Wouldn't It Be Great For The Grand Ave Project Developers If They Could Build The Affordable Housing "Off-Site", or Cut It Back
To everyone reading wondering why ZD is going big with his coverage of Grand Avenue Project. A project with a $2 billion dollar plus starting tag, that includes public land and subsidies, that you are letting the current city hall and county board of supervisors in charge of deserves the highest level of attention. HEY TALK SHOW HOSTS AND MEDIA NEWS REPORTERS...YOU GOTTA ROLL WITH ME ON THIS ONE. IT'S A HUGE PROJECT WITH LAYERS AND LAYERS OF LOOPHOLES AND ESCAPE CLAUSES, and if you want to take down the fraud, waste and abuse that plauges the City, this is the big enchilada, y'all!!! LA Live is big, too...but this project is supposed to be the big philintropic "civic activism" project on Broad's part -- but more importantly, is the only project of it's kind with the City, County, CRA and private billionaires all working in cahoots. I HOPE SOME OF THE OTHER NEWSPAPERS IN TOWN PICK UP ON THIS. YOU'LL SEE. I'm gonna shine the spotlight on as much shadiness as I can uncover. But that's like trying to capture Niagra Falls with a Dixie cup.
WHY WE CANNOT ALLOW THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO BE SCALED BACK OR MOVED OFF-SITE
Los Angeles City Council President Eric Garcetti reminds us, “I want to thank the developers. Because there is a huge risk in this. And in fact, if we didn’t have a developer who was willing to put their own money forward on this, there is a huge risk and I don’t think we would have had the package of affordable housing on-site...if we didn’t have a developer who believed in this, as well.”
[And let’s hope they continue to believe in it until the affordable units are built and occupied.]
Councilmember Janice Hahn also noted on-record during the same LA City Council meeting where the Project was unanimously approved, “And yes, we had some governmental intrusion on this project, by demanding certain things; but yes, we got back a tremendous benefit in so many ways from the open space [THAT WE ALREADY HAVE], to the jobs, to local hiring [how does that help the majority of people throughout the City like in the Valley and everywhere else outside the range that is considered, “local”. So now you can live in the City of Los Angeles, but still not have equal access to jobs in the City; because you are not considered, “local”.], to the community benefits package and I love the fact that this project will allow people of diverse background, diverse incomes to be living together, side by side.
And I look at Los Angeles, right now; it’s one of the toughest times in terms of inter-racial tension.
And I think projects like this, that encourage people of different backgrounds and incomes, living side by side, reaping the benefits together, will go a long way, I believe, towards improving relationships between all people throughout Los Angeles.
[Let’s call it the “Gandhi Center”!]
And I hope we get to continue to call it the “Gandhi Center”! Cause I know it would be a lot cooler for the developers to take all those 150-200 affordable units “on-site” and move ‘em “off-site”, so you can sell the affordable ones at the Grand Ave Project for a million or so each, and build the affordables “off-site”.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON WHY THE GRAND AVENUE PROJECT DEVELOPERS REALLY CAN'T AFFORD THE COST OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. (Cost as in lost opporutunity.)
It’s bad enough phase one is only penciled in for 100 rentals and zero units of affordable units for purchase. That’s right, phase one includes only 100 rental units, but none for sale for “those” people, thank you! The CRA is “obligated” to provide $10 million for these 100 units. (And yes, they do call it an obligation in the board memo.)
At around $100,000 each per affordable unit, the developer would be losing about a $1 million per unit, for a grand (avenue) total of about $200 million.
AND, the best part of the deal if it is moved off-site (for the developers, not the public), is it could cost another $100 million, or so, of public money from wherever it may be found. (And taken.)
Bob Barker told me on the way out the door, if it was a showcase showdown, the developer, contractors, “consultants” and other involved parties (like non-profits) could make another $40-$50 million if the affordable housing is built off-site.
Plus, you must factor in that affordable housing could have been built in that area anyway. (If the affordable housing is built off-site, it will be in an area that they would want to build affordable housing in, anyway.
So now, all you have done is eliminated the added affordable housing that the project was supposed to be adding to the downtown area and to the city, and add on the added financial bonanza of being able to make a whole bunch of extra money by building a separate project. And since it will be the same developer, and they will get the perceived credit in the mind of the public (since the City will position it that way, if this is allowed to happen), no one will notice, except the official activist watchdog groups, that are more like lapdogs these days, cause Antonio has them all neutered.
But I feel confident that this won’t happen because Janice Hahn and Eric Garcetti just told us why it needs to stay on-site. And Janice told us that this was a fact before approving the project.
So I’m sure the community benefits packages and affordable housing units must be included on-site at the Grand Avenue Project. (Whew!)
Because I know it’s gonna be tough to feel you are losing out on $200 million, when you could be making an additional $40-$50 million, for a total of an extra $250 million, or so, profit; instead of a loss.
