Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Monday, January 10, 2005

Weekend Mayoral Round-Up

RodeoHertzberg brings in the Dough: Hertzberg's camp reports that they have raised the maximum allowed under the matching funds program and have reached the 2.2 mark. Reports are due tomorrow for all of the candidates.

Parks Shakes Up the Team: In a bold move just two months out from e-day, Parks sacks his management team for fresh meat.

LA Democratic Party Endorsement stalemate: Not reaching the 60% endorsement threshold needed to win the endorsement, Villaraigosa's camp falls short leaving the party endorsement open.

Animals Have Their Day: Sunday marked yet another debate, with Walter Moore gleaning the endorsement from the hosts. Who said this guy couldn't debate?

Handicapping the Race: The Downtown News picks up its series handicapping the Mayor's Race

Voting Blocs: The LA Times reports on the candidates scurrying for their needed blocs to build the numbers needed to win.


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Why doesn't any of this surprise me. Bitter Bernie is only running cause he's vinditative towards Hahn for booting him. AV is in all kinds of trouble with his constituents and things will be coming to head real soon. Bob is on another planet with school issue. And poor Alarcon has no clue what he's running for. Although I have to give hm high marks for being a classy mature candidate who hasn't joined the bullies.

January 10, 2005 11:14 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I agree with the above statement. Anyone who dares challenge the failures of the current administration is just a bully. How dare anyone speak negatively about an incompetent mayor! What do they think this is, a democracy?

January 10, 2005 11:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Worst mistake Tony made was having Jack Weiss endorse him. He couldn't even help Tony win the County democratic endorsement this weekend. How lame is that? Mind you after Hahn sent a letter in 2001 blasting them. Good! People are now getting the story on Tony. It's about time.

January 10, 2005 12:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Whats even worse is the fact that above poster has his/her facts wrong. The Central Comt was only recommending an a candidate to the full board. Either way its the 220 delegates that will ultimately vote on this matter. The sad, scary thing is that an incumbent Democratic Mayor who spoke at the DNC convention doesn't have a lock on this endorsement. He's the incumbent, i suppose the Dems are getting really nervous about endorsing a mayor paralyzed by scandal.

blog away.

January 10, 2005 12:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

MEAT: Give us the lists of bar owners and the 72 neighborhood watches. Until then you have NO credibility!

January 10, 2005 12:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That was a very weak post Meat. Sometimes in the defense of antonio, when it's not looking good, it's best to be quiet. If Antonio couldn't get the endorsement committee to vote for him he has no chance on the floor. You should know that. Nobody will get enough votes on the floor.

January 10, 2005 12:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hertzberg released his new polling numbers to this week's Cal-Peek:

Villaraigosa 24%
Hahn 20%
Parks 15%
Hertzberg 10%
Alarcon 6%

All those blog ads must be working.

January 10, 2005 1:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hertzberg is losing his umph by sticking to the silly LAUSD break up issue. It may have separated him from the pack............but not in the right way.

He already had the Valley Vote and needed to move to the rest of the City for support. Instead this break up plan created acrimony in the rest of the City, who think the elitists are just at it again.

Also, his support in the Valley hasn't necessarily been dwindling........but it has just quieted down, since the LAUSD is old new and Hertzberg has NOT brought anything new to the table.

Additionally, Villaragosa and Alarcon and even Parks are making much stronger showings than anticipated. Cutting into both the Mayor's and Hertzbergs possible base.

Tough times ahead. Looks like a rerun of the last one is coming up !!!

January 10, 2005 1:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If the blogs are doing so well for Antonio I say keep on with the blogs and let Antonio keep in the 14th and do something for us for a change.

January 10, 2005 1:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The blog ad reference was a touch of sarcasm directed at Mr. Hertzberg. Why would a campaign release a poll that showed their candidate floundering in 4th place?

January 10, 2005 2:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How embarrassed would you be knowing that the animal rights activists endorsed Walter Moore? He doesn't have much money, no endorsments until that one and he's a weirdo. I'm glad he shamed those other mayoral candidates. One of them thought they had it in the bag.

