Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Monday, January 17, 2011

First "CLARTSgate", now "Listgate". What are the connections betwen these Councilman Huizar's scandals?

If only Tricky Dicky was still alive, he could learn a thing or two from Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone about judging your political supporters and enemies.

Did Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone ponder a journalist/ blogger list of supporters and enemies?

Page 1 of Northeast LA List.

Page 2 of Northeast LA List.

Happy Martin Luther King Day to all as we celebrate the man who sought equal rights for all. Then there is CD 14 Councilman Jose "Charro Huizzy Corleone" Huizar who told his staff to judge his constituents base upon "loyalty" and "influence". So much for judging constituents based upon their character but that is life in Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone's CD 14 fiefdom.
As millions of Americans celebrate the legacy of MLK, the Los Angeles Times City Hall Reporter David Zahniser today exposes the insecure proclivities of Huizar. Zahniser reports that staffers were require to write ratings of priests, police officers, recreation supervisors, school administrators, non-profit directors, and your average CD 14 community member who interacted with council staff. According to former CD 14 staffer Juanita Martinez, who is the mother of City Council Candidate Rudy Martinez, staffers would meet every three months with Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone to review the loyalty and influence grading of various CD 14 constituents. The "loyalty grading scale" was "-3" for Huizzy haters to "3" for hard core Huizzynistas. The "influence grading scale" was "0" for no influence, to "5" for those who could influence many to support the endeavors of Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone. Thus, if you scored "3 and 5" (like El Sereno "Our Town Magazine" Editor Julio Torres), then the resources of the CD 14 council offices, were there for the asking. ** All the lists will be made public on Tuesday morning.
As this story makes the rounds among CD 14 activists this morning, many are questioning whether the grading scale compiled by CD 14 staff, with the final approval of Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone, was the basis for allocated "monetary resources" from the likes of the CLARTS Fund and other public funds? This blogger was privy to viewing the lists before the Times story was published. For example, one "connected non-profit director" was given a "3" score for loyalty and his organization received multiple allocations from the CLARTS Fund. Thus, one could surmise that the lists was "a political credit report" on CD 14 constituents and the fact that the likes of Father Greg Boyle and Father Moretta of Boyle Heights Resurrection Church, were subjected to a loyalty grading, will surely cause a backlash.
As Listgate now joins with CLARTSgate to form a nefarious brew of political corruption, Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone may look back upon this day, as being the start of the end of his political dreams. For CD 14 voters, they now have clear evidence that their councilman is a "political segregationist" who values the loyal and influential few and disregards the majority of CD 14 constituents who have nothing to offer their elected office holder. Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone's lists are an injustice to those who practice random acts of character on a daily basis in CD 14. These selfless act are not negotiable political tender in Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone's CD 14. Thus, leaving us to dream of a future when our concerns will not be predicated by a score on a loyalty and influence list.
** As a bonus to our MLK Day Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone coverage, we provide this link to Huizar's MLK Day Keynote Speech at Princeton University one year ago. The rank and file of LAPD might want to note Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone's comments on their fellow officers actions at the "May Day Melee in MacArthur Park". Its sad that Councilman Charro Huizzy Corleone use this speech at Princeton to wrongly disparage those who duty it is to protect our equal rights.
** From Parke Skelton and Michael Trujillo's blog of choice Street Hassel: "More Archaeological Journalism on CD 14 at the Times". (MT might want to reconsider this heading "Rudy was a wife beater". )
** From Latinopoliticsblog: "Making a List and Checking it Twice".
Your thoughts..............
Scott Johnson in CD 14

Labels: , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Surely this is proof that Councilman Huizar is NOT a representative of all his constituents but only for the few that show their political loyalty to him.

When one reads the CLARTS ordinance it is very clear that the CD14 councilman was skirting the law with his disbursements. Hopefully, this has been reported to the DA and the Ethics Commission.

And no systematic grading list can be compiled without a certain amount of spying, not so much on those who support the councilman, but very much so on those who didn't and don't.

It is very similar to the list Nixon kept and I am wondering what recourse anybody has who was negatively rated on the list and had bad constituency service (or none at all) from CD 14 council offices.

January 17, 2011 11:43 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parke, don't you give your clients any training? Huizar is wavering in shit up to his chin and Gatto is under investigation for pulling an "Alarcon". You get a pass on Antonio because he is a dumbass and you can't teach an old dog new tricks, or manners. But with Mike and Jose, you have something to work with here. Good looking, degrees, somewhat smart, young and most important of all, they fit nicely at the end of your puppet strings.