But don’t beat yourself up over the fact that you won’t be able to do this thanks to Councilmembers like Garcetti and Hahn: You sold this project on the concept of the “one-big-happy-family.”
And they even made provisions to make sure the low-income, property-value-devaluating, “affordable” residents, get to use the same entrances, lobbies and walkways as the rich and famous. (And if they went so far as to make the provision, let’s make sure they need it.)
And if you wonder by what method they could wiggle out of the affordable stuff, even though we are told the developer is committed to it: Eli’s “Joint Powers Authority” board memo says, ”Funding plans include “potential” parking revenues -- and CRA Bunker Hill tax increment funds to the extent available.” (And if parking revenue and if the tax funds are not extensive enough, since it is only “potential” revenue, then what? Is Eli Broad gonna panhandle for the money like everyone else in the area?
But here’s the CITIZEN’S ALERT!!!: JPA board memo states, “If developer does not receive CRA tax increment money for the agreed upon affordable housing (like, if they don’t have it) – they may reduce the amount of affordable housing units.”
Watch them not have it, and then we don't get the affordable part -- only the un-affordable part…(Price is Right ‘loser’ deflated sound effect…Whomp, whomp, whomp, whomp…whoooooooomp.)
During the term of the ground lease, they cannot convert the affordable housing to condos. But after the lease expires, kick out all the affordable residents and convert them to billion dollar condos. (Man does someone hope they have to break the lease, cause them it won’t be the term no more, y’all and they can get started with the luxury condo conversions.)
The affordable housing covenant only remains in effect for a minimum of 45 years for owners and 55 years for renters, so that means you can forget the covenant as soon as the minimum is up.
And, oh no…It was already mentioned previously how Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa Chief of Staff, Robin Kramer worked for Grand Avenue visionary and founder Eli Broad. But was also mentored under the tutelage of Richard Alatorre when she was his Chief Deputy.
If the former CM is an affordable housing lobbyist and consultant, and knows Kramer that well, and is the top advisor to the Mayor of Los Angeles, I could think of no better project to advise yourself as consultant on, than the biggest political and corporate gravy train in town, Grand Avenue Project.
Because the other thing, If you move it off-site (besides the fact you just told us why you are including it as a fact, before you approved it, because that’s how you sold it to the people. (Well, actually, that’s how the developers sold it to council. The people didn’t really have anything to do with any of these decisions.)
zumadogg@gmail.com
zumatimes.com
WHY WE CANNOT ALLOW THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO BE SCALED BACK OR MOVED OFF-SITE
Los Angeles City Council President Eric Garcetti reminds us, “I want to thank the developers. Because there is a huge risk in this. And in fact, if we didn’t have a developer who was willing to put their own money forward on this, there is a huge risk and I don’t think we would have had the package of affordable housing on-site...if we didn’t have a developer who believed in this, as well.”
[And let’s hope they continue to believe in it until the affordable units are built and occupied.]
Councilmember Janice Hahn also noted on-record during the same LA City Council meeting where the Project was unanimously approved, “And yes, we had some governmental intrusion on this project, by demanding certain things; but yes, we got back a tremendous benefit in so many ways from the open space [THAT WE ALREADY HAVE], to the jobs, to local hiring [how does that help the majority of people throughout the City like in the Valley and everywhere else outside the range that is considered, “local”. So now you can live in the City of Los Angeles, but still not have equal access to jobs in the City; because you are not considered, “local”.], to the community benefits package and I love the fact that this project will allow people of diverse background, diverse incomes to be living together, side by side.
And I look at Los Angeles, right now; it’s one of the toughest times in terms of inter-racial tension.
And I think projects like this, that encourage people of different backgrounds and incomes, living side by side, reaping the benefits together, will go a long way, I believe, towards improving relationships between all people throughout Los Angeles.
[Let’s call it the “Gandhi Center”!]
And I hope we get to continue to call it the “Gandhi Center”! Cause I know it would be a lot cooler for the developers to take all those 150-200 affordable units “on-site” and move ‘em “off-site”, so you can sell the affordable ones at the Grand Ave Project for a million or so each, and build the affordables “off-site”.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON WHY THE GRAND AVENUE PROJECT DEVELOPERS REALLY CAN'T AFFORD THE COST OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. (Cost as in lost opporutunity.)
It’s bad enough phase one is only penciled in for 100 rentals and zero units of affordable units for purchase. That’s right, phase one includes only 100 rental units, but none for sale for “those” people, thank you! The CRA is “obligated” to provide $10 million for these 100 units. (And yes, they do call it an obligation in the board memo.)
At around $100,000 each per affordable unit, the developer would be losing about a $1 million per unit, for a grand (avenue) total of about $200 million.
AND, the best part of the deal if it is moved off-site (for the developers, not the public), is it could cost another $100 million, or so, of public money from wherever it may be found. (And taken.)
Bob Barker told me on the way out the door, if it was a showcase showdown, the developer, contractors, “consultants” and other involved parties (like non-profits) could make another $40-$50 million if the affordable housing is built off-site.
Plus, you must factor in that affordable housing could have been built in that area anyway. (If the affordable housing is built off-site, it will be in an area that they would want to build affordable housing in, anyway.
So now, all you have done is eliminated the added affordable housing that the project was supposed to be adding to the downtown area and to the city, and add on the added financial bonanza of being able to make a whole bunch of extra money by building a separate project. And since it will be the same developer, and they will get the perceived credit in the mind of the public (since the City will position it that way, if this is allowed to happen), no one will notice, except the official activist watchdog groups, that are more like lapdogs these days, cause Antonio has them all neutered.
But I feel confident that this won’t happen because Janice Hahn and Eric Garcetti just told us why it needs to stay on-site. And Janice told us that this was a fact before approving the project.
So I’m sure the community benefits packages and affordable housing units must be included on-site at the Grand Avenue Project. (Whew!)
Because I know it’s gonna be tough to feel you are losing out on $200 million, when you could be making an additional $40-$50 million, for a total of an extra $250 million, or so, profit; instead of a loss.
But don’t beat yourself up over the fact that you won’t be able to do this thanks to Councilmembers like Garcetti and Hahn: You sold this project on the concept of the “one-big-happy-family.”
And they even made provisions to make sure the low-income, property-value-devaluating, “affordable” residents, get to use the same entrances, lobbies and walkways as the rich and famous. (And if they went so far as to make the provision, let’s make sure they need it.)
And if you wonder by what method they could wiggle out of the affordable stuff, even though we are told the developer is committed to it: Eli’s “Joint Powers Authority” board memo says, ”Funding plans include “potential” parking revenues -- and CRA Bunker Hill tax increment funds to the extent available.” (And if parking revenue and if the tax funds are not extensive enough, since it is only “potential” revenue, then what? Is Eli Broad gonna panhandle for the money like everyone else in the area?
But here’s the CITIZEN’S ALERT!!!: JPA board memo states, “If developer does not receive CRA tax increment money for the agreed upon affordable housing (like, if they don’t have it) – they may reduce the amount of affordable housing units.”
Watch them not have it, and then we don't get the affordable part -- only the un-affordable part…(Price is Right ‘loser’ deflated sound effect…Whomp, whomp, whomp, whomp…whoooooooomp.)
During the term of the ground lease, they cannot convert the affordable housing to condos. But after the lease expires, kick out all the affordable residents and convert them to billion dollar condos. (Man does someone hope they have to break the lease, cause them it won’t be the term no more, y’all and they can get started with the luxury condo conversions.)
The affordable housing covenant only remains in effect for a minimum of 45 years for owners and 55 years for renters, so that means you can forget the covenant as soon as the minimum is up.
And, oh no…It was already mentioned previously how Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa Chief of Staff, Robin Kramer worked for Grand Avenue visionary and founder Eli Broad. But was also mentored under the tutelage of Richard Alatorre when she was his Chief Deputy.
If the former CM is an affordable housing lobbyist and consultant, and knows Kramer that well, and is the top advisor to the Mayor of Los Angeles, I could think of no better project to advise yourself as consultant on, than the biggest political and corporate gravy train in town, Grand Avenue Project.
Because the other thing, If you move it off-site (besides the fact you just told us why you are including it as a fact, before you approved it, because that’s how you sold it to the people. (Well, actually, that’s how the developers sold it to council. The people didn’t really have anything to do with any of these decisions.)
zumadogg@gmail.com
zumatimes.com
Posted by Zuma Dogg @ 8/12/2007 12:08:00 AM
44 Comments:
.
.
.
Hahn would be the one to live in her failed idealistic world of the '60's, per all the previous posts about her tax and spend politics. The failure to this day by her (and her and Jim Hahn's boosters here) to understand that putting quality and policy decisions at the mercy of pandering to those who see everything as a case of "racial justice" -- in the case of MLK and why it was never held accountable -- just leads to financial ruin.
This is not to say that an integrated neighborhood would not be desirable, racially and in terms of socio-economic status, so long as there were not so many lower- end residents and units that the market value and desirability of the upper-echelon were compromised.
Fact is, that wherever the number of "affordable"/ subsidized units became too substantial, the others paying full price moved elsewhere.
The tiny apartments catering to singles seeking a pied-a-terre is one way they seem to be trying to come up with the 15%. How great would it be to see whole families crowding into small, "deluxe" apartments, anyway? Their public areas will even be less than usual.
But secretaries, law clerks and other professionals and couples may welcome these units and be a welcome addition to the buildings.
Today's LAT opinion by joel kotkin questions whether L A's downtown is ready for Manhattanization, and says the requirement for all that affordable housing, with trade-offs of air space and all kinds of complicated formulas, is one reason that the "game" is too complicated for smaller developers. Best city can do is with with the biggest ones, like Eric says. So, Janice thinks "government intrution" is pretty irrelevant, but it is why ONLY the big boys can play.
