Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Memo to CD 14 Chief of Staff Ana Cubas, "Big difference between $60,000 and $544,683 in CLARTS Fund Account

Now the video of her rambling presentation is posted above for all to see.  For those who may be interested in a career of public service, Cubas performance is noteworthy for its subjective dodging of the questions by the LA 32 Board. 
But at the end point of her opening presentation (about 25 minutes in), Cubas states that there was only $60,000 currently in the CLARTS Fund balance, which surprise former CD 14 City Councilman Nick Pacheco, who briefly speaks. But the truth unknown to the LA 32 Board, Pacheco and not likely Cubas, is noted below in the memo.. 

More after the bloggin leap.
In the weeks since, we have learned that besides using the CLARTS Fund for what it was created for, Councilman Huizar secretly moved $1,045,000 of the fund into his salary account. The amount above as of the date of the memo was the balance unallocated for.

Four months later, the big question here is what is the status of the balance. Has any of it been spent on community amenities? Councilman Huizar's challenger Rudy Martinez stated that he would use CLARTS to maintain public services as we noted in an earlier post..

And especially for the residents of Hillside Village, who were front and center in protesting cut backs in fire services, they might want to question Councilman Huizar why he was not pro-active in allocating any of the above balance to mitigate the brownouts at station 16? Thus, helping to pervent another tragic event that Luis Gonzalez emotionally stated at City Hall.

Paramedics, police or staffers pay, voters in CD 14 will decide on March 8.

Your thoughts..............

Scott Johnson in CD 14

Labels: , , , , ,

60 Comments:

Blogger USC said:

HAHAHAHAHA!! Was that Scottie Johnson trying to ask questions? What a whiny puke. What was even funnier was Hugo Pacheco and Jose Aguilar sitting in the background.

Seems like losers stick together.

February 23, 2011 10:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If you'd have ever paid attention during a neighborhood council meeting, you'd know there's big difference between what a City department (like Clerk or DONE), considers to be "uncommitted" and what an NC or a councilmember has committed, but for which the paperwork isn't all in.

And, beside, what's your point?

You got the answer. Maybe two answers, maybe both correct.

In two weeks, Huizar will be overwhelmingly re-elected to once again manager that fund.

Who do you suppose will be one of the LAST people who's opinion's will matter as to how to spend it?

(His initials are "Rid Splurt in CD14")

February 23, 2011 11:10 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What the hell is an "NHC" meeting?

This may be the only person in the city of L.A. that abbreviates: Neighborhood Council - with THREE letters.

(And we should believe HIS math??)

February 23, 2011 11:12 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Cubas was at your meeting on Oct. 6, most likely working with stats from the end of the last reporting period - end of fiscal 2009-10?

By the time Clerk responded to you, the Q1 2010-11 figures were most likely updated.

In City time, even a couple of weeks can change the figures reported - especially at the end of a quarter.

Even the pros running Rudy Rich's campaign aren't trying to make political hay straining at this gnats.

You should take a lesson from them. Even the Martinez family bloggers won't be picking up this torch.

February 23, 2011 11:16 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Red Spot, is it true you made up quotes yesterday and attributed them to former blog character Parque Esqueleto?

He says you did.

How pitifully desperate.

As one cartoon character to another, I'm sure Rudy Rich is ashamed of you.

February 23, 2011 11:18 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Red Spot get over it, the Los Angeles Times, and every other mass media unit had covered the issue.
Anna, looks very sexy, and smart on this educational video. All you are doing is providing Jose Huizar a reason to give her a promotion.

February 23, 2011 11:20 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Scott got taken in by a fake "Parque" - maybe that wasn't the REAL Ana Cubas, either.

February 23, 2011 11:34 AM  

Anonymous Return Community CLART FUNDS said:

Seems as though you have Huizar's Rats commenting on your page...

Thanks for sharing this! Great Job, in asking the much needed questions to Ana Cubas 'Huizars Best' which she was utterly useless in providing the needed information or answers for The Community CLARTS fund's.

February 23, 2011 11:44 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'm still trying to figure out why on God's green Earth the Lincoln Heights 7-11 should be denied a license to sell beer. The only conclusion I can draw is that Red Spot thinks Mexicans can't be trusted with alcohol. Am I right?