The rumor mill is rampant now and a lot of former staffers are getting the courage to come out with their Huizar episode. This campaign has the makings of a bad reality show or a good novela. Your not going to sleep much this spring, Parke. There are some doozies coming soon.

January 17, 2011 12:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No matter how you slice and dice it, it's a political enemies list.

Hopefully, any elected official who endorsed Huizar should take back their endorsement.

And, hopefully, Huizar will resign.

January 17, 2011 12:56 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Red Spot, you're a fool for many reasons, this being just the latest.

There isn't a politician in the country including W and Obama, who doesn't size up who supports them, and how much influence they have.

Do you think campaigns are won based on judging peoples' character?

If people WERE based on character, how do you think most people who read this blog think of you and your character?

Yesterday, you said that in the wake of your Gatto screw-up that you "manned up and owned the problem."


You didn't man up or take ownership of the mess UNTIL YOU WERE HIT WITH A LAWSUIT! And even then, you didn't apologize for LYING about Gatto being evicted from a building in which he never lived.

You went back to slamming the guy without any merit or caution.

What does that say about your credibility?

Again, you can't name a single EXPERIENCED politician who doesn't make such evaluations. Show me ONE who has ever won office.

You sir, are a fool.

January 17, 2011 1:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Street Hassles' naming of this scandal as a Zahniser "archeological" piece is somewhat insensitive to the other archeological site in CD 14, the graves of Tongva natives at Placita Olvera. These graves were unearthed in the past week and Gabrielino indians hav already been protesting.

Did this blog seek to imply that this list is not worthy of note because of its' "archeaological" status ( and 2 years hardly qualifies as archeological). Maybe Huizar believes that the native burial ground is not worhty of note either since it is an archeaoligocal site.

Trujillo needs to do some more work before babbling off.

January 17, 2011 1:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

There's not any reason for Jose to resign and end his paydays, especially when his team can try for that Hail Mary pass up to election day.

The Jose spinners have a holiday today so expect all the "answers" to come out tomorrow, more so than today. I can't imagine him coming up with the scheme unaided. It's too much work, so it must be somebody else's tool that he borrowed. Not a good move.

Shame on Jose. The question in my mind is WHO taught Jose how to come up with this device?

Almost like Antonio's dual-calendar excuse that slipped out in his defense of the "11% Mayor" activities. Two Calendars? "He misspoke, of course there's only one calendar."

and does anyone know what happened with that "independant investigation that Huizar was to demand as stated in the evening news right after the Ramona Gardens fatal LAPD shooting of a resident (gangmember) a few years back? Not a real vote of confidence by JH for the DA and LAPD investigations.

January 17, 2011 1:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Scott Johnon: obviously since you're quoting from lists not yet released (El Sereno), then you were also sent them, most likely from the Martinez campaign.

Isn't it about time you admitted to the heavy collusion you have ongoing with Huizar's opponent? It won't be a surprise to anyone, it would just be better to be up front about things like that, don't you think?

(It sounds like Martinez is already assembling his own "friends and enemies" list during this campaign, and you're on the former.)

And, the Northeast list released shows titles and affiliations for people - like on NE neighborhood councils - that are at least three years old, including people of NC board since two elections ago, so from this it appears Huizar is telling the truth that these were abandoned min. 3 years ago. I'm pretty sure at least one person on the list has been dead for over a year.

January 17, 2011 2:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Street Hassle is a hundred times less partisan than this place.

January 17, 2011 2:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The poster that thinks any elected leader would "resign" over something like this obviously just fell of the political turnip truck (after just being born yesterday).

The backstabbing of Huizar (again, 4 years later, after Alvin Parra), by yet another ex-employee is likely to rally Huizar supporters even more so -- to sympathize with the treachery.

The won't see this as "whistle-blowing" at all -- more like the work of a disloyal "mommie" who wants her sonnie to become an elected official.

January 17, 2011 2:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anti-Huizar posters here were just recently saying that in order to beat an incumbent like Huizar, Martinez needed to get turnout way up at the polls - many thousands more voting in an off-year election.

Does the opponent here really think this kind of skullduggery and mud-slinging this early in the race is going to drive more people to vote?

If anything, it drives people to stay home, and turn off the noise -- weary of the ugliness of another typical CD14 campaign.

Turnout suffers from crap like this, and Rudy M. can't afford for turnout to suffer.

The lists are primarily of interest to the few hundred named on them - most of which have already decided who to vote for... and you could probably track that by looking at their "score."

Even it the better part of this list changed sides, it would have minimal effect on the outcome.

