Millionaires For R
The Daily News has a great story about who's putting BIG BUCKS into the the campaign for Measure R.Do you think rich developers donate out of love for our city? Or love of the hundreds of millions of dollars that City Clowncil Members take from you and give to them?
Read it: http://www.dailynews.com/ci_4448684
Labels: proposition r
Posted by Walter Moore @ 10/06/2006 06:52:00 AM
15 Comments:
Daily News....Special interests promote Prop. R..Anschutz among big contributors...Special interests, including companies run by Staples Center owner Philip Anschutz, are bankrolling a campaign that's raised $144,500 so far in support of a November ballot measure that would give City Council members an extra term in office....billionaire Anschutz's AEG have been among the largest contributors with their $25,000 total donations in support of Proposition R, according to campaign finance filings released Thursday.
Total B.S. THIS IS WHY THE PEOPLE NEED TO VOTE NO ON R
And H is the payback for R.
Seeing as nobody else is getting through, I might as well take the opportunity to fill the space with my own opinion.
I'm not against R. I think it makes some sense to lengthen the terms of good Councilpeople. I think it would go a long way to facilitating the kind of development that LA could stand, and killing the kind it doesn't need. Certainly, the CRA would also get a good hand if some council members were there for 12 years rather than eight.
[Although the thought of LaBonge being my Councilman for 12 years after umpteen as Deputy does freak me out a bit. But then again, it may take him a full twelve years to fix our tilting street sign. Maybe eight years isn't long enough to get this kind of thing done...]
While I'm indifferent on R, I'm opposed to H. A billion dollars for a 1,000 extra units a year? That's less than 100 units per council district. As there are up to 100,000 units in some council districts, your chances of benefitting directly are exceedingly remote.
In fact, your chances of taking your $60-$120 year (if you don't pay it in tax, you'll pay it in extra rent as a renter) and hitting a random daily double with it at Santa Anita in the spring are far far greater than your chances of directly benefiting from the Affordable Housing Bond.
The market isn't doing a good enough job supplying affordable units, but it's doing a pretty good job correcting on its own right now.
I really can't believe there isn't more media coverage of this Bond, and that R is getting all the media oxygen. There seems so little chance of benefit and such a great chance for waste (see LAUSD for prime examples) that the voters deserve far more diligent review on H.
I oppose H. If citizens want affordable housing, perhaps deporting illegals should no longer be an option, but instead become mandatory.
Never mind all that has been said about illegals before (trashy, driving without licenses, etc.). Sure, illegals are here to work... BUT they perpetuate a fraud (which is a criminal act in itself) by declaring they are someone else via false identification papers, Social Security Numbers, etc., or declare that they have the legal right to work in the USA.
Via these same false documents, they can actually buy property here in Los Angeles, or rent apartment units, which actually contributes to the housing shortage. Take the illegals out of the equation by deportation, and then watch for LOTS of units to become available.
Lest the anonymous posters state I'm making racist remarks, I hereby beat you to the punch by calling you anti-American!
Different subject off thread (my apologies): Having been a member of a different moderated group for the past 10 years, I'm very happy that this blog became moderated. It weeds out LOTS of inappropriate comments.
Joseph:
Look deep down in your heart, look all of Mayor Sam's readers straight in the eye, and tell me honestly that you believe that giving the council members an extra four years is the key to finally getting things done. Where else in the nation have we found this to be true?
Term limits in and of themselves may not be a particularly good thing -- having to throw out those elected officials who are really good only to replace them others less able and less dedicated. But, then, given the mediocrity of this bunch -- and the sleazy manner by which they put this thing on the ballot -- no way should they be rewarded with being able to stay another term....
If these Clowncil members were CEO's of corporations and they had to go before their board of directors and state I need more time to do my job, ALL their asses would be fired. The argument that they need more time to do their job is ridiculous. Instead they should figure out a way to make city hall more efficient and not so bureaucratic to move the processes quicker. If they can't do shit in 4 years they shouldn't be in office. NO ON R.
THE FACT IS L.A.PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND ZONING IS FUNTAMENTALLY CORRUPT. EXAMPLE: ZONING LOBBISTS ARE EXEMPTED FROM REGISTRATION, CAMPAIGN PAYMENTS - DONATIONS- THIS IS UNBELIEVEABLE BUT TRUE THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ETHICS LAWS AS LOBBISTS. THEY ARE EXTREMELY POWERFUL, EFFECTIVE, AND WIDELY USED BY BUSINESSES BECAUSE THEY SHARE THEIR CONSULTING FEES GENEROUSLY.
this censorship sucks.
dont you dare censor my words you fkg commie.
Give me a break, please. The LACRA is robbing us, the taxpayers, blind. Don't you understand that the first accomplishment of a CRA project is to freeze the tax increment indefinitely. The second phase is to go out and screw all of the property owners who stand in the way of the CRA project out of their properties. The third thing is to spend millions preparing the properties for development. The fourth thing is to give the developer the property for peanuts, and the fifth thing is to give the developer all the time he needs, be it years, to develop the property and all the low-interest loans he could ever desire.
Then, as the project slowly begins to develop and buyers come in and buy the units, the ever increasing costs of services to the city are placed on the ballot in the form of school and service bonds which when passed are charged up to us, the taxpayers, who have been screwed since the first day the CRA project was authorized.
What censorship? It appears that people can still say whatever stupid things they want, as long as those things are at least sort of related to the original topic and/or don't involve gratuitous swipes at people who aren't involved at all.
What's gone is the instant gratification, and we're all probably better off for it.
As for Prop. R, there probably are some valid arguments for slightly longer terms of office, but nobody seems to be making them in any public context. Besides, sneaking the measure onto the ballad the way the Council did makes it difficult to take any "pro-" argument seriously.
WRONG, 8:21 - not everything is being posted that's submited.
Not every idiotic statement submitted is posted. Mere name-calling, for example, doesn't cut it. Nor do giant cut-and-paste jobs that have nothing to do with the original post. Libelous statements likewise probably won't make it through our filter.
However, any attempt, however feeble, at reasoning, and/or providing new information, is pretty much guaranteed to make it up. You can support or oppose the original post, but you need to do so with something showing an IQ at least equal to room temperature.
If you are unhappy that you can't post idiotic comments here, then please, by all means, cancel your subscription. Oh yeah, you're not paying anything anyway, are you?
Well, what you should do instead is start your own blog, and post all the name-calling and gibberish you're trying to post here, and see how many people read it.
I find that the quality of the comments has increased tremendously now that the internet taggers have had their spray-cans confiscated.
Besides the lame argument that Clowncil needs more time to do their job does anyone know what other reason these idiots are saying we should vote on R? Also, we know special interests are banking these morons. Can we say RED FLAGS????
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home