February 23, 2011 12:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:13, it had something to do with a nearby preschool. I don't know if Red Spot thinks 4-year-olds are going to steal beer? I mean that makes no sense. But I guess we ARE talking about Red Spot here. Making no sense is par for the course.

February 23, 2011 12:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Who are the two unwashed bums who can't seem to sit still. Ants in the pants? Restless leg syndrome? Sexuality anxiety?

February 23, 2011 12:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Forget the bums, who is the stalker cameraman circling this woman like a piece of meat? Sick stuff at LA-32.

February 23, 2011 12:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Why hasn't Rudy Rich released the results of his hate-hit poll conducted several weeks ago?

I think we know the answer. All his mudslinging isn't getting past shoring up the negatives for the 15-20 percent of anti-Huizar types from previous elections.

Dude is dead in the water, and now on defense, saying "no you're not" to the pro-Huizar mailers meant to shore up Huizar's 2/3-or more positive base.

Too little, too late, too bad Rudy.

Which fat lady have you chosen to have sing for you on March 8?

Because, it's over.

February 23, 2011 1:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Most of the board members aren't even listening during Cubas' presentation...

RIGHT over their HEADS!

February 23, 2011 1:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Red Spit.

She makes it very clear there are TWO different CLARTS funds?

Which are you talking about?

Or do you even know the difference?

(No, you don't!)

February 23, 2011 1:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Here we go again...

February 23, 2011 1:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Cubas really doesn't seem to have anything to hide. She asks Pacheco to take part.

Does that seem like someone who's trying to spin this a certain dishonest way?

Nah, Scott's shooting blanks again.

February 23, 2011 1:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

WHEN DO THE MARTINEZ FAMILY MEMBERS start blogging here and tell us, again, that Huizar has no achievements?

I just need to know when to schedule my nap.

February 23, 2011 1:45 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Annnnnd, we're back to the CLARKS funds (which can ONLY mean), all other Huizar bashing is failing miserably.

BUH-bye Rudy Rich.

February 23, 2011 1:53 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Apparently, the questions she's "dodging" are the very specific "gotcha" questions that were never provided in advance.

Was she supposed to have all this committed to memory, line-by-line?

February 23, 2011 1:57 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This is an actual question...?

REALLY?


"Ms. Cubas, OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD please detail all monies spent in the last 10 months from CLARTS funds, and who they were sent to and what it was for."

REALLY, and you just can't seem to UNDERSTAND why she had to "dance" around that question?

pFFFFFFahhh!

February 23, 2011 2:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Did Pacheco actually request the public records, as he said, or was he just blowing smoke here to pander to his old cronies.

I think we know the answer...

February 23, 2011 2:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Typical "tricky Nicky" Pacheco answer... when you go to the dump next ot Eagle Rock, LIE and tell them you're from Glendale.

(Then LIE when you move here from Glendale, and tell them you're an L.A. resident, right Rudy Rich?)

It's true what they say, a vote for Rudy Rich is a vote for another Pacheco term. And the people of the district have turned that option down twice already.

March 8, they turn it down for a third time.

February 23, 2011 2:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So, you were TOLD from the onset -- "get the full accounting from the City Clerk," you grilled Ms. Cubas for an hour, during which time she probably repeated that 10-times, saying "get the accounting for this fund FROM the CITY CLERK, I'm NOT an accountant - they ARE our accountants."

You asked the City Clerk, they provided it, and then you have your answer.

How is this a problem? If there's a difference in what was reported by the two (and it's not clear from this video that they're both talking about the same fund(s) and time periods, even), then "DOH" maybe THAT'S WHY she kept saying, GET IT FROM THE CITY CLERK!

Sounds like you just enjoy putting Huizar's staff people on the spot, even when you've been told they're not the ones with the specific information you need.

(What nasty little trolls; it's a wonder anyone runs for your NC.)

February 23, 2011 2:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The questions to be answered by Huizar were provided before the meeting and were pending answers from Huizar who did not show up. They were printed and distributed to the people attending the meeting.

Cubas had that list to work from in making her answers. Not much of surprise from the questions and not much information provided from her responses.

February 23, 2011 3:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:17 pm

Wow you have no sense of humor about anything and boy it is the "crime of the century" to dump at the local dump. Yeah, you got Pacheco good!

Say whatever you want to say about Pacheco but I personally liked the fact that he was always available and would take his punches from the constituents directly in community meetings. He didn't hide and avoid answering the questions. He wasn't always right but you always knew where he stood.