January 17, 2011 2:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Too bad that the poor illiterate suckers in CD14 can't come up with someone better than Jose AND Rudy.

January 17, 2011 2:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Councilman Huizar should be responding to all his constituents needs regardless of character and whether or not they support(ed) him.

I agree with an earlier post, it is a political enemies list. PERIOD.

As for your question about showing one politician who doesn't make such a list, simply read the LA Times story (assuming you didn't otherwise you would be the fool). Jan Perry, Ed Reyes and Eric Garcetti confirmed that they DIDN'T have such a system.

I supported Huizar at the last election but what with his clear violation of the CLARTS ordinance and his grotesque practice of grading his own constituents, I will not support him this time.

January 17, 2011 2:22 PM  

Anonymous trojan2002 said:

Keeping a record book of supporters and non-supporters is ok for a campaign.
It's NOT ok for an elected official.
Huizar was having his council staff keep score, not his campaign staff.
If you need an explanation on why this is bad, and should never be done, well, you're Chavista and you'll never understand.
But maybe PAY TO PLAY can marinate in your head.

January 17, 2011 3:12 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:13, Clearly you don't understand the very real anger that some people feel about grading constituents. If Martinez held back the list to later in the campaign for a tactical advantage, I would think less of him.

No decent, self-respecting elected official would keeps tabs on his constituents like this - except Richard Nixon, of course.

If Huizar used this list for a) disbursing CLARTS money or b) dispensing favorable treatment to his staunchest supporters, it is then a political patronage system that has seen some elected officials go to jail.

Huizar's pattern of abusing the power of his office is deeply troubling. When we see him violating so openly the purpose and procedures of the CLARTS Fund (and people actually supporting him for committing a possible criminal act) it is highly disturbing.

And let's not forget, Huizar is grading the political support he gets or doesn't get from individuals, some who have business in the City of Los Angeles, some of it in CD14. Obviously an investigation by the D.A. is now necessary to see if businesses and individuals have actually been harmed by being placed on a list that is now public.

Yes, Huizar should resign. Should he win the upcoming election, I'll wager he doesn't serve out his term.

January 17, 2011 3:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Street Hassle? Red Spot? Who cares? The facts are all that matter and they don't look too good for Huizar.

Giving Clarts money to his staff READ RICHARD RIZZO (and the Clarts Ordinance).

Drawing up a Black List READ RICHARD NIXON.

Martinez is not the best. But, boy, Huizar is not far from the worst.

January 17, 2011 3:46 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Political lists aren't new, they just seem to be kept in writing by the most "weasely" type of politicians.

Lets see if any other politician steps up to support Huizar and his list by claiming they have a similar one.

Imagine how much staff time was wasted on this stupid list. No wonder he needed to transfer all that CLARTS money to his salary account.

January 17, 2011 3:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3-59. Maybe Red Spot will challenge council members to sign a pledge that they don't keep such lists?

January 17, 2011 4:18 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Whatever you do, CLARTS-heads, just the real level of unhappiness with Huizar by the illiterate posts you read here.

I'd like to see your pointy foil hats go up in flames when Huizar is reelected in 6-7 because you actually thought any of these tiny issues of "it's the principle of the thing" startling revelations that just happened by be perfectly times for the next council race will actually move more than one percentage point of the voters.

January 17, 2011 5:52 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


You must be the most naive person in LA to think that because a POLITICIAN SAYS they don't have an enemies list, that it doesn't exist.

At the absolute very least, it exists in their heads. It exists in EVERYONE's head, yours included.

Don't be naive. But unfortunately, it's too late for you.

Oh, and you believe things that the LA TIMES tells you?????

January 17, 2011 5:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It would not remotely surprise me to find out that Red Spot himself created these lists in order to "create" controversy.

Shit, he's done it before!

He makes up shit about people without even confirming it. Just one of his dozens was that he said that Mike Gatto was evicted from a building, and he NEVER LIVED THERE!

Red Spot made that up. Red Spot makes up lots of shit.

HEY RED SPOT, WE'VE BEEN WARNING YOU ABOUT THIS CRAP "JOURNALISM" BEFORE. Your credibility is tainted in everything you do, even if you don't intentionally fuck it up. Warned ya. You didn't listen. Now it's legitimate for people to question your truthfulness and thoroughness.

January 17, 2011 5:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Jose Huizar: Political Dead man walking

January 17, 2011 6:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Red Scum doesn't have any credibility to report on this like this because you never know if he is putting in a thorough effort or if he's making it, as he has done in the very recent past.

