Pachyderms, Predictions and a Bit of R&R
The LA Times sends a welcome note to the LA City Council as a reminder of what they are facing when they return from recess next Tuesday...The Los Angeles City Council returns from a two-week end-of-summer break Tuesday to grapple with the serious issues and problems that typically face the nation's second-largest city — bad schools, bad traffic, bad planning and not enough housing.The Times list includes pachyderms (I know, a big word for some of you -- elephants), lap dancing, CD 14, LAUSD, Mayoral relations with the council, term limits, summer vacations, and motorcycle rallies
But there are some unconventional items on the horizon as well.
Posted by Anonymous @ 9/01/2005 07:08:00 AM
40 Comments:
.
Speaking of CD14, the Pachuecos have repeatedly claimed that they can refute every single statement of fact made by the LA Times editorial that successfully called for Nick's ouster from the city council. It's a false claim. They try to bury the facts with spin, vituperation and verbiage, but they don't address the facts themselves. Here are the Times' facts, verbatim from the editorial Perfectly Forgetful Pachueco:
(1) Pacheco claims he did not even know of the connection between the nonprofit group and the campaign committee.
(2-5) Between Dec. 30 and Jan. 21, Pacheco gave $36,500 -- on top of $30,000 in recent years -- to Madres del Este de Los Angeles-Santa Isabel, an Eastside nonprofit organization headed by Juana Gutierrez.
(6-10) Mothers for Nick, the political committee that shares Gutierrez's Boyle Heights address, reported to the City Ethics Commission in late January that it was spending $36,085 to campaign independently for Pacheco.
(11- 14) According to the California secretary of state's Web site, Mothers for Nick took over the name La Colectiva, a now-disbanded group that was run by Gutierrez's son, Martin GutieRuiz, a college friend of Pacheco's.
La Colectiva's claim to shame was its role in the 2001 mayoral race, in which (15) Pacheco backed James K. Hahn over Villaraigosa.
(16-18) A woman impersonating county Supervisor Gloria Molina placed recorded phone calls to voters slamming Villaraigosa.
(19-23) The district attorney's office investigated and found that La Colectiva used a phone bank owned by CAL Inc., a nonprofit group formed by Pacheco -- who said he knew nothing about the calls.
(24-26) In November, when Villaraigosa announced that he would run against Pacheco, district voters received particularly nasty mailers attacking him.
(27-29) La Colectiva's former attorney, Ricardo Torres, another college pal of Pacheco's, claimed responsibility.
(30) Pacheco -- you guessed it -- said he knew nothing about the mailers.
These tactics are one reason (31) The Times endorsed Villaraigosa over Pacheco in the City Council race.
Taxpayers... deserve an explanation of the (32-34) $250,000 "discretionary" account that Pacheco tapped for the Madres -- in $5,000 dribs and drabs so as not to have to follow city contracting guidelines.
(35) City Controller Laura Chick...adamantly denies Pacheco's contention that she authorized his expenditures...
.
Can you speak to the facts, Mayor? They haven't, in all their responses.
CD14 will continue to be one of Los Angeles' great shitholes regardless of which asshole represents them on the City Council.
With residents like the jerky who posts the drivel above, it's no wonder why that community will continue to suck.
Ha!
Steve Hymon does a great job of pointing out the fact that we have a lame ass city council who don't care about real issues but stupid, idiotic crap. This city is in turmoil because Antonio's racist buddy Minister Mohammed is threatening to burn down this city if Antonio doesn't get rid of Bratton and his coward little butt is hiding out. LAPD is going down the toliet with John Mack as prez of police commission, officers are now saying they will leave LAPD and it seems that no one gives a shit because the Nation of Islam has scared the hell out of everyone.
this district is like living in the wild west. A new sherriff steps in . all these politicians want is a chance at the cash register and tit of power. This is
a shame because the good people of the area suffer. while the politicos make thier back room deals
Bring back the 4th Floor blog
7:25 AM
So why aren't these people in jail? Why hasn't the Times followed up on the investigations?
Las Madres used that money to buy turkeys and toys for kids and families from Boyle Height's housing projects. Mothers for Nick and Madres were investigated and audited resulting in a letter by the City Ehtics commission clearing Las Madres.
You mention that this address was used for Mothers for Nick, it was also used for Las Madres scholarship fund, it was the home used by Padilla when he ran Cedillo's campaign, it was also the address used by Lucille Roybal Allard to claim residency in her district- now Lucille and Alex are both endorsing Huizar.
La Colectiva never changed their name, take a look at that website again. The District Attorney's investigation lays blame squarely on Paige Richardson, Xavier Becerra's campaign manager for the "Marina" message, you should read the report. La Colectiva never "used" the phonebank as the Times claims, they rented it to the Becerra campaign.
Martin GutieRuiz never went to college with Pacheco, he went to Princeton, Nick went to Berkeley.
The Torres mailers were a personal attack against Villaraigosa, after Ricardo and Antonio got into an argument, even Skelton claimed this in print - Nick knew nothing of this. If you know Torres, you know he is a loose cannon - but he did take sole responsibility for these mailers.
The public did get a full accounting of the money spent. If Laura Chick didn't authorize these expenditures, why did she sign the checks?
On a side note, Enrique Gasca, Huizar's field consultant for his $350,000 uncontested school board race in 2004 was the recipient of three Madres scholarships while attending Georgetown U. His sister, who also goes to GU, received the largest scholarship in 2001. She would have gotten more but the Madres had to disband. Juana Gutierrez had just turned 70 and with irresponsible editorials like this from the Times, why bother asking people for schoarlship donations when Skelton and Antonio already branded you a crook. Las Madres were giving out $40,000 a year in scholarships to inner city kids - think Skelton or Villaraigosa ever replaced this money? Think Huizar did? NO
7:49 says
"Can you speak to the facts, Mayor? They haven't, in all their responses. "
Where have you been. Have you not seen Juana Gutierrez' e-mail. Have you not seen the letter formthe Ethics Commission? The only fact out there are that no one mentioned in this editorial has ever been charged, jailed or even fined - that is a fact. It is a fact that Parke and Antonio lied and they damaged an inner city community - just to get their candidate elected. What do you think Parke has in store for Huizar's campaign? What other self made non-profits are out there that you can attack Parke?
Let's see, Parke Skelton makes up lies about Las Madres taking money from the city to put into Pacheco's 2003 campaign. The city ethics commission clears Las Madres of this lie.
Yet Skelton ends up owning a formerly public street after Villaraigosa is elected. He now has his mountain top resort capped by a private cul de sac, all because he didn't want those pesky Mexicans driving through his street when the new development in his neighborhood was finished. Isn't this the height of hypocrisy. Really shows what kind of character Parke has. Damn those Mexican kids and their scholarships, I WANT MY PRIVATE STREET. Well Parke, you got it. Let's see how Huizar defends this.
10:23. Can you offer any evidence that what you are saying about Skelton taking possession of a public street is true? Anything at all? It would be a big story if it were true, but I can't find any evidence of it anywhere. Post up a city document proving that the section of that street adjoining Skelton's house was vacated.
And since the project you reference was approved by Pacheco, wouldn't Pacheco have approved any gift of public land to Skelton. Is this credible?
So, Pacheco raises an impressive 30% of his money from the district. And Huizar a pultry 10%. Huizar is the choice of developers and construction companies. Get ready for a lot of building in the 14th District if Huizar is elected.
Does the Northeast Progressive Alliance know this? Do they really care?
The reason that Mothers for Nick didn't get indicted is that after the LA Times exposed the $36,000 transfer from the City just before they announced their $36,000 IE for Pacheco, they wisely decided not to do the IE that they had already filed.
They never spent the money. So why did they announce the IE, if they had no intention of spending the funds? And if the whole thing was perfectly legal, and this group called Mothers for Nick (with the same principals and same address as Madres) really did have $36,000 from some other source to spend for Pacheco, why didn't they complete the IE?
If Antonio had funnelled $36,000 from city discrtetionary funds to a community group days before the group filed a $36,000 Independent Expenditure for him, you wackos would be screaming like banshees. But when Nick does it, you decide that "Skelton made it all up."
Pathetic.
are Parke Skelton and Eric Hacopian business partners?
11:30 a.m.
How come you never mention the $36,000 the Madres spent on the food and toys for kids.
That's where the city money went.
You're parsing the truth, looking at similar figures and saying "MUST BE."
You do that kind of weaseleing you can launch a bogus investigation of every public official in the country that ever used a community non profit as the delivery agent for a city's charitable funds.
The end result of that will be that cities just STOP dispensing goodwill funds to communities and non-profits, rather than risk being "linked" to some fake corruption if the amounts seem even faintly similar.
Your SCROOGE, that's it.
Just send them all to the poorhouses, right?
11:08
If happened, but it wasn't approved by Pacheco -- it was done through the city departments that handle this. I don't know if he could have stopped it, but there was a lot of wrangling going on there with a number of big players (the developers were tight with Riordan). Skelton also had a big attorney firm downtown doing supposedly "pro bono" on it, too, "for the community" (Omelveny, Latham, or??) but they got screwed and he got a street closure. Bottom line is, there is a cul-de-sac there that didn't exist before, there's one less entrance to that huge development than was original planned, and the other streets that lead into it are more crowded as a result.
11:30 says
" The reason that Mothers for Nick didn't get indicted is that after the LA Times exposed the $36,000 transfer from the City just before they announced their $36,000 IE for Pacheco, they wisely decided not to do the IE that they had already filed."
What are you talking about? The Mothers for Nick IE existed, check the Ethics Commission files. They spent $29,000+, not $36,000. The $36,000 figure cameout because an Ethics staffer double counted some donations - how convenient. The principal of this I.E. was Esperanza Vielma, she had nothing to do with Las Madres. She was put under oath when she testified in front of the Ethics commission.