Kotkin notes again the Zev is the only politician who recently called the into question, saying it's in opposition to many residents -- but as yesterday's LAT story on opening of construction on the Light Rail line reminded us, it was Zev who, in '98, forbade any city taxes going to the very mass transit that everyone now realizes is essential to support all this "smart growth."
(In fact, it was also Zev who got Waxman at the federal level to not ALLOW L A to get federal funds for mass transit, because there had been a methane leak under the Ross store in the Fairfax district -- which he then represented as a CM.)
Now, Zev is scrambling to make up for it all, proposing turning Pico/ Olympic one way, and advocating that the rail line continue all the way to Santa Monica. (Where it was headed in the first place, until he froze the funding over 20 yrs ago.)
Meanwhile, all the big projects are being approved by CC unanimously, because the liberal intentions of social and economic diversity make it impossible to "do business" with any but the very biggest boys.
Oh no...just saw this in this weekend's LA Times. (You may rememeber Bill from my LA Weekly article that was already out a couple weeks ago. AND, OH NO...I can think of no finer project that needs more public money than the billionaire boys club.
Bill Witte, the Related Cos. chief who's in charge of that project, told me he plans to lobby the state for enough additional funding, on top of the budgeted $50 million in local funds, so there's a chance to build one of the great public spaces of the world.
I bet he's going to lobby for additional state funding. I think we should pour even more money specifically into THIS project, instead of having it go to another area of the city that doesn't already have $50 million in local funds. HEY VAAAAAALEEEEEEEY...Aren't they buzzing about secession again at the NC level? I SAY GO FOR IT... THIS IS SICKENING!
Re: the Valley: Kotkin reminds what everyone knows, that the biggest of them all, what will be the biggest mall in SoCal, will be the Westfield expansion in Topanga/Calabasas, Zine land. And Wendy's Sherman Oaks Westfield mall is planning another huge expansion, and the neighbors there are peppering her with concerns over traffic -- the Valley is no different from Downtown or elsewhere, and in fact, has the most space to grow, and IT WILL.
Only option for smaller builders and people who want smaller new buildings is out of the city to Burbank, Glendale -- out of L. A.
But remember, the reason that the big boys like Broad, Witte/Related Cos. are looking for more funding, is because the City Council, moved by the liberal faction, is requiring them all to build the 15% affordable housing, which eats into their costs and revenues.
What is it about vertical urban growth that bothers fools like ZD who understand nothing about the alternatives?
People must live somewhere, well, normal people, not fools that live in vans.
The alternative to urban vertical growth is urban sprawl. Is that more desirable? Those who understand this issue opt for intense vertical development every time.
Centralization creates a fertile market for mass transit, which is also desirable, as reducing pollution and global warming.
So, if some developers want to risk a huge amount of capital to bet on the fact that people want to be closer to their work and are willing to live in smaller units in vertical structures, where is the problem, just because somebody is getting a reward for the risk?
It is called "capitalism". Risk and reward are related, and it is the American Way.
And, if some folks like Hahn, Garcetti and others are elected by the people and decide that as a public policy it is good to have affordable housing, then that is what the people who voted for them deserve.
So, they offer to increase the density if you will include the affordable housing, and developers read the rules and play by them.
If you don't like it, change the electeds. Run yourself, or get someone to run.
But blogging will not accomplish this, nor will bothering the elected officials by singing and dancing for two minutes and telling them how to run their offices in imitation blackface. You have to do it the old fashioned way, with shoe leather and coffee klatches and hard work campaigning. That is also the American Way.
Lazy fools that sit and type in their vans that they call home will never amount to anything.
Get a job, spend the time and money to campaign and see how many votes you can get. Make a difference if you disagree; stop whining about everything you see that intrigues or offends you. Learn instead of dropping mindless drivel.
Dear God, Higby, how long do we have to endure this inane creature?
Freilich, Robert H. From Sprawl to Smart Growth: Successful Legal, Planning, and Environmental Systems.
Here's a good place to start to learn something, dummy.
Bob Freilich understand the difference and points out the clear merits of avoiding urban sprawl as an environmental necessity.
Officer Malloy said...
I thought dis here wuz da Sam Yorty Republican website. Since when did Republicans change they position o' being pro-development, pro-growth an' anti-union?
Many o' those against Wal-mart an' Home Depot iz pro-union. This web site often attacks da unions an' says it iz Republican. Republicans support free market principles an' businesses like Home Depot an' Wal-Mart. I guess dis here website iz against everything on both sides o' da political aisle ... like uh lot o' lawyers I know at O'Melveney & Meyers. In case ya didn't know, OMM iz da law firm who taught Rocky Delgadillo his ethics.
What'swiff all da anti-development crap? Downtown looks like uh third world country. I don' really wants ta hang out on Skid Row. What'sda problem wiff improving da city o' LA wiff some new development? Like da Mayor Sam slogan says on da website ... "this city iz da envy o' da world" . Have ya been downtown?
I say:
What da hell shimbuzz iz going on homies?
When enlightened men jet on arguing fo' uh long tyme, dere iz uh distinct
possibility dat da queshun iz not clear.
Voltaire, _The Age o' Louis XIV_ peep this shit
Two relevant Op-ed pieces in da Los Angeles Times Current section o' February 25, 2007 need ta git uh mention in Bottleneck Blog. “Give L.A. uh free ride” by D. Malcolm Carson an' “The Times rolls over fo' Grand Avenue pitchmen” by Joseph Mailander.
Mr. Carson proposes another ¼ percent sales tax ta pay fo' free public buses. This would be on top o' da one percent countywide sales tax already going ta public transit. And where has da lion’s share o' dis here one percent sales tax been going? Dare I mention da multibillion bone, 17 mile, 16 stop -err- “station” Red Line Subway wiff it’s 120,000 daily boardings?
Now we's see high density development schemes ta jet on top o' da stations o' dis here not very long subway. A means o' justifying construction o' da Red Line? Or maybe usin' Metrorail as an excuse ta allow dis here sort o' development? There’s already da Highland-Hollywood Complex. How has dat been doin'?
I dispute da notion dat da Grand Avenue scheme iz on “public” land as listed in da Los Angeles Times Current section. Somebody please correct me if I’m wrong, but I suspect da Grand Avenue scheme iz going on property dat wuz prob'ly wuz seized by da CRA through eminent domain in da name o' slum clearance o' Bunker Hill during da 1950’s an' 1960’s.
Ernie Bernardi, where gots ya gone?
WHOEVER SAID THIS...
"But remember, the reason that the big boys like Broad, Witte/Related Cos. are looking for more funding, is because the City Council, moved by the liberal faction, is requiring them all to build the 15% affordable housing, which eats into their costs and revenues."
(August 12, 2007 2:01 AM)
The corrpupt racketeering involved parties can thank you for the next zuma dogg thread on the city's "affordable housing" boondoggle. LET ME ASSURE YOU, IT WILL BE THE LEAST FAVORITE STORY IN THE HISTORY OF ZUMA DOGG...
I've been holding it back...but now that ZD has exposed the Grand Ave shadiness in the past couple weeks, LA Times is picking up on my coverage. YES, I AM POSITIONING IT THAT WAY...Because, how come for the entire history of this project (and it has been in the works for years), LA Times starts talking about it a week after ZD.
So bro, you can spin that bullsh*t that the reason is because the city "requires" 15% affordable housing which eats into their costs.
OH, IS THAT THE REASON...WOW!!! What's Eli Broad and Bill Witte's paypal button. I better donate to them. THEY REALLY NEED THE CHARITY.
SO YOU MUST BE VERY CONFUSED ON HOW THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SCAM WORKS IN THIS TOWN.
WELL NOW YOU'RE ABOUT TO READ ABOUT IT IN THE LA TIMES, SOON.
[And thanks for the re-cap of the past year of Zuma Dogg calls, blogs and comments regarding the city's "Dumb Growth" (badly planned/no planned density around insufficient infrastructure and public transportation. SO NOW THAT THE LA TIMES has decided to go "ZD" on the City...I'm gonna use it as an opportunity to hand out some assignments to their lazy ass reporters who don't know what to write about until someone writes about it first on this blog.
LOSERS! But thanks anyway...at the end of the day, the good news is...
THE CORPORATE GRAVY TRAIN IS ABOUT TO BE DERAILED JAN PERRY YOU DISPICABLE, INCIPID IGNORANT BITCH!!!
HEY BITCH...NEXT TIME ZUMA DOGG SHOWS UP TO YOUR COMMITTEE MEETING TO TALK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GONNA DO...
YOU'RE GONNA SIT THERE WITH YOUR BIG MOUTH SHUT AND NOT CUT ME OFF FOR BEING OFF TOPIC WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DURING AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGENDA ITEM....
THE PEOPLE ON THE COMMITTEE WERE NODDING THEIR HEADS UP AND DOWN "YES" AS I WAS SPEAKING, SO HOW CAN THAT BE OFF TOPIC.
JUST HOPE SOME FOLKS DON'T END UP WITH RACKETEERING CHARGES OVER WHAT THE TIMES WILL BE PRINTING BASED ON MY RESEARCH.
YOU HEAR THAT JAN PERRY!!!! THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES IS ABOUT TO FIND OUT WHO THE REAL PROBLEMS ARE IN THE CITY AND IT ISN'T ME!!!
Higby: Any reason you letting this idiot refer to Perry as a "bitch?"
