Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Saturday, February 21, 2009

LA Times Endorses Ron Galperin for City Council

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jeff Millman" <jm@jeffreymillman.com>
Sent: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 10:19:44 Pacific Standard Time
Subject: RELEASE: LA Times Endorses Ron Galperin for City Council

February 21, 2009 (800) 709-7532

LA Times Endorses Ron Galperin for City Council

Today, the Los Angeles Times endorsed Ron Galperin's campaign to
represent the fifth district in the Los Angeles City Council. Here is
an excerpt from today's editorial endorsement:

"The Times endorses Galperin for the 5th District City Council seat.

Like the other candidates, Galperin places the needs of his
constituents at the top of his agenda. But he also has a keen interest
in improving accountability and fiscal prudence in City Hall, and
that's something that all council members must grapple with, for their
own sakes as well as for their constituents. The 5th District has a
tradition of electing people -- Zev Yaroslavsky and Mike Feuer come to
mind -- who served their constituents while also leading on issues of
citywide concern. Galperin has the best potential to follow in that

The full editorial is available at

The Times editorial adds to the momentum in Galperin's campaign for
fiscal reform at city hall. On Thursday, he was endorsed by former
Los Angeles city controller Rick Tuttle. And this week's filing with
the city Ethics commission shows Galperin's campaign has raised the
most contributions and has the most cash on hand compared to the other

Galperin is the business candidate in the race. He has started
several successful small businesses and was an editor at the Los
Angeles Business Journal. Galperin will work to make the city operate
more like a business by collecting its unpaid debt, cutting waste and
operating more efficiently so it can better provide services in
neighborhoods, including more police and road paving. Ron has served
on his neighborhood council and on the West Los Angeles Police
Advisory Board. He lives in Coldwater Canyon.



Anonymous Anonymous said:

A major coup for Ron Galperin. The Fifth District reads.

One can't help think that this was done to further the Times' anti-Labor bent. Which candidate is endorsed by Labor? Paul Koretz.

Which candidate is most likely to take votes from Paul Koretz? Ron Galperin. Galperin, like Koretz, is Jewish and male.

Further, Galperin is likely to siphon from Koretz's strong gay support. (Galperin being gay; Koretz, though straight, having strong support from the community from his time in WeHo.)

Look what the Times DID mention about Koretz. Allegations of carpetbagging. It thus "praised" him by defending him from an allegation. A very backhanded "compliment" that served to publicize the allegations it was trying to defend. Questionable.

Thus solving the mystery of why the Times went with Galperin.

This is not to say that Galperin is not a strong candidate. The Times mentioned all the articulate, solid, intelligent candidates. Galperin, Robyn Ritter-Simon, and Paul Koretz.

Notice the endorsement board of the Los Angeles Times was NOT impressed by Adeena Bleich. Her "like, vote for me, because like, it's my turn" vapidness must have shown through.

February 21, 2009 11:17 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And endorsed Antonio, although tepidly, saying it was pointless to even present the other candidates, and didn't mention them. (What, no shout-out to Saltzburg or Walter, even?) They just hope he'll plug away at his issues a little harder. He's duly in DC working Obama, and while I think the whole trillion- dollar giveaway rounds are insane, and way too little trickles back to California which always sends far mroe to DC than gets back, I figure if the rest of them are out there for handouts, we deserve more than our share. Like him or hate him, at least Villar is more well-known than most mayors.

February 21, 2009 1:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Like the other candidates, Galperin places the needs of his constituents at the top of his agenda. But he also has a keen interest in improving accountability and fiscal prudence in City Hall, and that's something that all council members must grapple with, for their own sakes as well as for their constituents."

Well boys and girls, that sure sounds good. But if it's true, how can Galperin support Measure B? The City Council process was so abused even the casual observers have figured it out. To support Measure B is to dignify the travesty to accountability and fiscal prudence we elect our council members for.

February 21, 2009 2:12 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Message from a Concerned Citizen:

Ron Galperin, who is a columnist for the Los Angeles Times, has accepted the endorsement of his employer in the race for the 5th District in the City of Los Angeles. Any ethical journalist would never pull such a stunt! Furthermore, if Ron Galperin has any ethical standards, he would decline such an endorsement because it creates a false impression in the minds of voters as to his qualifications. Galperin’s name is on over 270 articles in the L.A. Times archives. This is another attempt of Galperin’s self-aggrandizing, grandstanding and self-congratulatory rhetoric and it has no place in our city government! Elections are about the people and the setting of public policy. Galperin has no experience in government and will need years of on-the-job training. How can we trust a candidate who uses these kind of tactics?