He lost to Antonio in 2003, big deal, and in 2005 he again lost to Antonio, not Huizar. You are delusional if you think he lost to Huizar in 2005.

Pacheco had Neighborhood Leadership training so residents could be active in their communities.

He had the guts to shoot down a developer trying to develop Moon Canyon in Mt. Washington by eminent domaining the lots for open space.

He killed development of Ascot Park by re-zoning it open space forever.

He completed the Evergreen Jogging Path.

He had community events that brought people together; like his "unity fairs" and "environmental fairs" in each part of the district.

He reclaimed the Hazard Park Armory from the military but at the same time was smart enough to have the Naval Trauma Training Center use the parking lots to provide free medical services. He took the wetlands in Hazard Park away from the railroads.

When he left office he fully funded the Dog Park in Hermon and the skate park in Garvanza. Of course, Villaraigosa sat on those projects and made them become more expensive to build.

And finally, he kept the district clean by having the bulky item drop off center and there is no reason Huizar couldn't bring back this project with CLARTS funds.

Yes I am a Pacheco supporter and under no circumstances do I see Martinez ever coming to replace someone as committed to being councilmember as Pacheco was.

If Martinez can just be somewhere between Pacheco's open door policy and Huizar's secrecy then I will be happy to work with that type of office.

February 23, 2011 3:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:33

Nice legacy posturing Lauro.

Yeah, we know it's you. No one liked you THAT much or you'd still be in office.

And no, he wasn't "joking" in that video - Nick was always ready to lie - and ask others to lie for him - about even the most inconsequential things.

Lying isn't a joke, and when you have it exhibited - on video, just like that - and you still try to pretend it wasn't a "serious" response, then you're drinking your own kool-aid.

People "claim" Huizar has lied about things while in office, but without any proof.

But, Pacheco LIES to your face on video, and smiles at you like it's funny. (He didn't get the nickname
"Tricky Nicky" for nothing).


And he WAS behind the first "POCHO" attacks on Antonio, through his buddy in 2003.

Everyone knew it, and that's why Sheriff Baca withdrew his endorsement (and endorsement he now gives easily to Huizar - because we KNOW no real cop is going to endorse flee-the-scene-of-the-crime Rudy).

Antonio didn't beat Pacheco in 2003, Pacheco beat himself playing "tricky" games like that that were so transparent. Sleaze mailers with someone else's name on them - egged on by the candidate.

February 23, 2011 3:56 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If anyone has any doubts about what 2:17 said, and who really IS the "man behind Martinez's curtain" just read the immediate, detailed response Pacheco posted himself, anonymously at 3:33 p.m.

8 years later? Who has that kind of detailed memory of what Pacheco says he did -- except Pacheco? Trawling around at the LA23 NC to protect his legacy of CLARTS all over again.

Vote Pacheco OUT of CD14 politics, AGAIN, for a third time, by ignoring the bile coming from the Rudy Rich campaign.

It's all one in the same.

February 23, 2011 3:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

When does the DA files charges against Pacheco for the money laundering through his law firm?

Has to happen soon. With that many employees told to commit crimes by their employer, someone's bound to flip to save themselves.

You KNOW Parke Skelton has Cooley on his speed dial - checking that one every day.

February 23, 2011 4:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Senor Pacheco, quién es más pocho, Villaraigosa o Martinez?

February 23, 2011 4:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

4:05

La pregunta no es quien es mas "pocho" sino quien se ha vendido mas. Hay razones por ser pocho, no hay por ser vendido.

February 23, 2011 4:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:56

Since when are mailers that tell the truth sleazy? As we all knew, Antonio would prove those mailers correct - and he did.

February 23, 2011 4:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Maybe Rudy Rich can use CLARKS funds to pay for that full-time Spanish translator that's going to have to follow him everywhere when he's "elected" (HA!).

February 23, 2011 4:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

HA! Apparently it's actually
City of Bell's Rizzo and RUDY who have something in common...


"(L.A. TIMES) Bell 8: Rizzo rushed to hospital with chest pains during break in court hearing"

(I'll BET it's just a "muscle spasm").

February 23, 2011 4:42 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Pacheco's sleaze mailer telling everyone Villaraigosa was a womanizer and would use CD 14 like a one night stand.

http://www.insidesocal.com/friendlyfire/Pacheco-Villaraigosa%20Flyer_1.jpg

Hilarious shit now, not so funny then.