Your just talking out of your ass like Skelton. All the receipts and any other pertinent information regarding Mothers for Nick has been filed with the Ehtics Commission, including the three mailers they did. Do some research before you mouth off again.
I just looked up the 6300 block of Pine Crest on Google Earth. And there it is, a cul de sac. However, my 2001 Thomas Guide does not have a cul de sac at the of this block.
What gives?
Affectionately known to those who know as one little block of (South Pasadena Adjacent) "Mount Washington East."
I'm lost with this thread, is Skelton te packy-derm?
BUT IS THERE A (FAKE) NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH ON THAT STREET???
When Nick took office in 1999 he decided to honor a Mexican Christmas tradition known as Dia de Los Reyes. In Mexico, kids don't get gifts on December 25th, they get them on January 6th, the feast day of the Nativity or the three wise men. You know, the wise men who showed up with gifts for the baby Jesus. Nick was able to deliver turkeys and toys for families in the five housing projects in the 14th District. He and his staff enlisted Las Madres to distribute these gifts. Las Madres had an ongoing scholarship program and had recently distributed over 75,000 low flush toilets for the Department of Water and Power - at no charge to the customers. What better agency to handle this Christmas program.
But since Nick was involved, there had to be some sleazy motivation - in Parke's eyes. Antonio never came near to servicing as many families as Nick did during Christmas. I hope your porud of yourself Parke. Despite your claims, I'm sure you didn't lose any sleep over this one. Are you enjoying your cul de sac?
Can Parke have a Dia de Los Reyes Party in his cul de sac this Christmas? Maybe he can lend it out for some scholarship fundraiser - just like Sra. Gutierrez used to lend out her house. How about it Parke, are you game? Huizar can be the honorary speaker.
Esperanza Vielma headed the Mothers for Nick IE? She was the college roomate of Maribel, the lawyer that Huizar hooked up with a $200,000 LAUSD gig. She is also a very close friend of Huizar. Uh oh Parke, the plot thickens. See what happens when you don't do proper research on your candidate. Let's see if Huizar allows you to attack Mothers for Nick, I'm sure Esperanza knows a thing or two about Huizar that isn't very flattering.
the hell with mothers for nick.
anyone who breaks law should go jail.
Huizar said he wasn't friendly with Maribel. Parque, who gave you the haircut?
1:13
What law did they break?
Huizar wasn't friendly with Maribel? Have you seen Maribel? Before Firebaugh got to her, if Huizar didn't hit it he must be gay.
Huizar proudly lists an AWARD from the the MADRES on his campaign Website.
Is he generally clueless or just clueless about which charities his minions are slamming in his name??
Yup, still no "record" after two months being up, but this:
2002 Madres Del Este De Los Angeles, “Sí Se Puede” Award
http://www.huizar4la.com/about.htm
(Wasn't 2002 the year they supposedly did "nasty" things with city money?)
2002 was the year before Parke slammed Las Madres. Padilla and Cardenas were honored in 2001. I tell you, these guys don't know the meaning of the word hypocrisy. How long before Parke takes this down?
12:06
So you are lying I guess. You cannot demonstrate that there was a gift of a public street to Skelton, which was your original claim. Believe me, if there had been a street vacation next to Skelton's house there would be a public record, and Pacheco would have approved it. But it didn't happen.
Pacheco, who repeatedly promised as a candidate to help residents limit the size of this development, supported the developer 100% after he was elected -- and did everything he could do to grease the skids for the project. The developer and Pacheco got the traffic configuration that they wanted.
Your lame protestations not withstanding, you are simply wrong. Again, feel free to submit a public document supporting your claim.
12:06 never said it was a gift. But how often do public streets come up for sale. Given the money Parke makes, it's a no brainer that he would have bought the street to create his private cul de sac. And how could Nick promise to limit the size when it was already a done deal. Parke went to Nick and Nick told him that what Parke wanted would result in a lawsuit the city couldn't win. And there is a public record, stand by.
Councilmembers don't "approve" these things (it's an "informal" though permanent closure), since there's now a 3,000 square foot Million$$ home sitting in the middle of it - approved by the city department that grants lot size variances.
(You're probing to see who knows what, Porke, and who's posting, but getting no-where).
Huizar fires his consultant Shallman and hires Skelton to get Antonio's endorsement. Jose did you know he would have this type of baggage? That's an interesting tactic, take on the consultant who slimed East L.A. non-profits with lies. Huizar gets accused of being a titere (look it up), but he can still live to fight another day. He's uglier than Huizar, he's not Latino, and he is a liar. Skelton, let's see how you like it when the tables are turned on you. Do you think any of your Latino pnies will come to your rescue?
Hey Parque,
How do you X-punge a whole city street.
Cute pic, Parque. Got a sort of Lee Marvin thing going on.
2:49, I breathlessly await your public document showing that the city sold the street to Skelton. I expect to be waiting a long time.
3:38
All in due time.
CD 14 is against lap dances? Why?
If the poster named Ubray is using his real picture, I'll pay for a lap dance from him.
Pacheco is low class along with his Gutierrez clan.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home