February 21, 2009 3:05 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

The last comment sounds like a spinner from another campaign.

I don't think I'm going to support Galperin but I don't see any issue with the fact that he wrote some articles for the LA Times.

February 21, 2009 3:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Another message from a Concerned Citizen:

Dear Mr. Higby. With all due respect, my post is not “spun” and it does not come from another campaign, but rather my conscience. I am not into “spin” but I am into being an educated voter. The L.A. Times should not be playing politics. They should be reporting the news. I am an avid reader of the Times, but I think ever since Tribune Entertainment had to file for bankruptcy and the Times went from 1200 employees to 470, the quality of the paper has diminished. I think it is a desperate attempt on the part of the L.A. Times to endorse Ron Galperin so they can retain not only their readership, but also have a stake in a political candidate. We have serious economic problems, a budget crisis, people out of work, losing their home, public safety issues and the Times is going to endorse Ron Galperin of all people? I know I cannot afford to wait for someone to get his or her bearings at City Hall. Can you?

February 21, 2009 4:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:05 sounds like a spinner from the Vahedi camp.

They've tried and failed two times in a row to put him into the office, even going so far as to rig the candidate "debates" with questions for the audience that were designed to make him come out on top, Galperin fairly low, and the others way lower than they merit too.

This same group also held the invitation-only City Attorney candidate debate that was rigged against Weiss whether he showed up or not, so he was smart not to -- now they're claiming he doesn't debate but that's a lie, he's a very sharp debater, just knows who those folks were like we all do. They fed Trutanuch all the dirt they collected on Weiss in their failed recall campaign -- it's no coincidence his mailers look the same as their recall site and even reference it often, with fake claims and numbers.

Whether or not you like Weiss and Galperin, their manipulations to place "their" candidates in office shouldn't be allowed to work. You don't want people beholden to them and who can't work with City Hall to get things done. You need a realist with vision and both these candidates strike me as that although Galperin is untested yet.

February 21, 2009 4:08 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

I would rather have someone who needs a little time to get their bearings at City Hall than someone who is so deep incestous involved with the kleptocracy and special interests.

Again, I'm not supporting Galperin but piss me off enough and I might.

February 21, 2009 5:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The Amerian camp is starting to put out the word on Trutanuch, that he's not only the worst kind of lawyer, the kind who sold out from a brief stint as prosecutor for three decades as a hired gun for the scum of the earth, but what everyone in the DA's office knows:

that Cooley's hoping to replace himself with his good friend Nuch when he retires in 4 years. Then he could clean up and hide any messes Cooley leaves behind. And continue any cozy relationships.

They hope to use the City Attorney's job as a "learning experience" and win or lose, this campaign has been a way to get him name recognition while he had none. His dirty tactics are par for the course, what he's used to. Should he win, he could meanwhile clean up any messes his buddy and client Rocky leaves, too. Like what's with the worker's comp stuff that he won't let Laura see? What else is he hiding?

Career prosecutors are starting to get fed up with the way the media and public has bought Trutanuch's self-promotions, and may go after Trutanuch instead of just Weiss, who is the far lesser evil, since being a career public servant and prosecutor who's shown where he stands and has held steady in the face of even strong criticism when he feels he's doing the right thing, is a whole lot better than someone who's lying about who he really is and what he's done for 30 years.

I agree with poster who blasts the Times' endorsements for being bizarrely skewed and politically motivated: does new publisher Eddy Hartenstein, who's cleaned house there and not for the better, have ties to Cooley?

Amerian lacks the depth of experience or gravitas to lead the dept., and couldn't bring it the state and national support that Weiss and maybe Nuch even could -- but Nuch is widely being scorned in the legal community as everything career prosecutors motivated by "the good fight" hate.

February 21, 2009 5:39 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

That's why I'm supporting NOEL WEISS for City Attorney. We don't need candidates who protect other elected officials or folks who bring "attention" to LA.

We need someone who is dedicated to the law, to transparency, accountabiilty and to having the City Attorney's office truly serve the community.

NOEL WEISS is the only candidate talking about that, he has extensive experience with City Hall, he's a fine attorney and has the highest ethical background.

February 21, 2009 5:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That shows what kind of an idiot you are, higby.

Someone pisses you off about a particular candidate, so much so that you'd support the candidate due to that one idiot?

This completely drowns your credibility. Why not make that your headline on your front page? "Piss me off about a candidate, and I'll support the candidate regardless of their position."


February 21, 2009 6:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Times said they wanted "change" over experience as a reason not to endorse Koretz, plus implied he wasn't obsequious enough, which Galperin is likely to have been. I'm not keen on Koretz' time at WeHo city hall, and it's true he's a carpetbagger unlike the others.

But the paper's a shell of its former self, a joke -- the Times editorial board has been musical chairs and Jim Newton out, Hiller in as publisher, then Hiller out and Hartenstein Hatchett Man and Newton back. The best reporters all being let go, and they don't know squat from neighborhoods.

Have to do a big mapping project instead of news. A mapping project that could have been solved if they'd just taken the NC maps, which were drawn based on careful deliberation.

February 21, 2009 6:35 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

6:31 don't be such a clown. You really have a hard time getting it don't you?

February 21, 2009 8:02 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

6:31 - let me be more clear for you as your years of milking the status quo have disabled your cognitive abilities.

I may be supporting candidate A over candidate B. Though I support candidate A, candidate B doesn't appear to be a bad choice either. Candidate A, in moments of total insecurity, goes over the top in attacking candidate B. That demonstrates a certain something about candidate A; perhaps they may not after all have the temperament to be in political life. All things being equal, I revisit candidate B who I have found to be for the most part acceptable and switch my support to candidate B.

All because candidate A couldn't keep their mouth shut.


February 21, 2009 8:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:05, etc.

The Times shouldn't be involved in playing politics?

You wouldn't have said that if they had endorsed your candidate. Also, newspapers have been endorsing candidates since the beginning of newspapers. You act like this is the first time the Times has endorsed anyone.

Galperin doesn't work for the Times and doesn't write articles. He writes guest columns. Although he has never held public office, these columns allow the voter to have a good understanding of what he believes in, his values, and his vision for the future. Others just make up crap at election time.

February 21, 2009 9:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


February 21, 2009 9:51 PM  

Anonymous Susan Rocha said:

Jesus Rosas for City Council in District 1.

Ed Reyes only shows up for photo op's & funerals. Our community has had too many shootings and no progress.

February 22, 2009 8:27 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Before the Times went bankrupt and became what is now a slow and dragging newpaper, they endorsed candidates that could do good for the city for which they had actual reasons. Galperin's endorsment is a unsubstanciated. On what basis is Galperin a better candidate than anyone else? It's redicolous! And if he were a guest columnist, he would still have to work with the Times editor and you're telling me he's sumitted 200+ articles for free? Sure.

February 22, 2009 9:41 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Orlov in his Sausage Factory blog puts Koretz's endorsments from the Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence and other councilmembers way above the Times' in terms of value, and notes they were also strong for Ritter-Simon. The Times' "in your face, imcumbents" attitude has made it pretty irrelevant, and it's only the endorsement of wishy- washy opinion editor, here and gone and here again Jim Newton, not the City Desk. They don't even seem to take those endorsements seriously.

I'm not saying this because of sour grapes over Koretz -- I don't like Koretz and his endorsements from the most liberal of the current and former councilmembers as well as two-faced/ double-speak Zine are a negative for me. He helped increase traffic while at West Hollywood City Hall while that city pointedly ignored the anger of CD5 residents surrounding it and in the hills above, who were impacted by the traffic. Now he wants to represent them.

The Weekly basically brushed off him off as a puffy-faced lifetime pol who has little to show for himself, but they played up Vahedi, which the Times didn't even mention, except implicitly as someone who was so beholden to NIMBYs that he vowed never to make a decision unless one of them was with him and the Times says, being afraid to act without unanimous support from these NIMBYs would mean "gridlock on the streets and at City Hall."

The Weekly doesn't even take note of Koretz's heavy list of endorsements from players, brushing him off as someone who "isn't getting traction in the blogosphere." Like they're two separate universes, with mutual cntempt for the other. (By that logic, zuma dogg/ jjohn and the other gadflies debating today are "more important" which is nuts.)

Just shows that what one paper thinks is great, another thinks is bad, and both papers and many blogs are determined to have an "anyone but the experienced pol" attitude, but beyond that don't agree on who that should be.

Times selecting Galperin because of his "enthusiasm" and "fresh ideas" seems goofy. They're right that he's better than the Weekly's choice Vahedi, but other than that, it's pretty arbitrary and is clearly just one among many types of endorsements, making it downright irrelevant to elections in many circles. Not what it used to be.

February 22, 2009 4:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

In response to this last post, to be clear, the Daily News and the LA Weekly have not made any endorsements yet.

The LA Weekly didn't make an editorial endorsement, but its article [http://www.laweekly.com/2009-02-19/news/fight-for-l-a-39-s-ritzy-council-district-5/] oddly gave more ink to Vahedi implying he was somehow more quirky than the rest of the candidates, although really everyone running is a neighborhood candidate, except for Koretz, who just moved into the district. The LA Weekly article would have you believe that certain candidates were running against some powerful machine...of course, none exists in this race or the fifth district.

The Daily News hasn't yet endorsed. The Sausage Factory post, however, did not make any comparisons between the endorsement of certain politicians or small-time political organizations and the Los Angeles Times. While Orlov writes for a rival newspaper, he would never underestimate the influence of the Times' endorsement.

While the LA Times is certainly in decline, there should be no doubt that for a low-profile and low-turnout race, in an older, upscale district, it's by far the most significant endorsement in the race.

The Times will make a huge difference as voters make their decisions this week and next. It will also help Galperin in fund raising. I would imagine Galperin will be sending out a few pieces of mail with the Times' endorsement, if he hasn't already!

February 22, 2009 11:18 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The 4:02 post never said the Weekly endorsed, but refers to the extensive (and only) article about the CD5 race which implied its clear favorites and least liked candidate (Koretz as latter) in how it portrayed them. Koretz supporters feel it was very biased and mean about his appearance -- while Vahedi got way the most positive hype. (I'd imagine Jill Stewart would support his extremist anti-development position.)

For an unknown like Galperin this will mean a lot more especially with the older voter who relies on papers and tv, than it will to a known candidate like Koretz, who has his own base already. Many who DO follow the elections are very disgusted with the Times Op Ed Editor's clear bias against the experienced candidates like Koretz. Like him or not, the fact that someone has a record while someone else like Galperin nothing but promises, is significant to any rational person. Even Obama had a record as a Senator -- although not as much as some, he wasn't running strictly on words. They have also often been wrong. Koretz is not a huge name, though, and is more known to the establishment than the public.

The point re: the Weekly was also that the writer seemed to totally discredit that and put maybe disproportionate weight on their standing in the blogosphere (where Galperin isn't a blip, either).

February 22, 2009 11:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I agree with 11:49PM

Because this is not a binary choice, I'd imagine that Koretz then with his base of support, however small, and Galperin, with his LA Times endorsement, would make the runoff.

February 23, 2009 12:32 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Koretz will be in the runoff. He is the right candidate to get elected to CD5. I don't want to see a newbie candidate flounder around trying to learn how to become a politician. Koretz is a public servant who knows how to help the people and his humane and environmental record is outstanding. I must say there are some very good arguments being made for the others, but the city's problems are getting worse and I'm not prepared to place my trust in the hands of a novice. Galperin strikes me as an elitist. How is he going to help senior citizens and people living below the poverty line? They live in CD5 as well. My vote goes to Koretz.

February 23, 2009 10:25 AM  

Anonymous Citizen against liars 09 said:

I think it is interesting that the one candidate who actually has worked for the city for 4 years, and has many city contacts and experience, is ignored because of her age. In the great state of California age disrcimination is illegal, but that doesn't carry over to politics and endorsements.
And for anonymous, I personally know Adeena and she has never used the word like, unless it was something she enjoyed, she didn't grow up in the valley she grew up in CT.
Given how bad our city is run, and how bad a deficit, wouldn't it make sense to vote someone with new idea's, that isn't part of the same old political machine.
Finally, i think it is appalling that Mr. Koretz could move into a district just to run for an office. Prior to running he also had no job, then surprising a director position (what he put on his ballot) working for the labor movement (Jewish Labor Committee). FYI the previous director is endorsing Adeena.
Believe what you want, call each other names, watch as politicians lie without citizen fact checking. In the end Adeena is truly the best candidate for CD5.Beacuse she actually cares about the people and this city, not polotics.

February 25, 2009 1:51 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home