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

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Zuma Dogg for City Council... It actually could happen!

Some people love him, some people hate him. Some think he shakes up the system, others think he was shaken too much as a child. Whatever your thoughts on Dave Elliott aka Zuma Dogg, an interesting confluence of events could leave Zuma Dogg actually winning the seat for LA City Council District 7.

With 8 other candidates it would still be a tough fight but follow the bouncing ball.

CD7, AD39, and SD20 have been playing a game of musical chairs. Problem is that when the music stopped one contestant was sitting on two chairs and Cindy Montenez was left standing.

Former City Councilman and now Senator Richard Alarcon was termed out of his Senate seat, Cindy Montanez still had time on her Assembly seat but since Alarcon was going to be forced to either run for AD 39 or retire the plan was hatched for Cindy and Richard to swap Senate and Assembly seats. Someone forgot to clue in Alex Padilla who beat Cindy for the Senate seat. No problem, Cindy could now run for Alex's vacated City Council seat right? Wrong.

Formerly termed out City Councilman/State Senator and now newly elected Assemblyman Richard Alarcon was given a new higher-paying path with the passage of Proposition R. Alarcon, who demands loyalty from everyone else but doesn't seem to believe the word applies to him decided he would challenge Cindy for the City Council seat throwing Cindy under the proverbial bus. When Alarcon got in the race, all serious opposition got out leaving an interesting predicament.

What happens if David Hernandez wins his lawsuit against Prop R? You guessed it, Alarcon would be out and well... Can you say Councilman Dogg?

You have to admit, it would be hysterical to watch.

Labels:

19 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said:

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NONO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

December 26, 2006 12:55 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Alarcon is a complete slime for what he did, not just to Cindy but to his staff as well. These people were with him for YEARS and he fired them with NO warning.

All he cares about is himself.

December 26, 2006 1:01 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Why did he fire staff?

December 26, 2006 1:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Same reason he is running for city clowncil, he is a greedy and self centered s.o.b.

December 26, 2006 2:57 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ok this is a scary scenario. I'm sure clowncil and our midget mayor are a little nervous. After all it was Team Villaraigosa who made Fuentes and Montanez bail to leave the door open for Alarcon. Not only is Alarcon a slime ball but he sexual harrasses women all the time and is sleazy.

Will someone please tell Alarcon that he's not fooling anyone with that horrible dye job!!! Why do men think they're fooling people dying their hair or putting gresin formula to hide the gray like Parks, Antonio, Alarcon and others. They look hideous.

December 26, 2006 7:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Wow! Tony Villar and the Council must be shitting bricks. Considering the courts overturned his Polloness's school scam they might lean the same way towards another unfounded scheme, that being Prop R.

December 26, 2006 8:29 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Merry Christmas Michael Trujillo.

December 26, 2006 9:50 AM  

Anonymous Matt Dowd said:

yes yes yes or should I say yeah yeah to councilman Dogg. may I also point out that in a recent public comment I chastised the mayor for having too much free time to have hair dye appointments. 7.51 is right, it is hideous and quite undignified. Mick Jagger don't even get away with it any more. I lead by example, so check out my gray hair in this new video on Venice. click my name to see the latest ridiculous situation at Venice

December 26, 2006 9:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Is Rodriguez still in the race at CD 7?

December 26, 2006 10:04 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No court will overturn Prop R - it's another FOOL's errand to try. That being the case, the effort is VERY appropriately staffed.

I'm still waiting for that little religious symbol to reappear in the county deal.

Mayor Sam's needs to be renamed "Home of losing politics".

December 26, 2006 10:30 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No court will overturn Prop R - it's another FOOL's errand to try.

vILLARAIGOSA (MIGHTY MIDGET) TRIED AND LOOKE HERE. HE'S MAYOR.

TRY AND TRY AND TRY AND TRY.

December 26, 2006 10:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I should have said: "Yeah, when pigs can fly", but noooooooo.

Shake that hangover off..
It could actually happen...? I wish ALL the candidates well. I think the idiot who brings up a "dye job" on someone's hair as a reason for voting for or against is a girlie. I think there must be some issue more signifigant to vote for than someone's hair style. Would you rather have someone with a bad dye job or a high density, developing son of a bitch neighborhood destroying crook?

THE DIFERENCE BETWEEN the two lawsuits (schools and ethics and term limits) is that, wheather you or I agree or not, the voters approved Prop R, not the state legislature.

The other issue is; for an argument to be made after the election that the public was duped or stupid, and they did not know what they were voting for is an insult to the voters. Many state & local props. contain more than one "issue" (define isssue)- and have passed judicial review.

Another difference here is that the a judge reviewed prop 7's descriptive heading, and apparently changes were made, even more than the judge had suggested.

The voters passed prop 7 by a signifigant margin.

Mr. Dogg, Francis, whatever, you do a service by shaking things up -I hope someone is listening, and if you weren't battling the public comment clock, maybe you could settle down. But you have the courage to meet the monster head on- and except for the less than entertaining "you'all" bullshit, you would be a good guy to have in the council. But I question your skill at handing out certificates at council meetings. Other than that, a fine candidate you might be.

One word of serious advise however. The D.A. is not one to be f--ked with. You can bet he is already got an investigative team on you to confirm your true residence. It's not you personally, his office takes the residency requirement as serious as a heart attack, and you better make sure you have lived in the dist.for 90 days prior, and you roll into bed every night at your district address, and can prove it, or win or lose, it could be the pokey for you. Felons cant run for public office.

The difference is the voters approved term limits by proposition, and they voted to modify it by one. Check out the many other Prop's. which seem to contain more than one issue, or who's title seems misleading. Can you find one that was overturned by a judge???

December 26, 2006 10:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

FRANCIS ZUMA DOGG,

Councilman Alex Padilla
December 14, 1999
KNX-AM 1070
Los Angeles, CA
As a member of the Los Angeles City Council, I am proud community where I was born and raised. It’s my job each day needs and concerns of my constituents.
Currently, those running for city office are only required to live days before the candidate filing deadline. With this short residency currently in place, any politically connected outsider with a big bank U-Haul truck can exploit the system by quickly moving into declaring their candidacy.
That’s why I’ve proposed a longer residency requirement for Candidates with new faces are welcome in our dynamic civic essential that these new faces come from the very communities leadership. An increase in the residency requirement increases empowers neighborhoods by ensuring that elected representatives communities they serve.
When a candidate runs for office, there’s no guarantee of a victory. longer residency requirement in place, communities are representation with a local face.

December 26, 2006 10:37 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

j

December 26, 2006 10:40 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Acevedo, grandfather of cd7-- who does he back?

December 26, 2006 10:42 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What would be an interesting contest would be alarcon v. alarcon (as in corrine)

December 26, 2006 10:44 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10:35 am - a council person's residency is based on intent, that's it.

That's exactly how Alarcon is skating by, and Padilla did too, oh, and how Jan Perry can also...

December 26, 2006 11:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Attn: Political experts

Is an interested party allowed to run for CD14 this late in the game?

December 26, 2006 12:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

11:53 you are the smart one- tell it to the judge.

December 26, 2006 1:21 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement