Zuma Dogg Follow-Up To Zahniser's LA Times Story On Shady As F*CK CRA (Community Robbing A-holes)
Most Recent ZD TV Show from last night (Best of)
Ben Frankilin said if he had more time, he would have written a shorter book. In this case, if my A.D.D. wasn't so bad, I may have been able to simplify this story. But it's a good starting point for those who care to induldge in what may be going on "behind the scenes" at the CRA as ZD reads "between the lines" of Zahniser's LA Times story on the shady as hell Redevelopment Agency.
FROM ZUMA'S INBOX: ZumaTimes.com (ZT) ZD wrote about Eli Broad's Grand Ave project and started talking about Profitable Affordable Housing on about 8/10/2007, so someone acted tough on 8/16/2007? Unfortunately, someone probably didn't read the detail, and predictably acted tough on a medium or small developer? Perhaps ZD caused the big fight there at CRA?
Zuma Times follow-up on:
Divided agency guides L.A. growth
By David Zahniser, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 4, 2007
Are they having a "cat fight" at CRA over (profitable) non-profit affordable housing?
by Zuma Dogg
MAN, do I wish I was Bewitched so I could wiggle my nose and have a Jurassic Park dinosaur eat the whole damn CRA. But the corruption would probably give the dinosaur acid reflux. I'll try and simplify this later, but this should allow those in the know to add some additional info. Most of you won't give a hoot about this. BUT IF YOU WORK FOR A NEWSPAPER, MAYBE YOU CAN DO SOMETHING WITH THIS.
ZumaTimes.com (ZT) recently wrote about Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (perhaps along with LAANE) being soft with big developers such as Chris Pak (paying only $900,000 to waive 30+ affordable units?), while LA Times writes this article about how LAANE is being so tough with other small or medium developers; who either don't have the "in" connections; who didn't contribute to the right people; or who haven't hired the right consultants; or who don't understand that they have to pre-negotiate with LAANE and know to go to LAANE first -- not just to CRA staff or Council Office.
Zuma Dogg is concerned they are more (only) concerned about maximizing profits for the (profitable) non-profit affordable housing developers who are either related to them; buddies of theirs or have hired certain consultants or have made certain donations.
LA Times, "Historically, the redevelopment agency made such demands only of developers who received direct cash subsidies. But these days, the left bloc contends that any decision that benefits a developer financially -- an increase in height for a building, a reduction in open space around condos, a change in zoning --is grounds for extracting more concessions."
Meaning they have created more ways and more reasons for developers to hire consultants and have more reasons for developers to make donations or contributions as they await approval of their projects before the City of Los Angeles.
CLICK READ MORE FOR SOME STUFF THAT'S GONNA GET ZD IN SOME HOT WATER I AM TOLD...BUT I DON'T LIKE TO HOLD THIS STUFF IN. ANY CLARIFICATIONS, PLEASE POST A COMMENT.
LA Times, "When the real estate market was soaring, some commissioners spoke in favor of getting as many concessions as possible out of developers, Jackson said. Now that the market is shaky, those same concessions may end up killing economic activity", Jackson said.
[THIS IS HOW YOU TANK THE LA ECONOMY LIKE AN ANVIL ON A HOUSE OF CARDS.]
"There were points that weren't completely negotiated. And there was all of this political pressure put on every member of the board." (said by Janis)
["There were points that weren't completely negotiated"?]
How did SHE know? How WOULD she know?
Did she take part in the negotiation too?
ZUMA DOGG WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LIST OF NEW PURE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE CITY THAT ARE GOT SUBSIDIES AND/OR ZONING CHANGES. (Same thing, right Mr. Perez?). INCLUDING THE TOTAL COST PER UNIT AND UNIT SIZE. (Including the value of the zoning change and/or free land). ALL SUBSIDIES AND BENEFITS FROM ALL AGENCIES COMBINES, PER UNIT ON EACH PROJECT.
SINCE IT'S PUBLIC MONEY, THAT INFO SHOULD BE AVAILABLE? WHERE DOES ZD GO TO PICK IT UP?
AND, does LAANE release a list of all its contributors?
More stories ….
THE FIGHT:
LA Times says, "Tenants of a building in downtown Los Angeles were furious over multiple evictions, and Commissioner Joan Ling wanted to quiz them about it. Commission President William Jackson did not."
Someone explained to ZD that, "Joan Ling wanted to quiz them" means that she wanted to help and give them a second chance to speak more. Next time, when ZD is at City Council and wants to speak for more than 2 minutes, just ask Eric to please quiz ZD.
Joan Ling is the (profitable) non-profit Affordable Housing expert in Santa Monica, is very close to LAANE, and is a good friend of Janis (Does anyone know if she is working on any non-profit LA projects?)
CRA Commission Chairman Bill Jackson is a lawyer. He is described to The Times (Zuma, not LA) as, "quite reasonable and moderate. He tries to use a balanced approach, but perhaps being too easy-going, sometimes gets taken advantage by fellow board members."
LA Times reports, "Jackson interrupted Ling, saying the commission needed to move on. Ling then cut off Jackson, saying she had a right to ask questions. The spat ended when Ling and another commissioner abruptly left the room to meet with the tenants. And that was just the public comment period."
As if these two commissioners (at least one is an affordable housing expert) don't already know what affordable housing tenants usually complain about. We could have told them: 1. Illegal rent increases and evictions 2. Unsatisfactory living conditions: things don't get fixed or repaired - both of which agency staff have no time to deal with 98% of the time. But the thing is, it is the same with most Affordable Housing. Some commissioners make it look like there are good guys and bad guys. But most of them are "bad".
LA Times, "At its most basic level, the commission has two distinct camps: three pro-business members who favor the free market and three left-leaning members who aren't afraid to demand new, sometimes unprecedented concessions from developers on behalf of renters and low-wage workers."
On behalf of renters and low-wage workers? (LOL!) Zuma Dogg is of the first amendment protected opinion that they are playing "tug-o-war" (deciding/arguing) over which Profitable Non-Profit or For-Profit Affordable Housing group they get to give the projects to.
Some commissioners use "renters and low-wage workers" as "warm and fuzzy" excuses to block projects from going to small or medium developers who aren't on the "cahoots" list of preferred developers.
However, the few big developers, in the know (who know the "ins and outs" tricks) will receive much less bamboozlement/more expeditiously/friendlier treatment from the board.
(Like only paying $900,000 to waive 30+ onsite affordable housing units at the Wilshire-Western MTA project? And when I say 30+, it's really 37.)
ANOTHER INCIDENT
LA Times, "The unpredictable meetings have infuriated some City Council members, who have begun intervening aggressively on behalf of projects in their districts. Last year, Councilman Bernard C. Parks was livid after commissioners demanded that a developer of student housing near USC pay its property taxes early, at $42,000 per month, into a fund for affordable housing."
$42,000 property tax per month? That's $504,000 a year!
Chris Pak, who the Times wrote about recently has a 2.6 Acre project sitting on County MTA land with a ground lease of only $350,000 a year. Chris Pak's project doesn't have to pay any property taxes on the land by leasing it. County MTA still owns it (so no one will have to pay any property tax on the land). And by leasing it at $350,000 a year, doesn't it cost less than the property taxes on the land value alone that Chris Pak's group would have to pay if they were given the land for free?
And did Chris Pak's group pay only $900,000 to waive 30+ affordable units?
BREAKDOWN ON THE MULTIPLE ROLES OF A HARDWORKING CRA COMMISONER
LA Times, "Parks said the deal would have scared other for-profit developers away from his South Los Angeles district, an area starved for investment. "We went to the mayor and said this has to be overturned, because these commissioners are behaving as though they are the developers," he said.
As though they are the developers! Some commissioners may be using certain practice. Besides acting like the developers, also as plaintiffs (defendants sometimes), the plaintiffs' (or defendants') lawyers who coach some people beforehand as witnesses or speakers speaking for or against projects, on one side of the bench.
Behind the scenes/curtain as the negotiators, dealmakers, or fundraisers (non-profits). And on the other side of the bench, as the jury, judges, and final decision makers! All by the same people!!! I can see Alfred E. Newman saying it now, "What Conflict of Interest?" They are non-profits!?!? They have no financial interest. Only to help the people on these "warm and fuzzy" issues. No conflict of interests here! Ignore the man behind the curtain.
Instead of providing checks and balances to the system, some of these commissioners seem to want to do it all by themselves and eliminate all checks and balances.
From another LA Times article, "But some protest bitterly in private and warn that as the market softens, they may opt to take their building projects elsewhere rather than knuckle under to what they see as extortion from Janis and like-minded colleagues."
Currrent LA Times article: … she said, "with the addition of Ling, a provider of affordable housing; John Perez, political director of United Food and Commercial Workers in Orange County; and Madeline Janis, who heads the L.A. Alliance for a New Economy, a group focused on improving the incomes of low-wage workers."
LAANE stands for "L.A. Alliance for a New Economy". But Zuma Dogg says it stands for "LA Alliance for a Neutered Economy".
They mentioned Janis last and tried to lower her profile? She is by far the "brain" and leader (a much better 2 or 3-way horse trader).
"John, Joan and Madeline are concerned about low-income people," Dennison said.
ZT hears that Dennison is LAANE's non-profit buddy.
Concerned about low-income people again? ("Warm and Fuzzy", y'all!)
If only ONE low-income person was really helped every time they make that proclamation, we wouldn't have any.
The LA Times article mentions (finally) that Perez is the mayor's cousin.
contact: zumadogg@gmail.com
Ben Frankilin said if he had more time, he would have written a shorter book. In this case, if my A.D.D. wasn't so bad, I may have been able to simplify this story. But it's a good starting point for those who care to induldge in what may be going on "behind the scenes" at the CRA as ZD reads "between the lines" of Zahniser's LA Times story on the shady as hell Redevelopment Agency.
FROM ZUMA'S INBOX: ZumaTimes.com (ZT) ZD wrote about Eli Broad's Grand Ave project and started talking about Profitable Affordable Housing on about 8/10/2007, so someone acted tough on 8/16/2007? Unfortunately, someone probably didn't read the detail, and predictably acted tough on a medium or small developer? Perhaps ZD caused the big fight there at CRA?
Zuma Times follow-up on:
Divided agency guides L.A. growth
By David Zahniser, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 4, 2007
Are they having a "cat fight" at CRA over (profitable) non-profit affordable housing?
by Zuma Dogg
MAN, do I wish I was Bewitched so I could wiggle my nose and have a Jurassic Park dinosaur eat the whole damn CRA. But the corruption would probably give the dinosaur acid reflux. I'll try and simplify this later, but this should allow those in the know to add some additional info. Most of you won't give a hoot about this. BUT IF YOU WORK FOR A NEWSPAPER, MAYBE YOU CAN DO SOMETHING WITH THIS.
ZumaTimes.com (ZT) recently wrote about Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (perhaps along with LAANE) being soft with big developers such as Chris Pak (paying only $900,000 to waive 30+ affordable units?), while LA Times writes this article about how LAANE is being so tough with other small or medium developers; who either don't have the "in" connections; who didn't contribute to the right people; or who haven't hired the right consultants; or who don't understand that they have to pre-negotiate with LAANE and know to go to LAANE first -- not just to CRA staff or Council Office.
Zuma Dogg is concerned they are more (only) concerned about maximizing profits for the (profitable) non-profit affordable housing developers who are either related to them; buddies of theirs or have hired certain consultants or have made certain donations.
LA Times, "Historically, the redevelopment agency made such demands only of developers who received direct cash subsidies. But these days, the left bloc contends that any decision that benefits a developer financially -- an increase in height for a building, a reduction in open space around condos, a change in zoning --is grounds for extracting more concessions."
Meaning they have created more ways and more reasons for developers to hire consultants and have more reasons for developers to make donations or contributions as they await approval of their projects before the City of Los Angeles.
CLICK READ MORE FOR SOME STUFF THAT'S GONNA GET ZD IN SOME HOT WATER I AM TOLD...BUT I DON'T LIKE TO HOLD THIS STUFF IN. ANY CLARIFICATIONS, PLEASE POST A COMMENT.
LA Times, "When the real estate market was soaring, some commissioners spoke in favor of getting as many concessions as possible out of developers, Jackson said. Now that the market is shaky, those same concessions may end up killing economic activity", Jackson said.
[THIS IS HOW YOU TANK THE LA ECONOMY LIKE AN ANVIL ON A HOUSE OF CARDS.]
"There were points that weren't completely negotiated. And there was all of this political pressure put on every member of the board." (said by Janis)
["There were points that weren't completely negotiated"?]
How did SHE know? How WOULD she know?
Did she take part in the negotiation too?
ZUMA DOGG WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LIST OF NEW PURE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE CITY THAT ARE GOT SUBSIDIES AND/OR ZONING CHANGES. (Same thing, right Mr. Perez?). INCLUDING THE TOTAL COST PER UNIT AND UNIT SIZE. (Including the value of the zoning change and/or free land). ALL SUBSIDIES AND BENEFITS FROM ALL AGENCIES COMBINES, PER UNIT ON EACH PROJECT.
SINCE IT'S PUBLIC MONEY, THAT INFO SHOULD BE AVAILABLE? WHERE DOES ZD GO TO PICK IT UP?
AND, does LAANE release a list of all its contributors?
More stories ….
THE FIGHT:
LA Times says, "Tenants of a building in downtown Los Angeles were furious over multiple evictions, and Commissioner Joan Ling wanted to quiz them about it. Commission President William Jackson did not."
Someone explained to ZD that, "Joan Ling wanted to quiz them" means that she wanted to help and give them a second chance to speak more. Next time, when ZD is at City Council and wants to speak for more than 2 minutes, just ask Eric to please quiz ZD.
Joan Ling is the (profitable) non-profit Affordable Housing expert in Santa Monica, is very close to LAANE, and is a good friend of Janis (Does anyone know if she is working on any non-profit LA projects?)
CRA Commission Chairman Bill Jackson is a lawyer. He is described to The Times (Zuma, not LA) as, "quite reasonable and moderate. He tries to use a balanced approach, but perhaps being too easy-going, sometimes gets taken advantage by fellow board members."
LA Times reports, "Jackson interrupted Ling, saying the commission needed to move on. Ling then cut off Jackson, saying she had a right to ask questions. The spat ended when Ling and another commissioner abruptly left the room to meet with the tenants. And that was just the public comment period."
As if these two commissioners (at least one is an affordable housing expert) don't already know what affordable housing tenants usually complain about. We could have told them: 1. Illegal rent increases and evictions 2. Unsatisfactory living conditions: things don't get fixed or repaired - both of which agency staff have no time to deal with 98% of the time. But the thing is, it is the same with most Affordable Housing. Some commissioners make it look like there are good guys and bad guys. But most of them are "bad".
LA Times, "At its most basic level, the commission has two distinct camps: three pro-business members who favor the free market and three left-leaning members who aren't afraid to demand new, sometimes unprecedented concessions from developers on behalf of renters and low-wage workers."
On behalf of renters and low-wage workers? (LOL!) Zuma Dogg is of the first amendment protected opinion that they are playing "tug-o-war" (deciding/arguing) over which Profitable Non-Profit or For-Profit Affordable Housing group they get to give the projects to.
Some commissioners use "renters and low-wage workers" as "warm and fuzzy" excuses to block projects from going to small or medium developers who aren't on the "cahoots" list of preferred developers.
However, the few big developers, in the know (who know the "ins and outs" tricks) will receive much less bamboozlement/more expeditiously/friendlier treatment from the board.
(Like only paying $900,000 to waive 30+ onsite affordable housing units at the Wilshire-Western MTA project? And when I say 30+, it's really 37.)
ANOTHER INCIDENT
LA Times, "The unpredictable meetings have infuriated some City Council members, who have begun intervening aggressively on behalf of projects in their districts. Last year, Councilman Bernard C. Parks was livid after commissioners demanded that a developer of student housing near USC pay its property taxes early, at $42,000 per month, into a fund for affordable housing."
$42,000 property tax per month? That's $504,000 a year!