Or "passed," as he would write.

January 17, 2011 7:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

5.55 From the perspective of the "most naive person in L.A." i would agree that in a political campaign candidates, whoever they are, determine who they can count on for support and who they cannot. I would assume that a candidate considers his or her opponent (and possibly their campaign staff and campaign supporters) the enemy.

However, once that campaign is over, the victor most often carries out the task of the elected official, not that of the campaigner he or she once was. The successful candidate usually keeps an eye on his real or perceived enemies but gets on with his job of governing all his constituents.

Richard M. Nixon is an example of somebody who kept an "enemies" list after a successful election and continued it while governing. Jose Huizar is another example. We all know Nixon's legacy.

In the reports I read, Huizar confirmed such a list exists-one that even you call an "enemies list" - and also confirmed that is was still in existence until as recent as 2009.

So, if the agree there is a Huizar enemies list (and you did), then why wouldn't I believe the Times - it got it right!

I may be naive. But you are in the contorted position of believing Huizar has a "enemies" list but are unwilling to believe the Times "telling" us that.

You seem to be a blind loyalist, willing to support Huizar at all costs and in all things, and I am sure you have a suitable rating from the Councilman...or do you?

January 17, 2011 7:50 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Rudy is dictating the pace of this race, every day they his campaign drops another pile of shit on Huizar.

Looks like an upset is in the works.

Where the hell is Huizar's campaign?

January 17, 2011 8:01 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Big "No Duh!"

A group called Clean "SWEEP" (as in sweep out all the incumbents), picks the ONLY person running against incumbent Jose Huizar.

Who the hell else were they going to endorse??

Lyndon LaRouche?

January 17, 2011 8:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Rudy Martinez: Not even walking!

January 17, 2011 8:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar -0 and -0 in my book! Wow, wow, wow. Talk about Mexican style politics.

January 17, 2011 8:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The word is that the Huizar campaign is in crisis mode, they are apparently afraid of bigger stories to break over the next few days.

Huizar cancelled his previous engagements for today and took the day off.

January 17, 2011 8:35 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:35 p.m. "The word is..."

The REAL word is... anything that follows the words "the word is" on this blog is written by someone who is 100% making things up, lying, so out of touch with reality they think they matter, and/or mentally ill.

Pretenders, poseurs, angry misanthropes, and mentally deficient textbook cases of arrested development... Mayor Sam's Blog WANTS YOU!

January 17, 2011 8:41 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Political discourse at its worst...the martinez campaign beat the clarts fund "non" issue to a bloody pulp and now they are they are trying to make a case against Huizar out of a tool used to strategize political resources (employees time perhaps), worst of all they are trying to use former disgruntled employees whose egos interfered with their public servant duties to insinuate the list was produced with malice...amateur hour!

January 17, 2011 8:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You need to get a clue, here.

Take a look at the reactions by the rank and file on some of the Northeast blogs, if you'd like.

They're laughing at all this (and not at Huizar, either), including some of the people named. It's funny to them, not the atom bomb dropped on Huizar's campaign his opponents had hoped for.

Meanwhile some others NOT named on the lists are feigning hurt, "hey, why not me, Jose?"

The tactic failed. This is a momentary embarrassment that is mostly being seen as just a dumb exercise on the part of both the list makers and the list leakers.

It will be all but forgotten in a month, and within 2 weeks, Huizar will be joking about it with his supporters.

Rudy's "scorched earth" attempt to maim Huizar is ending up being more like "burnt pie".

Sorry... Strike 2.

January 17, 2011 9:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:54. Why is CLARTS a non-issue?

The CLARTS Fund ordinance states very clearly that each and every disbursement must be voted on by the full council and the money can only be spent on projects.

Salaries are not projects. And the city council didn't vote on each and every disbursement.

Councilman Huizar violated a City ordinance and possibly committed a criminal act. How is that a non-issue?

January 17, 2011 9:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huh, what happened here, Reed Spit?

You predicted the pro-Huizar people wouldn't be chiming in today(because of course, you've always contended that it was just field and campaign staff beating your around the ears here -- and THEY had the day off).

Huh, ain't that a bitch. Huizar, (the 66-percent landslide winner in 2007 when he embarrassed the FIRST embittered ex-employee) apparently still has a healthy collection of supporters even after all the "scandals" you've diligently exposed and help infect out to other attributionally challenged writers -- even some willing to venture into this cesspool of inaccuracy and self-important insinuation.