February 23, 2011 5:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

4:05

They are all pochos. Have you heard any of them speak compared to a native speaker.

They all need Spanish lessons.

February 23, 2011 5:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:56

Your right not a single politician I support lies. They are all good people working hard for this city, state and country.

I don't know why politicians have such a bad rap.

February 23, 2011 5:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

One had only to attend ANY of the local forums in CD14 to know that it really didn't matter which language, or how many Rudy Rich spoke.

He's clueless.

He knows absolutely ZERO about CD14.

He has absolutely ZERO experience working with any of its ongoing concerns.

And he isn't even apologetic about that?

Drifts in off a boat from somewhere, throws his riches around, makes up solutions that will never work in a million years (many of them probably illegal under City law).

CLUELESS, is the only way to explain it.

When are we going to learn that the answer to someone we disagree with or think is offbase or that slimers can claim are "corrupt" (always WITHOUT proof) is NOT the first daft dipstick to walk in the door and tell use he'll FIX everything (but who can't beyond the length of a bumper stick message actually explain WHAT it is he'll fix).

February 23, 2011 6:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

4:33

That's obviously your "la pregunta" -- it's called dodging the question.

Prove "vendido" with anything other than opponents rumors, and then we can "habla".

Si?

February 23, 2011 6:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Each message works for a slightly different audience. This week's messages are massive.

For some, Rudy Rich's troubles with the police mean more than anything (why else would his handlers be trying to dig up all kinds of retired cops to write limp, vapid testimonial letters for him)? Simple, because he's HURTING in that area. BIG TIME.

Why would they be trying to roll out any other small business owner he ever gave an encouraging pat on the back to - also with "he helped me" testimonials.

Because he's hurting nearly as BIG TIME from the lack of community leadership support that Huizar has about 80-90 percent of coralled - districtwide.

(These are OBVIOUSLY the dirty secret weaknesses that his slime polling told Rudy about HIMSELF).

The simple stated fact, that Martinez doesn't speak Spanish, means a great deal to many of the Spanish ONLY-speaking (NOT bilingual) voters in this district.

For MANY of the much lower-paying service and civil service jobs that work those areas "bilingual" is a REQUIRED skill. You can't even answer the WANT AD, without that appearing on your resume.

Why should the most important LEADERSHIP position on L.A.'s Eastside be any different - even if it can't be listed as a "required" skill... it IS, absolutely!

Can you imagine the hell that would break loose if tomorrow, there were no Spanish-speaking cops working out of Hollenbeck. No Spanish-speaking firefighters interacting with people in crisis or disasters.

The City would get SUED, for MILLIONS of bucks, for being UNABLE to provide basic services to the people paying for them - and the most basic service of all is CAN YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING?

What the hell is Hacopian thinking, that he can spin that sh*t with the "language of representation" trumps actual personal communication? That's just insane (but, granted, he doesn't have a choice!) He's been propping up a 100 percent LOSER for months now with inane spinning.

That won't even fool the limo liberals in the Northeast. It sure isn't going to fly south of York.


BUH Bye Rudy Rich. You weren't even prepared to submit your application, just to get the ball rolling.

Go back and hire people for your restaurants who are quadraplegics. (They're better qualified to be waiters in your eateries than you are to serve CD14).

February 23, 2011 6:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The last three councilmembers, Huizar, Villaraigosa and Pacheco all sucked for the first two years they were in office. Okay, Villaraigosa, wasn't really "in office" for the first two years as councilmember.

Rudy Rich will be no different, even if you get him help from Pacheco.

No one can hit the ground running in the mess of City Hall.

The election is a simple one. If you are happy with the last 6 years, vote for Huizar. If you are not, then you vote for Martinez.

It is no surprise that Martinez is attacking Huizar, how else are you going to justify changing horses midstream.

Me personally I would love Huizar to be more engaging and at least in public act like he wants to be our councilmember.

February 23, 2011 6:53 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Can someone tell me why I should vote for Huizar?

February 23, 2011 6:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:54

He's your only choice.

Rudy Martinez is unqualified in EVERY possible way.

February 23, 2011 7:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:53

I don't think you can count on Rudy Rich ONLY sucking for the first two years, for two reasons: 1) He'll never be elected; but 2) (just for yucks), lets say his is...