Chris Pak, who the Times wrote about recently has a 2.6 Acre project sitting on County MTA land with a ground lease of only $350,000 a year. Chris Pak's project doesn't have to pay any property taxes on the land by leasing it. County MTA still owns it (so no one will have to pay any property tax on the land). And by leasing it at $350,000 a year, doesn't it cost less than the property taxes on the land value alone that Chris Pak's group would have to pay if they were given the land for free?
And did Chris Pak's group pay only $900,000 to waive 30+ affordable units?
BREAKDOWN ON THE MULTIPLE ROLES OF A HARDWORKING CRA COMMISONER
LA Times, "Parks said the deal would have scared other for-profit developers away from his South Los Angeles district, an area starved for investment. "We went to the mayor and said this has to be overturned, because these commissioners are behaving as though they are the developers," he said.
As though they are the developers! Some commissioners may be using certain practice. Besides acting like the developers, also as plaintiffs (defendants sometimes), the plaintiffs' (or defendants') lawyers who coach some people beforehand as witnesses or speakers speaking for or against projects, on one side of the bench.
Behind the scenes/curtain as the negotiators, dealmakers, or fundraisers (non-profits). And on the other side of the bench, as the jury, judges, and final decision makers! All by the same people!!! I can see Alfred E. Newman saying it now, "What Conflict of Interest?" They are non-profits!?!? They have no financial interest. Only to help the people on these "warm and fuzzy" issues. No conflict of interests here! Ignore the man behind the curtain.
Instead of providing checks and balances to the system, some of these commissioners seem to want to do it all by themselves and eliminate all checks and balances.
From another LA Times article, "But some protest bitterly in private and warn that as the market softens, they may opt to take their building projects elsewhere rather than knuckle under to what they see as extortion from Janis and like-minded colleagues."
Currrent LA Times article: … she said, "with the addition of Ling, a provider of affordable housing; John Perez, political director of United Food and Commercial Workers in Orange County; and Madeline Janis, who heads the L.A. Alliance for a New Economy, a group focused on improving the incomes of low-wage workers."
LAANE stands for "L.A. Alliance for a New Economy". But Zuma Dogg says it stands for "LA Alliance for a Neutered Economy".
They mentioned Janis last and tried to lower her profile? She is by far the "brain" and leader (a much better 2 or 3-way horse trader).
"John, Joan and Madeline are concerned about low-income people," Dennison said.
ZT hears that Dennison is LAANE's non-profit buddy.
Concerned about low-income people again? ("Warm and Fuzzy", y'all!)
If only ONE low-income person was really helped every time they make that proclamation, we wouldn't have any.
The LA Times article mentions (finally) that Perez is the mayor's cousin.
contact: zumadogg@gmail.com
Labels: mayor antonio villaraigosa
Posted by Zuma Dogg @ 9/07/2007 04:41:00 PM
30 Comments:
.
Forget hoping for press coverage.
It sounds like we need the Feds... can we get the guys who just broke the New Jersey case?
As a result of the recent market turmoil many of Countrywide's competitors have exited the business permanently, which will provide Countrywide with the opportunity to gain greater market share and improve Their margins. Countrywide Bank is also a beneficiary of this environment and is seeing increased opportunity to grow its investment portfolio with better quality loans and higher yielding loans. While tighter credit standards and soft housing market conditions will result in the reduction of their origination volumes, their servicing portfolio will, however, benefit from slower prepayment speeds resulting in greater earnings from their servicing sector. And most importantly, operating their core business out of Countrywide Bank will enhance Countrywide's stability, economics, competitiveness, and overall strength.
The most important aspect of Countrywide Home Loans strategic plan that they have implemented was to migrate their residential lending business under Countrywide Bank. This will materially enhance and strengthen their business model and will deliver tangible benefits to Countrywide including greater and more stable liquidity, reduced borrowing costs, and greater operational efficiencies among other advantages. They have strengthened Countrywide's capital base by securing a $2 billion strategic equity investment from Bank of America, which was also an important vote of confidence in Countrywide by one of the largest and most respected companies in the world. This has been very helpful in stemming negative perceptions about Countrywide's stability, which was another important reason for the investment. Countrywide has made many changes to their product guidelines to ensure that they are only originating loans which can be sold into the secondary market or which otherwise qualify under the investment criteria for Countrywide Bank's loan investment portfolio. In connection with these changes, they are no longer originating any subprime loans other than those eligible for sale or securitization under programs supported by the GSE's (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac) and FHA. It is important to note however that in spite of product guideline changes, Countrywide continues to offer among the broadest and most competitive product menus in the industry. Nyuck.