There's seems to be plenty of blowback to your latest screed today, even when the City computers are turned off.

Imagine... you're wrong again. Go figure. (Hope you'll "man up" and admit it, this ONE time, too).

January 17, 2011 9:41 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey Mayor Sam's. Why is it so often that the people who root for the writers on this blog do so while including racial or ethnic overtones, like 8:31 p.m.?

Why is that?

Do you welcome this?

Don't get your panties in a bunch, I'm not calling YOU a racist. I'm just wondering why so many people who exhibit the symptoms of that disease post here, usually ONLY on the one side of the issue, and seem to find a warm place to vent... here!

Some might even say the blog encourages it by letting it stand.

It's that "enquiring minds" thing, you know? Just something that makes you go "huh" and wonder if it would even stay posted if it was derogatory against any group but the one just referenced.

January 17, 2011 9:50 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

9:41, When one thinks of the Robert Rizzo type actions Huizar has taken with the CLARTS Fund or the Richard Nixon type behavior Huizar exhibits when compiling a political enemies list, Red Spots predictions are irrelevant.

By the way, the "blowback" hasn't been too impressive... I suppose it is easier criticizing Red Spot than putting together a coherent defense of Councilman Huizar.

January 17, 2011 10:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So if I understand this correctly (and I do), Martinez's mother - who worked for Huizar for a LONG time - didn't have any trouble helping to compile the lists for years, keeping them up, promoting and protecting Huizar, etc. - to some of these same constituents, up until the last minute.

Just as long as she was getting paid for this "horrible deed" - everything was okey dokie!

But the minute her son decided to contest the office, and needed some dirt to make up for his lack of qualifications and experience (OH, and she go no more "payola" from Huizar), THEN it's all BAD and DEVIOUS and maybe even (shudder) UNETHICAL! (The same day-t0-day tasks she made a living at).

Or, equally likely, she removed government documents after her employment was terminated, knowing her boy was going to run, and decided he just might need to know who the "players" were in the District. Damn sure he didn't know a dozen of them himself, let along hundreds. What better way to give junior a leg up than to abscond with a critical database on contacts.

Rudy better be glad this isn't the kind of business he's usually been involved. What do you suppose CEO Rudy's reaction would be if he found out someone in a housing industry business he ran, once terminated, walked out with the "graded" clients list from Rudy;s business so they could help someone in their family compete with their past employer. Heck, he'd slap that thief with a suit so big they'd be out of business before they started.

Yup, good thing Rudy's not running on his skillful "business" experience as part of his platform. (OH WAIT, yes he is!)

Well, the rotton apple doesn't fall too far from the tree, does it?

January 17, 2011 10:11 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Jose Huizar,

Today is Martin Luther King Day 2011. A day of recognized leadership about a man of courage, wisdom, respect and superior class.

With all do respect my non-brother Huizar, please remove your FB photo of you and the backdrop of Martin Luther King. I believe it is one of your Princeton reunion photos in which you used tax payers money to pay for your 5 star hotel?

Your speech about the struggle of the African American and Latino immigrants in America is pure nonsense and historically incorrect to my Black brothers and sisters!!!

Recommendation: Invest in an African American history class and READ to your hearts content my Almighty God!

Removal of your FB photo should be respected and granted by you because MLK represents true leadership. Your lack of bringing people together and character assassinating community leaders is inhumane and unacceptable.

Word to my non-brother, it is well-known about your treatment toward the long time constituents who are the real COMMUNITY LEADERS/ACTIVIST in CD 14. Especially BOYLE HEIGHTS!!!

Word to my non-brother, it is known who is intellectually a threat to you in CD 14 and those who you think you can invalidate because of their race, background, creed and color.

Remember word to my non-brother, real hardcore and effective COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS do not stay idle, they talk to other COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS about issues that impact their lives and especially disenfranchised communities like South L.A., Boyle Heights, Watts, East L.A.!!!

Your segregation-ism in CD 14 speaks louder than words and it's time for you Jose Huizar to step down with whatever dignity you can salvage.

Today is a very special day because it is Martin Luther King Day! Today is also a very special day because the corruption of the Huizar Regime is finally coming to an end.

The taxpayers and constituents of the City of Los Angeles demand an INVESTIGATION!

January 17, 2011 10:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

There's no "defense" of Huizar needed. While this was probably a dumb thing to do, especially considering the incredible lack of loyalty several of his employees seem to have, its not criminal or unethical ... and certainly not going to do the damage his opponents had hoped.