All the others you mentioned had some background in public and civil service. They at least understood the basics of government and working with people to solve community problems and issues. (Don't let the "I'm a problem solver" Rudy tripe foll you. When he says "I solve problems, what he means is 'I solve MY problems. The problems that keep ME from getting richer" ...and MORE out of touch with real people.

Rudy Rich is a money-grubbing businessman, cutting corners in every walk of life to get richer and richer. He made MOST of his money off other people's misfortunes - buying they're family homes for pennies, and turning quick profits.

That's NOT typically the profile of someone suited for public life.

Usually, when you take aptitude tests in high school or college, if you have a "business" mentality, you know how to scrounge around and make moey for yourself -- smart counselors steer you in the exact opposite direction from public service.

Rudy should have listened.

Watch one episode of "Flip this Bird" (or whatever it's called), and just see how he relates to his own workers. He's not someone that will work well with whining, hard-luck constituents who don't even know who they should be askign for what.

It's a recipe for extremme disaster, and it would take the NEXT guy two TERMS to clean it all up.

February 23, 2011 7:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Part of the reason Huizar didn't seem to "hit the ground running" even though he had more local experience in L.A. than Pacheco or Antonio, was BECAUSE Antonio wasn't acting like a councilmember for two years.

He had to jump start nearly everything our pretend CM had pretended to start.

Now at the end of his first full term, things are moving along much better and we are actually in a lot better shape - even with the budget cuts, than some other districts that are forced to rely solely on stripped down city departments.

February 23, 2011 7:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:54

Don't waste people's time. If you ask that question, THAT way - you've already decided. All you want to do is POUNCE back and try to rebut every positive thing someone suggests, in a cynical attempt to prove the opposite.

But, it's OKAY. We don't NEED your vote. Huizar will be re-elected without all the "give me a good reason" people who haven't been paying attention anyway.

And YOU will join the other 1/4 to 1/3 that ALWAYS voice contrarian views and elect no one, ever in CD14 (the deadlocking, obstructionist GOP fringe, the "throw them all out" simple-minded types)... the one who ACTUALLY think a unqualified "real guy" (in this case a very RICH, dishonest, non-resident guy) who knows nothing is better than someone who's been doing the job, but not the way the minority of you agree with.

And from that you get:

JIMMY CARTER and ARNOLD SCHWARTZENEGGER


But not this time... so, VOTE your "ANTI" vote for Rudy Rich, and feel good about starting us off on a NEW course with a mediocre nobody -- until about 3 hours after the polls close, when Huizar is reelected, easily, by a double-digit margin, and Rudy rides back to Glendale, $200,000 poorer.

February 23, 2011 7:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:54

You're kidding, right?

His opponent "collapsed" from "stress," etc. after only the fourth actual face-to-face (with 50-100 people) meeting in the district, and less than six months after moving here to run.

And he's being treated like a baby kitten by the constituents so far, compared to how Huizar gets handled every day by rabid haters like the ones who post here.

Can you IMAGINE how Martinez would handle actual angry rooms full of voters if he ever managed to get elected?

What do you think will happen within the first 6 months when the Huizar-haters here at Mayor Sam's turn into Martinez-haters instead? (Don't believe hat will happen -- ask Antonio, ask Trutanich, ask - pretty much anyone elected).

You should only vote for Martinez if you want him to drop dead by the end of July (and that's NOT a threat Rudy, so PLEASE don't file another "poor me" police report).

We need cops on the street, not filling out your campaign-spin paperwork.

February 23, 2011 8:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

People should vote for Rudy specifically because he is not part of the established machine.

There are plenty of "unqualified" people who have sat on the City Council. Most of them are owned by a political machine. A couple are owned by the unions, a couple by TELACU... that does not make them better representatives of their districts. It makes them tools. Huizar is a tool. Villaraigosa was a tool. Alatorre was a tool.

City Council is about making sure the quality of life remains high for the entire district, not just the connected few. It is about delivering public resources effectively. It is about changing bureaucratic processes so that the agencies make fair and impartial decisions. There is no reason Council people should being MAKING policy on the fly and using discretionary money to do it. This is the sign of a broken government.

We need council people that will fix the system, not take advantage of it, pillaging precious resources for their friends.

February 23, 2011 9:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Dip... Unintelligent... Useless... Ineffectual... Limited... And a waste of taxpayers money = Ana Cubas. Fired! Wake up Mrs. Huizar.