Is CRA meeting broadcast on Channel 35 too? Got to watch it from now on.
LA Times, "When the real estate market was soaring, some commissioners spoke in favor of getting as many concessions as possible out of developers, Jackson said. Now that the market is shaky, those same concessions may end up killing economic activity", Jackson said.
From another LA Times article, "But some protest bitterly in private and warn that as the market softens, they may opt to take their building projects elsewhere rather than knuckle under to what they see as extortion from Janis and like-minded colleagues.”
True! These so called advocacy groups put up so much barriers for small guys to get anything done in the city.
The developers are leaving the city that is full of these advocacy groups when the market softens, as is now.
And they won’t come back for a long long time until the next cycle when the housing shortage becomes so severe and the market so hot again that they would even want to deal with these advocacy groups again.
That's what the lefties can do. But the NIMBY's will be happy. No more development, no more taxes, no more jobs, the city can just die. You can only screw the developers so far; there is a balance that takes someone with the ability to find it. Perez's swing vote actually doesn't sound bad under the circumstances, whether or not he's a certain Mayor's relative.
I found that SFR sales run on an 18 to 19 year cycle with an 18 month slop. As Getty said; "Buy low, sell high". I have studied many years and many places and know this to be true. What I have not learned is to anticipate a SFR (100x100) with net as value as a multiple. I think it is 2x prime is "IN-EXPENSIVE" or "Affordable" as opposed TO 4 to 6 X "LUXURY" depending on the terrain. Anyone can make a lot of money for the developer and the owner.
Pitiful.
CRA is as corrupt as our politicans. They need to be audited and we need to find out about all the contracts and millions of dollars they're pouring into so called "non profits." Where the hell our the council members on this issue????? WE know their lame asses but NOT one is speaking out
6:53amam=chrish
When is the formerly respected, now pitiful Villar-flunkee William Bratton, going to order his officers to start impounding again the shit box cars of unlicensed drivers?? Meoowww.
Memo to Bratton, you don't need to kick this to the Police Commission, you don't need to listen to the radical pro-illegal alien lover Gil Cedillo, the citizens of this rotting city demand you impound cars of unlicensed drivers NOW !!
If ONE person gets hurt because your cops didn't impound one of these cars, the blood is on YOUR hands, and the city should get the pants (or in your case Bratton, the dress) sued off them.
Here's what Bratton said in 2006:
"We've argued for many years that when police pay attention to minor offenses — such as prostitution, graffiti, aggressive panhandling — they can reduce fear, strengthen communities, and prevent serious crime."
Well, Billy boy, unlicensed driving is alot more than a minor offense. You better do the right thing and fix this HUGE "broken window" NOW!!
Hooboy, another KKKFI listener mixing apples and oranges...
The fight was about a CRA loan to rehab an old hotel and the complains about eviction. Right?
Aren’t most of those downtown old hotels infested with drug dealers, drug users and plagued with crimes? I am sure some innocent, working, or old and disabled people live in there too and they should stay. But how could you rehab those hotels without having some evictions?
After reading Zuma’s analysis, the earlier Downtown News article “CRA Launches $50 million SRO Grab” (would use more than $50 million) makes a lot more sense now.
On Aug 23 (one week after the 8/16 fight), at a little-publicized special meeting, the CRA Board of Commissioners approved the plan aimed at loaning city grant money to local nonprofits to help them buy, and eventually rehabilitate, some of the most affordable and shabbily maintained residences (7 old hotels) on Skid Row.
As if someone is saying: “Don’t fight, don’t fight over that $8 million.” or “OK, you win, you win, even after losing the vote”.
“Here is $50 million or more to buy 7 more old hotels for your local nonprofit friends so that everyone can play. OK?”
Every time the affordable housing groups (for-profit, non-profit or whatever, they are all profitable) fight, they will all win, only the low-come people get used and shortchanged, and all tax payers lose big time.
Actually Jerk Hoff, a Kevin James listener, and your Cal State education is showing again.
Now drink some more Kool Aid.
Y'know (wipes another tear away), I just hate it when people make fun of my name. It is so difficult to blog and cry at the same time....
(sniffs)
Can I borrow the sleeve of your white robe?
...btw, who is Kevin James?
Anonymous said...
Actually Jerk Hoff, a Kevin James listener, and your Cal State education is showing again.
Now drink some more Kool Aid.
THE RESPONSE,
Jack Hoff said...
Y'know (wipes another tear away), I just hate it when people make fun of my name. It is so difficult to blog and cry at the same time....
(sniffs)
Can I borrow the sleeve of your white robe?
...btw, who is Kevin James?
This brings to mind two Goliaths beating each other over the head with clubs, both believing they can wear the other down with might. Yet neither has even so much as raised a bump on the other’s head. Someone’s skull is going to have to crack sooner or later.
Yes, "epic" comes to mind, doesn't it?
tToday I was in a crowded Budget rent-a-car agency on Sepulveda in Encino when a young woman stormed in to rent a car....screaming about the fact that this is the 3rd time an illegal alien with no insurance (naturally) crashed into her car causing many$$$ of damage and resulted in her having to rent a car...again (third time)!
This woman was SOOOO MAD...she couldn't stop screaming about the illegals and how they are destroying our city! She is only one of millions in this city who can't believe they are allowed to illegally operate a vehicle!
The don't know how to drive; they drive drunk; and they usually RUN away from the scene! They do not belong in this country. Period!
It's all because of greedy developers, corrupt city officials, and creating an unsustainable tax base. The house of cards is going to collapse...right along with the housing market in CA!
Stop the insanity!
Anyone care to elaborate on the latest buzz word...'SHARED HOUSING' for those hard working families who can't afford to stay in their homes???
Just want to see if everyone is paying attention to the not-so-subtle innuendos coming out of our erstwhile leaders.
Per the Times today, Bratton/LAPD are going to start impounding the cars of unlicensed drivers again, and MAV is in solid agreement. So he's going against Huizar/ Hahn on this one, good for him. He IS the mayor of the whole city, after all.
And the article quotes a West L A Division top cop who says that 46% of the hit-and-runs in WLA are caused by those without a license. Don't know the statistics in Encino.
Huizar and Alarcon and Hahn should face some consequences for their pandering.
Meanwhile, Carol Sobel wants to add "thousands." that is everyone who marched on May 1st just about including the agitators, to her class action lawsuit. Rocky wants $1.1 million in a fund to START sorting through all the lawsuits.
Of course, Sobel denies there were any agitators -- in the D N two days ago, she claimed that no one pushed that cop off his motorcycle or threw bottles at the cops, that the cops are all lying!
They march again on Sept. 12!!!
You can bet there will be lots of ICE around, mayor or no mayor.
Are there any illegal aliens in the CRA, if there are any illegal alien CRA commisioners we need to impound their cars and send them back to Mexico.
9:11 -- I dunno about the CRA, but I'm giving odds there's a few in the mayor's immigration office.
Is Mirthala illegal?
Why the hell doesn't one lazy ass reporter who has balls report how much money these damn illegal marches are costing the city????? They sure as hell report all the shit on the illegals and clowncil members sure as hell are fast with action to support illegals but the hell with the legal residents of this city.
HAHN, HUIZAR, ALARCON, CEDILLO are jackasses. They jump to help illegals but nothing in their own districts. Why is Huizar's city staff working full time on the county parade happening today? They have been helping Molina's staff for weeks.
Not that I care about the illegal discussion or not, but the way that it would be on topic here would be if some of you are saying that illegals live in affordable housing and we are building more for them. Do they? Are we? Can illegals stay in affordable housing and what kind of priority do they have getting in?
I don't have an opinion about the illegals yet.
And Cedillo is SUCH an esteemed member of our clowncil?
Oh boo hoo, little blondie in Encino got hit by an illegal. Waah.
She's a valley girl, she's a valley girl.. gag me.
Anyone know of a couple of illegals who would please hit 8:27?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home