The poking at Red Spoit here is just what it is. Enjoying seeing him throw this crap out with ALL HIS MIGHT, thinking it will matter in the end, and once again being seriously disappointed based on just how wildly out-of-touch he is with who and what matters in the distict.

Speaking of Nixon, RS, here's the "silver lining"... for the next four years you WILL still have Jose Huizar to kick around (wikipedia that and see what it means). Same office, same title, same salary, same perks, same basic level of support (majority) and opposition (minority).

You'll just be even further down the food chain of people who can affect the end results of district politics.

So much of what government CAN do for its constituents doesn't really HAVE to be done for them, and when you make yourself out a fetid thorn in the side of the people who can choose to do them, you get what your toxic efforts deserve.

January 17, 2011 10:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

CLARTS funds = Discreationary funds
discretionary = for any use or purpose one chooses

January 17, 2011 10:30 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I saw Martinez's mother at the forum last week. Man did she make this look personal, like she had in the last couple months turned from being one of Huizar's in-office minions, to wanting him dead! She was staring angry darts in Huizar's head the whole time.

This is a bitter nasty, family fight all over again on the eastside, and the rest of us are all just pawns in the "get even" chess match.

A woman scorned . . . (er, terminated).

January 17, 2011 10:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10.11, Wikileaks?

January 17, 2011 10:47 PM  

Anonymous InTheKnow said:

@10:30 pm

The CLARTS Fund is not completely discretionary according to the ordinance posted online by the City Maven.  

Through ordinance 175949 the CLARTS Fund was added to the LA Admin. Code under Chapter 140 section 5.540.1.

It says under sub-section "(b) Purpose of the Fund: The fund shall be used for the purpose of financing community amenities within the City of Los Angeles Council District 14."

And under  "(d) Expenditures from the Fund: Appropriation from the Fund shall be authorized upon recommendation by the Councilperson of the district, only by the City Council, by resolution on a project by project basis, and shall be used exclusively for purposes set forth in subsection (b) above."

I don't think anyone on this blog, supporter or opponent of Huizar, can with a straight face say that the $1.04 million dollars Huizar transferred into his salary account would be considered a "community amenity" and even less so a "project".   

I am sure there is some twisted reasoning that will argue that employees salaries are community amenities and were voted on a project by project basis but it won't pass "the smell test".

The ordinance (code) seems clear and it sure looks like Huizar violated it.

January 17, 2011 11:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


So much for "transparency" Rudy Rich. The additional lists have been released on their campaign site but with some very "odd" numberings and missing players - perhaps as many as 60-80 names.

Funny, unlike the "Northeast" list posted by the Times, the "El Serreno" (sic) list they post has been heavily edited -- numbered through 114, but containing only about 45 names (and NONE of them are listed with negative numbers).

That could suggest the Black Plague reached ES and wiped out two-thirds of the community leadership there.

And, conspicuously redacted out seem to be nearly ALL of the people on the LA32 neighborhood council that Red Spot is the 'Reconing Secretariat' for.

Suspicious? I think so. Maybe Red Spot's buddies at the Martinez campaign didn't want to see him get too embarrassed by how little "clout" he actually has. That doesn't explain why almost no one from LA32 is included, but the probably just got carried away.

January 18, 2011 12:28 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What a joke, and what a dishonest pile of garbage.

Hacopian and company have renamed Huizar's influence/support lists as:

"Constituent Discrimination Lists"

And they accuse Huizar's handling of "spinning". I got dizzy just logging on to Rudy's site.

Talk about "facts NOT in evidence." I think it's about time they got a full-on "cease and decyst" before their cancer spreads.

January 18, 2011 12:37 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"every day they his campaign drops another pile"


January 18, 2011 1:29 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And how did Rudy rank on Huizar's list?
He received the highest ranking. How ironic.

January 18, 2011 1:31 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The CRA voted to squirrel away the $$$ just like a certain coucilmember took back the community's CLARTS funding. The pattern continues....STOP the pattern, and vote the weasels out!

January 18, 2011 5:13 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I wonder if Huizar and his "employees" will claim that Huizar's mother's boyfriend is a non-issue. I guess it would be a non-issue if $75K of public funds wasn't put up to protect him.

BTW, there is no such thing as a loyal ex-employee - that is an oxymoron (quick, look it up Trujillo). That loyal employee crap is such a lame argument, especially given the fact that there are so many ex-employees -hee, heee, heeee.