February 23, 2011 10:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

9:17

And what qualifies the old house flipper Rudy to "fix" anything but a clogged drain?

Just because he's not part of a "machine" (and, what a conspiracy theory load of hooey!), doesn't mean he can move one meaningful change through City Council, even given 4 years.

And then where is the 14th district left? With the only "non-machine" player in City Hall -- i.e., the ONLY one who can't get squat accomplished for us.

No, I'll take one of the "team" players who can occasionally get something through for us, rather than a contrarian who stands on his own -- accomplishing nothing.

February 24, 2011 12:41 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Rudy is described here repeatedly as the" house flipper". That's only a recent phenomena. His businesses are also something started only in the last few years. Does anyone know what he was doing 10, 20, years ago?

February 24, 2011 2:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Will one of the Sleazy Huizzy groupies who keep attacking and posting here like immature, ignornant fools please answer why is Huizar giving money to a school in Sherman Oaks from the GRYD money? That money is earmarked and targeted to be used in CD14? Maybe the media should look into that. Another question is why did Huizar GIVE Janice Hahn $50,000 from the CLARTS FUNDS for a youth center in her area not CD14?????? Is Janice Hahn going to pay it back or what favor is she doing Huizar because he GAVE it to her?

February 24, 2011 7:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:23

Huizar was the only member of council to grab his knee pads and do Villar's bidding on his DWP corruption bid - the only vote out of 15. I would say that defines a vendido.

We can go into Vernon, Belmont, Southwest, - the list goes on and on - one example after another of Huevon Huizar selling out his community. At least he sold himself for enough money to buy his re-election. There is no democracy in Skelton's barrios.

February 24, 2011 10:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

7:23 a.m.

Your post re: the "Sherman Oaks" school is completely 100% wrong.

Huizar gave student transportation money to an Eagle Rock-based charter school that was forced (by NIMBY neighbors) to temporarily relocate for one year to a site in Sherman Oaks when LAUSD failed (under state law) to provide it with an alternate site within the area its students were drawn from.

All of the students at the school were from Eagle Rock and surrounding areas and were, nearly all, from CD14 families.

Huizar assisted with about one-months worth of bus transportation, until the school could locate another facility within the district, and reestablish itself as a resource for CD14.

Huizar not only helped the school stay open, he made up for his former employer's (LAUSD) insensitivity to the needs of students on our district.

That was an EXCELLENT use of district discretionary funds.

Do some homework next time, and you won't end up looking so damned foolish!

February 24, 2011 12:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:22

Judging from the "Rudy - big tobacco" slicks put out by the Huizar campaign, not only was he trying to pass himself off as a polic officer with his illegal badge, but he was also pretending to be the "owner" of restaurants he was only a partial investor in - to the chagrin of the REAL owners, who slapped him down publicly for it.

Fake, fraud, pretender... a pattern!

Rudy Rich is a known quantity. Only blind hatred of Huizar would get anyone to vote for Martinez.

(OH, and catch his own slicks about his "military service"... before he was MEG WHITMAN, trying to buy an election, he was DAN QUAYLE and G.W. BUSH-ing it in the reserves, following in an AGE-old GOP tradition of "defending the home.... um BACK?").

February 24, 2011 12:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:10

Is that like huevon Huizy getting slapped down by the other council members because the huevon was trying to pass himself off as a councilman.

February 24, 2011 12:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:39

We'll have another 4 years with Huizar on Council to determine if his peers respect or disrespect him, starting July 1.

(That same week, Rudy Rich will be planning his July 4th "Red (Snapper), White(fish) & Bluefin (Tuna)" sushi menu, to try and recoup 1/100 of his campaign funding losses).



Hoooooo, hah!

February 24, 2011 12:52 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That's right, when he was shilling for the cigarette companies as a "restaurant owner" Rudy Martinez wasn't even the actual spokesperson for any restaurants - and the REAL owners disagreed with him.

What a fraud, all the way around.

February 24, 2011 12:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This Ana Cubas is a real piece of work. Sort of the City Hall Ho. She won't be able to play that card for much longer as she gets older though. Her tone in explaining this fund is kind of condescending.

February 24, 2011 9:23 PM  

Anonymous g said:

WELCOME TO THE CD-14 WEBSITE ASA JOSE HUIZAR!

February 26, 2011 3:06 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement