Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Zuma Dogg - Garcetti Showdown Set

Zuma Dogg reports that Los Angeles City Council President Eric Garcetti has banned him from speaking at the next two City Council meetings allegedly for Dogg's use of the word "loser" which Garcetti reportedly took offense to.  This sets the scene for a First Amendment showdown between the Council President and the infamous blogger-gadfly at next Tuesday's Council meeting.  Read the rest of the story at Zuma Dogg's blog.

Labels: , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:

The Los Angeles City Council, that includes Councilmembers Eric Garcetti, Ed Reyes, Wendy Greuel, Dennis Zine, Tom LaBonge, Jack Weiss, Tony Cardenas, Richard Alarcon, Bernard Parks, Jan Perry, Herb Wesson, Bill Rosendahl, Greig Smith, and Jose Huizar are DEVIANT. Councilwoman Janice Hahn also should be included with the bunch of self serving politicians because many times she is part of the problem, instead of the solution.

With a 3.8 million population, City Council should always allow the public to comment regardless if 100 committee meetings have been held. The United States of America, including Angelenos, like to think Los Angeles City Council wants to encourage participatory democracy at all levels, specifically at chambers.

The Los Angeles City Council needs to be reminded that they are PUBLIC SERVANTS and are paid $178,789 salaries by the same people council is constantly shunning.

Here are some examples of the Los Angeles City Council at work.

1. The City Council claims that the item(s) before City Council have been fully vetted at the committee meetings, which many times this does not happen. Just take a look at the Ad Hoc Committee on Gang Violence and Youth Development where most often it is chaired by the solo/lone councilmember, Councilman Tony Cardenas. Where are the other Councilmembers Herb Wesson, Janice Hahn, Jose Huizar, and Ed Reyes? Is this what City Council calls fully vetted?

2. The council constantly speaks on non Agenda items. June 9, 2009 at the end of public comment Alarcon spoke 50 plus words on a non agenda item and Council President Eric Garcettii, who should be setting the example, spoke over 90 words on a non agenda item. This is only one of many examples. Where is the deputy city attorney?

a. For Mr. Zuma Dogg haters, many L.A. City employees attended this City Council meeting for the first time and were astonished to watch how council was not paying attention to the speakers, it happens to the best.

3. The council never caters to special interest groups. When a USC representative came before council for a conditional use permit allowing a sign permit, he had a picture with him showing where the sign would be placed. He was directed to place the picture on the first pew. The cameras immediately zoomed directed at the picture while he spoke. Recently, a stakeholder brought a picture of the Autry Museum and was directed to place the picture in the first pew. She did as she was directed and never once where the cameras zoomed in on her picture while she spoke.

4. March 4, 2009 Councilmembers, Jose Huizar, Eric Garcetti, Ed Reyes, Wendy Greuel, and Tom LaBonge, introduced a resolution supporting Fair Election in El Savador where Los Angeles City Council is to monitor the EI Salvador presidential elections taking place on March 15, 2009 to ensure they are fair and transparent, free of intimidation, and that the decision of the voters and results of the elections will be respected.

The Los Angeles City Council needs to reevaluate their priorities.

Link: http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2009/09-0002-s26_reso_3-4-09.pdf

June 14, 2009 9:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The Showdown will go like this:


ERIK Garcetti: "Mr. Dogg, you are suspended for the next month!"

Final Score:
Erik Garcetti: 1
Zuma Dogg: 0

June 15, 2009 5:52 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I agree. They NEVER listen and Huizar is always looking at the broads...

June 15, 2009 8:26 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

9:05 Very well stated, but for the uninitiated, this is NOT all, by far, of the B.S. that would make Ron Kaye's idea on making pay cuts ESSENTIAL.

Gang violence, traffic problems, resources gobbled up and yet MORE development is the order of the day, and made a cinch if you add "more jobs" or "affordable housing" part of the language.

Just put that into your request, don't worry that demands on an announced understaffed LAPD and other city services that can't keep up with PRESENT DEMANDS is a reality. Ed Reyes needs more credit for development. Jose Huizar needs a downtown trolley and somewhere along the line, our city budget is belly-up like a dead cockroach, feet to the sky.