January 18, 2011 5:59 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

OMG Parke Skelton in crisis mode telling the Huizar groupies to monitor all blogs and post post post deflect from the issue. That list is being circulated wide and people on it who were supporters are mad. Say what you want either way it makes Huizar look badly he doesn't know who does what in the community and has to look at sheet to figure it out. Huizar people are saying CLARTS is a non issue. False. Everyone all over the city is asking where that $1.5 million went and why Huizar hasn't come out making a statement. The fact he's been silent makes him look guilty of hiding something. The CLARTS FUND money abuse and this "List story" is now on many blogs that are credible as you say you don't think Mayor Sam is, think again!!! All of us know what its like to work for an employer who treats people horribly. Everyone is siding with Martinez team and thanks to this list being published Martinez just got more campaigners to help him.

January 18, 2011 7:06 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I guess they entire city of la--city attorney, mayor, city council, city controller, city clerk-- is under huizar's thumb...wow! Section(a) is discretionary and section (b) pertains to at large city business...city general fund, council fund, and perhaps quimby funds...It appears Huizar was simply moving money around...

January 18, 2011 7:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What struck us is that the governor's staff even before Brown's cuts is smaller than that of the mayor of Los Angeles, whose office has ballooned to some 206 employees in recent years. Even as the rest of the city departments suffer deep cuts, the mayor has done little to share the sacrifice among his own staff. Council members, with their staffs of up to two dozen, also have done little to trim their offices either

January 18, 2011 7:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10:28 "There's no 'defense' of Huizar needed." Followed by 200 or so words defending him???

January 18, 2011 7:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

7:46 raises a great issue. Where are the staff cuts in CD14? (but please don't include all the firings and resignations, should a Huizar supporter want to respond).

And while most everybody is taking a pay cut or on furlough, Council Member Huizar adds an additional $1,000,000 to salaries (when his office already receives $1,000,000 plus for staff salaries from City funds!).

I suppose Huizar believes if he takes care of his 3's and 5's (who obviously don't care one bit if he wastes CLARTS money by augmenting staff salaries) then he doesn't have to worry abut anybody else, i.e., the poor suckers who have no clue how Huizar "governs" CD14 and who are robbed of projects in their communities.

January 18, 2011 8:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I don't have a dog in this fight, but this is point blank stupid. What kind of a moron would put a list like this on paper.

This idiot deserves to lose.

January 18, 2011 9:25 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


You know that Huizar himself has confirmed that these lists exiss and that the LAT article is accurate. That being the case why would any one need to "doctor" any documents.

January 18, 2011 9:28 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Does anyone know if there are more recent lists available? The Boyle Heights list has to be at least three years old. The President listed for the BHNC served as president two presidents ago.

January 18, 2011 9:29 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


"Constituent Discrimination Lists", laugh. That is fantastic.

Looks like Huizar is being Esseled.

Give the devil his due, he is really good.

January 18, 2011 9:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

To: "In the (don't) Know"

1. The quality of being pleasant or attractive; agreeableness.
2. Something that contributes to physical or material comfort.
3. A feature that increases attractiveness or value, especially of a piece of real estate or a geographic location.
4. amenities: Social courtesies.

Okay, once again, I'll "twisted" reasoning...

How about, in a district that already gets the short end on city services, one very true "amenity" might just be having enough Council staff working in the community to make sure that new and ongoing "projects" don't get shoved to the back burner, while other districts are cutting staff, or even furloughing people.

It's meat and potatoes. And staffing for community calls and needs is a service that comes up in commuity meetings more often than anything else on teh eastside.

Whiners are saying more money should have been spent on fairy dust festivals and public art projects.

I was taught to eat the nutritious food first, before chasing after "dessert". But, perhaps that's "twisted" thinking.

And, as far as what constitues an "amenity" - I'm not sure everyone with the power to make decisions would necessarily agree that having 2-3 more firefighters sleeping at the station and cooking each other dinner really provides

It's just the "scare" tactic that opponents always use -- everywhere, "Oooh, Ooh, your house could burn down because some elected leader decided to address another actual need, elsewhere.

January 18, 2011 10:09 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

1:31 a.m.

You obviously didn't read the list right, because "5" is the highest ranking.

Rudy, wanting to be elected councilmember didn't even rank as much influence as some pastors of small local churches.

OH, and hows this for a "funny" - who actually filled in the rankings? Council staffers, which means it was most likely Rudy's MOTHER who ranked her son as a "3" in influence (because in every mommy's eyes, their baby's a GENIUSES!)

Do you see ANY other owner of a small restaurant on the list ranked so high?

Mommy is very proud of her boy, but that don't mean he's as big a "big cheese" as she rated him at herself. And, geez, what's Huizar or other member of his NE staff gonna do when presented with a list made out by mommy, saying Rudy boy is 3-out-of-5 influential? Huizar's a daddy father himself. Too cruel to burst her bubble... no harm done, let her keep her delusion and sleep better at nights thinking she created a "leader" when he's really just a house-flipper, bottom feeder living off the sad, misfortunes of other who'd lost their homes.

And, apparently he was only a "supporter" as long as mommy was on the payroll. How nice. Keep me from having to support mom in her old age, Jose, and I'll keep telling people your a great leader. Stop, and I'll unleash hellfire on your career.

Plus the rankings for Northeast are at least 3 years old.

January 18, 2011 10:20 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Apparently Huizar has no "enemies" in El "Serreno" -- you've been lying to us all along, Red Spot.

Nothing but POSITIVE numbers on that list (which, by the way) appears from the names and affiliations to be the only one of the lists that's been updated in more than two years.

January 18, 2011 10:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hmm. Rudy's people have had these lists for months and months - since his mother was terminated for having an obviously conflict-of-interest.

Yet almost none of the names on these lists are also on Rudy's posted list of supporters and endorsers (and even some of the one with -1 and -2 ARE on Huizar's support list).

Sounds like even the "negative" numbered people -- the ones Rudy's people would have zeroed in on months ago and courted regularly, didn't bite on Rudy's bait.

No wonder he released the lists. Months of prospecting in likely fertile ground for dissention, and hardly any sales.

Sounds like Rudy is a "brand" no one wants to switch to, even when they don't like the old brand all that much.

How sad is that - for Rudy. Already halfway through his funds, and almost nothing to show for it but a botched, self-destructive performance at their first public debate.

Anyone who think Huizar's the one panicking right now doesn't know how this game is played. Pumping out heavy duty venom against the opponent is the SECOND tactic, after you've shored up support for your own squeaky-clean image.

Rudy's people failed at the "come unto me and I'll save the district" first round, and panicked themselves into going "all in" long before it would do them the most good.

Don't anybody fool yourself, the white knuckles are all on Eagle Rock Boulevard in this race, and will be for the duration. Remember, the man raised a NET of less than $2,000 in campaign contributions the final three months of last year -- when his star as the best hope of defeating Huizar should have been rising.

Buh-bye, Rudy Rich. Thanks for playing, and sorry you had to ruin your mother's reputation as a employable commodity for nothing.

January 18, 2011 10:36 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Huizar said teh El Sereno list did'nt look familiar.

You call that "confirmation".

January 18, 2011 10:37 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Does anyone know if there are more recent lists available?"

No, because Huizar was obviously telling the Times the truth. The lists stopped being made 2-3 years ago.

Only the El Sereno list is anywhere close to being up to date, and all the so-called "enemies" are off it. It was morphed into just a general contact list of people who could help support Huizar's community improvement efforts (NOT Huizar, himself - to win again).

Many of the newer names on it don't even have a rating -- because THAT PRACTICE STOPPED YEARS AGO.

So, he was right - it was "old" news, and Zahniser, not knowing the players well enough from list to list, bought on Hacopian's lying characterization that this was "new" stuff to damn Huizar with.

January 18, 2011 10:42 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

9"25 a.m."This idiot deserves to lose."

I'd probably agree, but so far the guy running against him appears to be a bigger idiot - mismanaging every aspect of his campaign, incriminating his own mother in a useless "hail mary" effort to turn around a decline in visibility, and wasting a lot of his own money in a fools game of slash and burn.

Nothing impressive going on from the other side of the court. Rudy's people still can't eve get the ball over the net in terms of making him a "good" prospect for change.

January 18, 2011 10:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The Times asked Huizar for copies of his "power analysis" lists on Dec. 20 and was told by his spokesman, Rick Coca, that the state public records law did not require that they be made available. "The public interest served by protecting the council member's decision-making process clearly outweighs the public interest served by the record's disclosure," he wrote.

Doesn't this mean, or at least imply, that the Councilman is CURRENTLY using these lists in his DECISION-MAKING process??

January 18, 2011 1:12 PM  

Anonymous In the Don't Know, too. said:

10:09 That was hilarious.

Too bad the Golden Globes have passed, otherwise, I would nominate you for Creative Writing in a Campaign

Keep eating the Huizar "meat and potatoes" and while you are at it, drink some more of the "Kool-Aid".

Funny stuff.

January 18, 2011 1:19 PM  

Anonymous g said:


January 18, 2011 3:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home