Chick Blasts Bogus Term Limits Plan
City Controller Laura Chick isn't too amused that supporters of the term limits extension scam - Proposition R - are using her name to advance the measure in recent campaigning. Trouble is, not only did Chick not authorize this, she actually opposes Measure R. Below is letter from the Controller to the Yes On R campaign, as well as her own statement.October 23, 2006
Mr. John Shallman
YES on Proposition R
Dear John:
It has come to my attention that you are using my name, and the credibility of the Office of the City Controller, in the campaign for the passage of Proposition R.
The mailers imply that I believe that Proposition R would have prevented the public relations over-billing scandals. Nothing could be further from the truth. Proposition R would have had no preventive effect on that matter. I remind you that the City Council actually voted to turn down my request for them to stop the LADWP from paying millions of dollars more to outside public relations firms.
In fact I adamantly oppose Proposition R, using my name in mailers to voters in support of this measure is duplicitous and intentionally deceiving.
Please cease and desist immediately from using my name, or the Office of the City Controller, in conjunction with the Proposition R campaign.
Sincerely,
LAURA N. CHICK
City Controller
STATEMENT BY CITY CONTROLLER LAURA CHICK ON PROPOSITION R
“For the Proposition R campaign to use my name in any way is duplicitous and intentionally deceiving. My work to expose millions of dollars in fraudulent public relations bills has nothing whatsoever to do with Proposition R. The City Council actually voted to turn down my request for them to stop the LADWP from paying millions of dollars more to outside public relations firms.”
“In fact I adamantly oppose Proposition R for many reasons, not the least of which is the disingenuous way with which this measure was placed on the ballot. I urge the voters of the City of Los Angeles to vote no on Proposition R.”
Labels: proposition r
Posted by Mayor Sam @ 10/24/2006 12:01:00 AM
16 Comments:
Good for Laura. John Shallman is a sneaky bugger. This goes to show how desperate the clowncil members are to once again deceive the public. EAA should be at Clowncil on Wednesday wearing T-shirts, buttons, etc. saying NO ON PROP R. All the media will be there and what better way to get attention on every local news channel.
Heads up in CD14: Kevin DeLeon spent $166,025 on Shallman Communications to do his campaign mailers during the primary. Sneaky is right!
Hail to Laura Chick!
wow, that's excellent
The mailer is wrong on another point: the FH execs were never charged with overbilling by $4 million. It was a fraction of that amount. Also, Prop R treasurer Kaufman worked for FH. Shallman worked for Hertzberg, who worked for FH.
"LA ANTONIA TIMES" has come out against Prop. R in today's newlook editorial page. Can you say "EX. CLOWNCIL PRESIDENT GARCETTI"?
Kevin DeLeon doesn't represent "CD14" -- moron; that's a city council district, and he's running for state assembly.
There's some overlap, but it sure as hell isn't the same thing.
Learn about the difference between STATE government and CITY before you shooting off your blanks, airgun!
Got the next round of pro R literature in the mail and no mention of Laura Chick. But the stink of misrepresentation is still there.
Prop R: What’s In It For Them?
Recently, the Los Angeles City council voted to place an initiative on the November ballot that will make changes to the current City Charter regarding ethics reform. This initiative (Proposition R) is known to the voters as the City Government Responsibility, Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act.
Many voters who do not regularly read the opinion section of local newspapers, have only the word of respected organizations like the League of Women Voters and the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce to help them make informative decisions on Election day.
These two organizations supporting this measure are responsible for bringing these changes to the city council earlier this year. Included in the changes is a term limit extension from 2 terms (8 years) to 3 terms (12 years) for city council members.
According to the City Attorney,
“Having reviewed the various proposals…we have concluded that the ethics, lobbying and campaign finance reform proposals can simply be adopted and implemented in their entirety through an ordinance passed by the City Council.”
Simply stated, the issue of ethics reform does not need to go before the voters. The only reason Prop. R is on the November ballot is because of the term limit increase.
So this is our question: Why do the League of Women Voters and LA Area Chamber of Commerce care about city council member terms being increased from 8 years to12 years? What is in it for them?
The mailers that were sent out to over 100,000 likely voters mislead the public in two ways: 1) by claiming that Prop. R will “limit” council members to “three terms (12 years total)” without informing voters that the current charter limits council members to two terms (8 years total) at present. And 2) that it will prevent city officials from swindling city government out of millions of dollars (referring to a case brought before the city council by City Controller, Laura Chick against the LADWP). These mailers suggest that this initiative if passed will prevent these incidents from occurring again and imply that the City Controller is a supporter of this proposition. In a letter printed in the Daily News, October 24, 2006, Laura Chick writes,
“For the Proposition R campaign to use my name in any way is duplicitous and intentionally deceiving. My work to expose millions of dollars in fraudulent public relations bills has nothing whatsoever to do with Proposition R. The City Council actually voted to turn down my request for them to stop the LADWP from paying millions of dollars more to outside public relations firms.”
“In fact I adamantly oppose Proposition R for many reasons, not the least of which is the disingenuous way with which this measure was placed on the ballot. I urge the voters of the City of Los Angeles to vote no on Proposition R.”
Sincerely,
LAURA N. CHICK
City Controller
When Liza White, President of the League of Women Voters, was asked about the mailers, she defended them saying “they aren’t deceptive.” If she really believes these mailers are not misleading, then how can this woman be trusted? She is obviously confused about what the word ‘deceptive’ means or she is trying to save face. Or she has another agenda.
Nevertheless, the most important thing the voters need to know when they go to the polls has not been made clear by the LA City Council, the League of Women Voters, or the LA Area Chamber of Commerce and that is: The changes to the city charter regarding ethics reform, can be made without voter approval.
If this council and these two organizations really care about ethics reform then this reform needs to begin closer to home. They need to be more transparent and truthful about their motives and political agenda.
Donna Connolly
David Hernandez
For more information, please go to www.TERMEDOUT.com.
about time laura-chick-n-shit stood up for something.
about time laura-chick-n-shit stood up for something!!!
Good for Laura Chick!
Well, David that was a long post, but a good one. Thank you!
GREAT STORY IN DAILY NEWS TODAY. Seems clowncil members are distancing themselves from all the negative publicity on Prop R. Hopefully all this bad media attention will convince the voters to vote NO ON PROP R
Anon 12:33
Anon 9:34 is not a moron
Yes we know Kevin is not running for CD 14, but AD 45 overlays most of CD 14 in El Sereno. So spending campaign $$$ in CD 14 with these guys is correct.
Look what rolled into Kevin's campaign in the last two day's....
its nice to have friends from out of town.......
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Davita (Tacoma, WA) $1,000 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Michael J. Malik, Sr. (Detroit, MI) $1,000 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Astra Zeneca (Wilmington, DE) $1,000 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Ca State Council Of Service Employees (Sacramento, CA) $6,700 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Faculty For Our Universitys Future, A Committee Sponsored By The Ca Faculty Assn. (Sacramento, CA) $6,700 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Acc Capital Holdings Corp. (Orange, CA) $3,300 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Advance America (Spartanburg, SC) $2,000 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
L.a. Arena Company (Los Angeles, CA) $1,650 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Bay Meadows Land Company Llc (San Mateo, CA) $1,650 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Hollywood Park Land Company Llc (San Mateo, CA) $1,650 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Political Action By Pest Control Operators (West Sacramento, CA) $1,000 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Hawaiian Gardens Casino (Hawaiian Gardens, CA) $3,300 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Bnsf Railway Company (Fort Worth, TX) $2,500 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
Friends of Kevin DeLeon
Visa U.s.a. Inc. (San Francisco, CA) $1,000 10/24/2006 10/25/2006
I'm sure all these people care so much about Highland Park, Boyle Heights, Lincoln Park and yes El Sereno......
Vote for Allen-Newman
She's not in anyone's pocket...
Lots of money she has not,
Stink of special interest is on her not.
Assume that we're a stupid lot,
and do just what you say?
Money makes an interesting trail,
like the dog that lifts its tail
and pees on my house despite my wail,
and then runs away.
The school issue made things very clear.
Who was outside and gave a cheer,
supporting parents far and near
while inside a man sold us out?
The best candidate that money can buy
is not the best for you nor I.
On election day do cast your vote
and throw the bastard out.
And for once we'll have someone
who will listen to us instead of
a ton of special interests
from outside our district who don't give a damn.
Forgive me Bill Clinton, but I voted for Sam.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home