SORRRRY, I HAVE TO YELL THIS OUT, BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO REPEAT IT- LISTEN: This affordable housing bullshit is a big sham. My family was in L.A. since the late 1800's. All "residential developments" contained low cost housing- for the maids, and other servants. Check it out: servants quarters, maid's rooms, and in later developments like Century City's - Century Towers there are 2 1/2 floors of living quarters for the help, granted it's in the basement areas, like parking spaces. When Century Towers went condo the apartments sold for a million$ and the servants apartments sold for 50K. We've always had "affordable housing" JUST NOT FOR THE MASSES, AND WE NEVER WILL. Can you imagine Eli, Richard, or Antonio, willing to give up an apartment with a view to someone who is also a bum, but with no money. Absurd. Remember the bullshit Reardon's campaign slung, that he was a businessman and the city should be run as a business. Is that why City Hall revovations costs increased by over 300% That is the business of bullshit, and non-accountability.
Zolog the Great.
Dear Laura Chicken,
You're a chickenette girl. Even when Jimmy ran against Soboroff, and soboroff gave Jimmy the big, tough, I'll kick your ass right here act, Hahn didn't run off to hire a Marcus Allen, Hahn, while clearly nervous, didn't cave to soboroff. Laura, you are a controller, so you should have controlled, not panicked. He's not going to hit a girl- you dope.
Zoldon the Great
What does a city controller need to hire a consultant - bodyguard - oouthpiece for $ 85 K/Yr. PART TIME. Nice work if you can get it.
Z.the Great
Here's an Education Lesson:
Eli watches FAME on TV. He wants a Public School of the Arts just like he saw on TV. Maybe someday they will name it the Broad Arts Institute and creamatorium or is it crematorium? Well he gets involved PERSONALLY, and gives the real taxpaying citizens of L.A. the FREE use of his advise. He gets everything he wants. Does he pay for it. NO Favors like that Los Angeles does not need. The Arts School (like Reardon's city hall revamp) winds up becomming the most expensive overbudget school in L.A. history. (around 200 million.) At some point however he gave a million $ to LAUSD, and gave himself a big party.
What a guy, next time Eli, don't do the people of L.A.any more "favors".
If you've got any extra money, buy a new toupe'.
Zobor the Magnificient
Why do we need an Ethics Commission? Why not simply elect honest people? E. Bernardi
Z Bigwig
Why would Laura need Marcus Allen? Have you ever had a conversation with this woman? She's uneducated, unsophisticated and doesn't read. Drop a name of someone relatively famous out of history and watch a blank epression come across her face. She's been lucky but she's now over her head and afraid she's about to be discovered. She's screwed a long list of friends. She has no back up. She was willing to spend your money for that support system. Marcus is a smart guy who clearly knows she's not. But for $250 an hour, shit, he'll put up with anything. He quit the mayor's office to make money.
August 12, 2007 3:22 AM "dear god, higby?? Wasn't that on Magnum P.I.? And that American Way reference you make- Isn't that trademarked by Norman Lear's people for the american way?
Where were you when the Flag Salute was pulled from the school agenda, Mr. America at 3:22 AM.
Next time you're up at 3:22 have Higby get you some warm milk>
Soldar the G.
Laura should hire that investigator that dug up all that dirt on the outside lawyers doing overbilling to the city. Or did she do that?
Zulor the Great
10:43am,
You should be more worried that Jan Perry allows condos to be built downtown with illegal, un-documented workers. Meanwhile, this means any terrrorist can fly into the country and be working on the site that day. No accountabilty. Shoddy workmanship. And meanwhile, while you raise taxes, add bond measures, add bulky item removal, trash collection and solid waste fees (hey, how about "air access" fees)...the people who have to pay these fees can't get jobs JAN PERRY, because you are allowing your projects to be built with illegal, non-documented workers.
I'd be a little more concerned over that...and the affordable housing scam she is allowing to happen that the LA Times will be reading about on this blog today.
And remember Perry...besides being a disgrace to Herb and ZD's hometown...ZUMA DOGG IS NOT OF TOPIC WHEN HE IS SPEAKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DURING AN ITEM ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING...CHECK THE MINUTES, BITCH! Hey Don Garza...wait until you hear what Jan Perry allows to happen. Don, mi amigo, wait until you hear how Jan Perry is selling out the pueblos. You're gonna be Jan Perry's biggest critic, and you should be.
See Jan, when ZD starts talking about affordable housing, during an affordable housing agenda item, and you cut me off for being off topic...it tells ZD he was "on topic". Good luck sustaining the PR on this one, JAN!
Anyone who sends love notes to Dennis, who then makes them public, is, well a chicken- wait: She's your girl.
Oh Higby, bring Laura some warm milk, won't you.
Oh NO, it's Zorro.
Yes, put more affordable housing off-site. In Burbank. No, Brentwood (Yvonne doesn't use her tennis court much). NO, wait -- In CD14, instead of more taco stands. How about Watts or Lynwood? No...North Hollywood!
I work for Jan Perry, and I'm sure if she hears about this, she'll quake in her boots. So don't worry, zuma, when you come into our committee meetings next time and glare at the "bitch," she'll be too scared to open her mouth and beg, "zuma, please go on, you're smarter than all of us, so I'm sorry I thought you were just a loud, crude, smelly and insolent bum." You see, it will be that easy.
Frankly, affordable housing IS the problem. There's a reason some housing is more expensive than other housing. I'm not working my ass off to get out of the barrio only to have the barrio follow me.
Mr. Loco Anonymous said ......
Centralization creates a fertile market for mass transit, which is also desirable, as reducing pollution and global warming.
*******************************
Using your analogy having a city like Los Angeles with so many gangs creates a fertile market for law enforcement.
Why not create smaller cities which have homes with a yard and open spaces for kids to enjoy and play in. And then encourage companies to move the jobs to the smaller cities and not create the need for so much commuting. If you really want to build affordable housing, do this by building the homes where the land is not so expensive.
Oh yes, let us move everybody into 20 story concrete boxes where the kids sit and play video games all day long, this also creates a desirable market for Sony play-stations and other consumer electronics.
Dear God, Higby, how long do we have to endure the comments of every inane creature with an internet connection and a computer. I also can't seem to stop coming here to voice my complaints with your blog, I really need to get out of my 20 story box and go for a hike in the mountains I am geting sooooooo mad at you!!!!!!!
NOTE: ALMOST DONE WITH THIS ARTICLE: CHECK BACK IN ABOUT AN HOUR...
ZUMA’S “NO MONEY DOWN” (NON-PROFIT) PROFIT WINDFALL SYSTEM
Why LA City’s Affordable Housing Policy is ONE BIG F-ING RACKET!
How you can make much bigger profits building non-profit affordable housing than the luxury for-profit stuff and how this drives up cost per unit and we therefore get way less units, then Jan Perry has to pretend like more has to be done, when all that has to be done is stop running a cahoots racket that allows a few well connected developers in the know to run a shell game scam on the City and the public.
well, in some ways it sounds better to have separate, cheaper-built housing in cheaper areas, so that the poor can be given larger if less "fancy" apartments/condos/townhomes, with a communal yard for the kids. And the rich sure wouldn't mind not having to share a building with poor people with noisy, ill-behaved kids. And this IS being done in Burbank, Pasadena and Chatsworth.
BUT how likely is it that developers of big projects in the city, would agree to pay for that? Since the whole premise is, they are being required to pay for the affordable housing, and it's easier to figure it into the buildings they are already building. Plus as it has been said before here and elsewhere, that would allow some lower-paid white and blue collar workers to live closer to work.
It can't work for everyone, like families, although in Manhattan, there have always been kids, and they go skateboarding and biking, and grow up going to museums. But if Hahn envisions masses of poor ethnic families crowding into these buildings, that's a non-starter, sure to scare away those who could afford the condos.
This is why I think it was a good idea to have a modest $150 per condo sale, to fund building those smaller, affordable units in remote cheaper areas. (But Hahn is urging the Council to do away with that in favor of on-site "affordable housing" with visions of masses of poor Hispanics happily living side by side with wealthy DINKS -- double income, no kids, or gays.)
Just because sales fees collected so far haven't been put to use, doesn't mean they shouldn't be.
August 12, 2007 3:22 AM said.....
But blogging will not accomplish this, nor will bothering the elected officials by singing and dancing for two minutes and telling them how to run their offices in imitation blackface
Dear God, Higby, how long do we have to endure this inane creature?
******************************
Zumma dog now morphing into a serious investigative reporter of Los Angeles politics.
The Old Dancing Zumma Dog
The New Serious Zumma Dog
we are all anticipating still another rant on this topic from zuma. For the 47th time. But otherwise, what would the L A T have to write about?
Have you ever been around these non-profit developers?
They are always talking about how much money government has and how they should never use their own money to do things with.
Zuma , does have a point- non-profit housing is where you make the money.
I do disagree though with your assertions that Jan Perry has sold out the pueblos.
As long as you continue to build high density in single family dwelling unit neighborhoods, that is selling out the pueblos. If you build it where it is supposed to be , then that is what needs to be done.
But let's really get at what is going on....
Everyone is in the business of sucking the money from the upper middle class that have the disposable incomes and everyone , including non-profit housing developers are all for downtown to densify, because that means more big monied developers to send money their way.
The issue is that many non-profit housing developers are not downtown and if you look closely you will find it is those who are opposed to the densification of downtown , because they are not getting a piece of the pie. They want a piece of the pie.
How many not-for profit developers downtown have shown up or publicly opposed the Downtown Density Bonus or the TFAR. Skid Row Housing Trust was at the press conference , earlier this year supporting TFAR- air rights- because they benefited from it.
Because of this new development ,downtown Los Angeles will see more low income housing being built off site.
There are 6 low income developements coming before the downtown los angeles neighborhood council this week. That is 6.
The issue is that these not-for profit housing developers that are not downtown also want to share in the gold mine which is downtown. So they will say anything to make it seem like everyone is losing.
There is money to be made in not-for profit housing if you are a executive director , etc.
So as long as the money is going to help clean up this mess in skid row : I don't agree with your assessment that Jan Perry is selling out the pueblos.
The bottom line is that the City and others are going to use downtown as an economic engine to benefit the whole city. The people moving downtown are the cash cows for the non-profit developers and the city and it's general fund. So who is using who?
I do have issues with certain developers not using union workers though.
Zuma Dogg picks up a hitchhiking migrant worker, hits him with a tire iron, plants false ID on him, and wrecks the car to make his death appear acccidental. When the coroner's report indicates murder, Rocky Delgadillo finds five similar "accidents" and suspects insurance fraud. After following several blind leads, he traces the insurance payoffs to a single address- a Santa Monica store, the unofficial post office for migrant workers, and all evidence points to the guilt of ex-con Zuma Dogg, but Delgadillo exposes and chases the culprit before he can kill for the sixth time.
EB
Help donate, so we can send Zuma Dogg to the Eli Broad College of Business and Graduate School of Management at Michigan State University. The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. NYUCK NYUCK.
3:36pm,
"The New Serious Zumma Dog" was filmed about three years BEFORE the "The Old Dancing Zumma Dog".
Nice catch, loser.
zuma dogg said...
"The New Serious Zumma Dog" was filmed about three years BEFORE the "The Old Dancing Zumma Dog".
Nice catch, loser.
*********************
Zumma why is it that you have a great sense of humor and a comic when you are making the jokes. But can't take a joke when we decide to be a comic as well.
Lighten up Zumma and learn to accept a little of what you love to dish out.
10:37pm,
Nothing funny about the level of accountabilty my critics on this blog are holding me to regarding accuracy. So go ahead and make fun of me all you want, and I have gotten some big belly laughs this weekend over some of "the good ones!" But if you are going to post intentionally decieving information, I will clarify for the readers.
It's a propoganda tactic. Spead some innacurate info, then use manipulation by guilt/mockery tactics to try and embarass me from correcting future lies and intentional inacurracies, that will escalate once I stop responding. Cults and dictators use the same tactics.
SO THERE YOU GO READERS...THAT'S THE POINT. You think I care about the videos being posted...I posted them on youtube. And MAN, that Larry King guy was amazing. People were stopping me, including close friends congratulating me for being on Larry King. I was like, "Are you kidding? You thought that was Larry?" What an insult, because it was such an over-the-top characterization == and people bought it. And he did a great job with the set.
Anyway...boo, hoo, hoo...Zuma won't let me post lies, mistruths without clarifying for the misled readers. Boo, hoo, hoo...Mommy!!! Zuma's playing fair again. That's not fair!!!
ZD is a mindless, uneducated, undisciplined moron.
He writes, sings, dances and acts out his fantasies before a public that is a hostage to political correctness.
If he lived in just about any other society, he would have been tossed in jail and/or executed long ago.
He is the penalty we pay for honoring the first amendment; those who cannot abide his lack of training or knowledge still are subjected to his rants, on or off message, on a regular basis.
If Dante would have known of his existence, he would have created another circle for elected government officals to go throughout eternity with ZD at the podium for two minutes, every hour of their purgatory.
Our punishment for wanting to transact business with government is to have to tolerate the imbecile whenever we wish to attend a public meeting.
But here on Mayor Sam, Higby has tortured us too far.
It is time for the moron to be exorcised.
Death, where is thy sting?
is that you, E. Garcetti at 11:45?
12:53am,
For the record, ZD does not believe 11:45pm is Eric.
DINKS -- double income, no kids, or gays.
I was a DINK; always had double income, no kids, tried gay for a while,and still can’t afford to rent “affordable housing”. I no longer have double income can’t have kids; don’t want to live as gay. I owned buildings and paid the taxes for the firemen, police, trash, schools, college and supporting the homeless. I have paid for your children’s school education. I make too much social security to be “poor enough” to get benefits. But the government still takes one of every three dollars I make. I will be happy when I get old enough to get benefits from someone; Federal, State or City.
It really frosts me that someone over 62 can immigrate to this country and receive about 75% of what I have contributed to Social Security for the last 50 years. Yet, I can’t receive benefits enough to pay, my rent, or food, or insurance. I have to choose one or the other; but I can’t have them all.
If you dont like Zuma
DONT READ HIS POSTS!
When is everyone going to admit that multiculuralism and diversity is dangerous to your health????
Hasn't everyone had enough of it yet???
CULTURE FOLLOWS RACE and there is NO WAY I would EVER live near a Mexican or Muslim!!! We MUST have segregated communities if we are not going to deport all the illegals...or they will drag us down into the bowels of hell!!!
No white family would EVER send their kids to LAUSD so WHY would any WHITE family live near the Mexicans????
If you want to maintain your property values....SEGREGATE YOUR COMMUNITIES!!!!
CULTURE FOLLOWS RACE!
would the racist mind not subjecting us to his stupidity and go somewhere else?
Someone woke up on the wrong side of bed, right 9:10?
You are full of shit and don't belong here. LEAVE and leave a productive blog alone!!!!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home