One idea to shape up the slugs at Council meetings: Change the camera views to pan CM's during speaker's comments. A split-screen would be ideal.

Garcetti, the enabler, is so full of it when he says, "We ARE paying attention, and we may be talking about the matter and viewing the speakers on the monitors we each have." Sure, and Jack Weiss is taking notes on speaker comments on his blackberry. Poor so-perfect Eric. You lie too much.

Just adjust the camera work and the truth shall set them free. All this double-standard enforcement of the "rules" and scoffing the Brown Act 50-word limit on Non-Agenda responses is the tip of the iceberg.

All the behind scenes lobbying is not questioned yet in this level of scrutiny. If you think the Brown Act quells that practice, then why do they have so many ex-insiders, like Richard Alatorre, hired as lobbyists? (And why did it take him a year before he finally registered as a lobbyist? He was just a "pal" before, dropping in to chat with new friends?) They are not there just to decorate the council chambers during meetings. Their real work happens outside meetings and that's not a luxury that is freely afforded to common city people.

My CM Jose Aguilar was urgently needed in El Salvador and, of course, our Medical Marijuana Dispensary applications remained with ZERO acton since 2007, coming to a head last week. (PLUM was handling that: Reyes, Chair, Weiss and Huizar, members.)

Of course he sponsored the motion to end "hardship exemptions"- he was unable in PLUM to get to those already pending- then his announcement backfired, with a total of over 500 applications now filed, and it's still not ending the MMD issue.

But the electoral process in El Salvador is safe. I think Huizar said that the trip was at his own expense- Even so, too much free time? too much discretionary income to spare from his Council "job"?

The Council needs a training session on PRIORITIES. That, too, is just the tip of the iceberg.

In cd-14.

June 15, 2009 9:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How about that he also used the words "damn" and "crap" - are those words verboten?

Or after his speaking time was up you could hear him yelling all the way to the back of the chamber - is that acceptable?

June 15, 2009 10:16 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10;16 am- about your comments apparently on the commments by Zuma Dogg after leaving the podium- even if he did yell out anything then, it would have been after Eric's call was made. Like a late tag in baseball- it doesn't change the call.

Eric was just too tired of being called loser- he might get that a lot over that pension deal.

Free Zuma Dogg's right to speak again, Eric, you poor sport. Eric, you don't enforce the Brown Act's 50-word-maximum on non-agenda item replies from talkers like Alarcon and Labonge who are loud and shun that Brown Act feature at will- Try to keep those guys in line with their ACTUAL violations and not get on ZD's case for your own subjective view and hurt feelings.

in e.rock.

June 15, 2009 8:14 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The only alternative for Mr. Zuma Dogg to protect his freedom of speech is by filing a Brown Act violation against the City Council to L.A. County District Attorney’s Office, who is responsible for investigation Brown Act violations.

The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Public Integrity Division

Public Corruption

The citizens of Los Angeles County have the right to expect that their elected and appointed officials will carry out their duties in a lawful, ethical and professional manner. They also have the right to expect that administrators, supervisors and the immediate subordinates of elected and appointed officials, who play an integral role in achieving the mission of the officeholder, will discharge their duties and obligations in the same lawful, ethical and professional manner.

The District Attorney's Public Integrity Division ensures that public and appointed officials - and their subordinates - fulfill their legally mandated duties. To this end, the District Attorney’s Office will use all resources at its disposal to detect, investigate and prosecute criminal misconduct at all levels of public service.

The Public Integrity Division’s ultimate goal is to increase the public’s level of confidence in its elected and appointed officials.


•Public Officials
Public officials are elected or appointed to positions of public trust. In the event of any breach of this trust, the Public Integrity Division will investigate and, if appropriate, prosecute criminal misconduct by any elected or appointed public official.

The term "public official" is defined in the broadest possible manner and includes state, county and city officials. Subordinates and employees of public officials, whose duties directly impact the public’s business, are also subject to investigation and prosecution by the Public Integrity Division.

Public Integrity Division
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office
320 West Temple St., Rm. 766
Los Angeles, CA. 90012
Phone: (213) 974-6501


June 17, 2009 10:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home