the rest of the councilmembers to vote their own mind and be true to their constituents and do fight for what they truly believe. And it will force AV to keep it on the up and up.

I mean really, AV appointed a rehab counselor to be the president of public works. I mean really, this is the largest department in our city and the most important, don't we deserve an educated and knowledgable individual to head it up. He just gave his good friend a job that we pay for who is a joke,,,Where are the cries of outrage on that?

September 25, 2005 11:04 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'd also like to respond to this blog:

Oh, Ruuuuuuby, don't take your votes to town!"

Ruby gets 2-3 percent in a low turnout... TOPS, on Nov. 8. (But more actual votes than Paul Gonzalez did last time).

Hey, what do you expect for someone lists themself on the ballot as a "COUNCIL OFFICE MANAGER." That's akin to saying you're the "night manager" (only one on duty), at a fleabag hotel.

"No thanks, I'll wait and talk to the REAL managers, in the morning."

Jimmy Jay get's 50 total votes, less than Ruby. His supporters are putting out TOTALLY illiterate, incomprehensible e-mail messages on local listservs in CD14. Sounds like the skidrow homeless are writing them for him.

RUBY came in 2ND in the Northeast Democratic Endorsement... Don't count her out just yet!!!!

September 25, 2005 11:15 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


And that council office manager to Ed Reyes! Nothing said here. As a pussy himself, Ed hired a pussy tobe his chief of staff and it all filters down.

September 25, 2005 12:08 PM  

Blogger Toby1234 said:

What about Ruby? No one cares. Sending her to city council would be the same as "showing up to a gun fight without a gun or a knife."

I mean really who calls themself a friend and encourages her to run. The only support she has are her friends, and that's only to her face. They won't even vote for her...it's sad.

How could they do that to her and call themselves friends. Friends don't let friends make fools out of themselves.

And if it's her thinking she has what it takes to represent the 14th? Well send out the men in white coats, she's nuts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

September 25, 2005 2:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Jose needs to finish the job he just started at LAUSD. Even if is part-time. Being a part-timer is not a bad thing, but Huizar thinks he deserves better. NO he doesn’t. Like many of the community members of CD 14, they live on 2-3 part-time jobs. Jose get to know your neighbors before taking on their battles, we don’t need you to learn on our time. Nick can get the job done faster and BETTER!

September 25, 2005 2:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Antonio also gave the commissioner paid appointment to the godmother of his kid, Cynthia Ruiz who has a degree in something other than a public works experienced worker. She had no experience and yet is getting paid $108,000 per year of our tax dollars.

September 25, 2005 6:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Whats upsetting me is that huizar is taking tax payers dollars in matching funds when he boasts of outraising the nearest competitor by 3 to 1. we all know the independent expenditures will mainly come from huizars (special interest) supporters. huizar was the guy raising money in his school board race when he didn't have a competitor. this isn't ethical behavior in my opinion.

September 25, 2005 8:14 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Can Jose use the money he raised in his unopposed school board race for the city council race?

Explain that to us...

September 25, 2005 9:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yeah, he squeezes that out of the LAUSD developers and lobbyist.

Jose is even using the kids of the district to work his campaign. I saw them out during the mayoral race. They were getting out of vans. Interesting huh? I talked with them and they were from his LAUSD district walking the 14th for AV. Wonder if Jose loaned money to AV during his campaign?

They were wearing Huizar kids shirts, or something like that. Wow, he'll use anyone...hasn't he ever heard of child labor laws...they should have been studying with the scores LAUSD schools have posted.

September 25, 2005 9:34 PM  

Blogger Toby1234 said:

I think we better watch Hose, he's a little tricky dicky. Little is the key word here...

September 25, 2005 9:45 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

In response to toby1234:
I'd like to let you know that the Campaign to elect Ruby de Vera to City Council took offense to your comment. She is the most qualified candidate to run with 10 years in LA City politics. I don't know who's camp you are on, but she gained over 2x as many votes as Mr. Pacheco did at a recent endorsement meeting... Watch your mouth before you blow off hot air!

September 25, 2005 9:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ruby has a good chance at this race. In the beginning, I was going to vote for Huizar, a few weeks later I read on Ruby and visited her office to find out more information. Ruby is the the right person for CD 14

September 25, 2005 10:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ruby DeVera's campaign took offense to a remark on Mayor Sam? Have you read what they do to Pacheco and Huizar? I don't know Ruby, only seen at at a couple of forums - but the race is between Huizar and Pacheco, so be a little real. At the Boyle Heights debate she was pretty pathetic. Pacheco just behind Huizar by a small margin is my prediction.

September 25, 2005 10:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ruby it is for CD 14!!!

September 26, 2005 12:32 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anyone taking "OFFENSE" at anything posted on this blog, or ANY other is TOO fucking thin-skinned to survive 4 months in city politics, let along 4 years.

This one if for the big (um...) people. Get a job on someone's staff if you need to take OFFENSE, so they can be the front (um...) person who takes the brunt and keeps moving as if there was no OFFENSE.

I don't have time to deal with a councilmember who's running around OFFENDED all the time.

That was Nate Holden's gig; he's gone, and so are those days.

I'm OFFENDED that anyone that easily OFFENDED would even bother trying to run for City Council.

Fucking amateurs!

September 26, 2005 12:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

CD14 has a chief of staff running things as a "caretaker," already.

It's ain't working.

Forget that noise.

September 26, 2005 12:50 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Come on get off this loser, Ruby is a secretary in a councilmember's office...it's such a joke.

September 26, 2005 5:40 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

In response to anyone posting 'negatives' about Ruby:
You discredit our candidate, you discredit us!
Ruby is MORE than a SECRETARY... Probably, more than you or me will ever become- Senior Field Deputy of CD 14, Community Liaison of CD 13, and now Office Manager of CD 1... Do any of you have that on your resumes??

September 26, 2005 5:50 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Your candidate discredits herself. She's out of her league and will embarrass her friends who will waste their votes.

Antonio wins again!

CD14 loses!

September 26, 2005 10:11 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ruby is a rotten banana - as opposed to a regular banana, you know, yellow on the outside white in the inside. Well the way Ruby has sold out to Tony she is yellow on the outside and brown in the inside - just like a rotten banana. Get it?

Although this may be negative, I bet her campaign is just thrilled with any kind of notoriety - even if it is on thisblog.

September 26, 2005 11:11 AM  

Anonymous Jim Hahn said:

I question the timing of her just "sudden" oh she's a good candidate for CD14.

This is all a trap by Antonio Villaraigosa. Why do you think all the council members are sucking on his "little brown dick"? Endorsing Huizar who has no credentials. They know he's running for governor and would like to be nice to him NOW so they can jump on his staff. (ie Jack Weiss, Laura Chick, Alex Padilla) or get an endorsement so he or she can be Mayor (Hertzberg, Parks, LaBonge)

To focus attention away from Jose Huizar's LACK of accomplishments. Ruby is just a decoy to siphon votes away from Pacheco.
Think 2000 Presidential Election and Ralph Nader.

September 26, 2005 11:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Fraud, Corruption, Pay to Play, Deals with Drug Dealers

"Impeach Villaraigosa"
"Impeach Villaraigosa"
"Impeach Villaraigosa"
"Impeach Villaraigosa"
"Impeach Villaraigosa"
"Impeach Villaraigosa"
"Impeach Villaraigosa"

September 26, 2005 4:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Gynthia Ruiz is his comarde and worked 24- 7 on his campaign. She is eyes and ears for him always has been, she is one of his closest friends. She tells him every thing. So he gave her that very high paying comission gig.

September 26, 2005 4:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

100 Days coming up, we have accomplished one thing,

"Mayor Kicks Off 'Operation Pothole' To Repair City Streets"

Thank you Mayor, we still have traffic, homelessness worsens, hospitals closing, schools failing, business stagnant.......but our potholes will be repaired...hallelujah.

September 26, 2005 4:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Communist mentality, always paranoid, keep people in key positions who can rat others out. Just keep an eye on Cynthia Ruiz, she will burn anyone to save Antonio. They say the kid is antonios.

September 26, 2005 4:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Sorry Ruby just doesn't have the package the constituency in the 14th wants. She doesn't have the...well look at her picture. It's pathetic. I not trying to be mean it's just -she's out of step with the times and people expect more than what she can offer. Sorry but it's true. Let's all move on and truly let her know she's not it. As a resident I went to several debates, she wasn't even at all of them. It was so sad to watch her...it just pathetic.

No more attention on her, it's a waste of time. Just like it's a waste of her time to run.

Come on, no more blogging on her.

September 26, 2005 7:21 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home