January 10, 2005 3:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I am the wrong person to ask (i don't have any connection with any of the campaigns) but with the amount of money he has raised he can change those numbers around pretty quickly with TV advertising. What do you think?

January 10, 2005 3:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Responding to the previous poster: yeah, money means everything, and everything so far is pretty insignificant until people start dropping mail and launching ads...

Here's a little perspective from a LA Times Poll from the last cycle, a month and a half out from election day, with their actual voter returns in ()s:

Hahn: 24 (25)
Soboroff: 12 (21)
Villaraigosa: 12 (30)
Wachs: 11 (11)
Becerra: 10 (6)
Connell: 8 (5)
Don't Know: 23

Soboroff screamed from 12 to 21 in a month, and AV jumped even higher. What made the difference? ADS.

Until people start spending on media, poll numbers are just about name-recognition...

January 10, 2005 6:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Money is important but it's not everything. 3 candidates in this race are already very well known: Hahn, Villaraigosa and Parks - unlike in 2001 when Hahn was the only candidate with citywide name ID. That made the 2001 race more fluid.

But the fundraising numbers for the past 3 months show that Villaraigosa has outraised the rest of the field by quite a bit.

Villaraigoas raised $658,022 in the period. Hahn $472,882 and Hertzberg $473,165.

Villaraigosa has now passed Hertzberg in cash on hand.

January 10, 2005 6:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


1) THIS FROM LA OBSERVER (read on after this for my analyis)

"Fast and loose *
Antonio Villaraigosa's campaign sent email to supporters this afternoon claiming that he's leading the race for mayor based on a poll released today by the Hertzberg campaign. The first problem is, Hertzberg didn't release a poll today (or any other day). Second, Hertzberg's spokesman Matt Szabo says their internal polling doesn't agree with the numbers Villaraigosa is claiming. When I called to ask what gives, Nathan James at the Villaraigosa headquarters couldn't explain the quite specific wording in his candidate's email, but he did say they were just passing along numbers published in CalPeek [the political newsletter by Dick Rosengarten in Beverly Hills]. Below is what CalPeek actually says, and what Villaraigosa's people made of it:

First the Calpeek item:

New Poll in L.A. Mayor's Race: This recent poll for former Assemblyman Bob Hertzberg was conducted by Andre Penada—that much has been confirmed by the Hertzberg campaign, but nothing else. Here are the numbers: Antonio Villaraigosa 24%, Mayor Jim Hahn 20%, Councilman Bernard Parks 15%, Hertzberg 10% & State Sen. Richard Alarcon 6%.
Andre Pineda (correct spelling) is indeed Hertzberg's pollster. Szabo would not discuss what their polling does find, other than to say "all the internal numbers we have show that Hahn is in trouble." Trying to read between the lines, I suspect there is a poll with these numbers or something very close. It's not surprising that Hertzberg's people won't confirm it—it's not flattering to his chances. But caveat emptor: We don't know when the poll was taken, what the question was, what the margin of error was or who got polled. Basically, it's pretty useless out of context (or else I would have led with the numbers.)

With CalPeek the sole source on the poll, what Villaraigosa did with it is surprising:

Dear Friend,
We have some great new news to share with you: Antonio Villaraigosa is leading the 2005 race for Los Angeles Mayor -- even in the polling released by our opponents!

Earlier today, the Bob Hertzberg campaign released the results of their just completed mayoral poll. Here is what it showed:

Villaraigosa 24%
Hahn 20%
Parks 15%
Hertzberg 10%
Alarcon 6%

This latest poll is certainly great news, and it confirms what our own polling shows and what we've been sensing over the past few weeks: Antonio's message is resonating with the voters, and our campaign has the momentum....

The email was signed by Senior Advisor Parke Skelton.

* Advantage Villaraigosa on fundraising: Hertzberg, on the other hand, just issued a press release claiming to be the best-funded challenger to Hahn. But the numbers from Villaraigosa's camp show that he did better in the latest reporting period and now has a bit more cash on hand than Hertzberg.

The relevant numbers:

First column: Amount raised 10/1-12/31
2nd: Total raised so far
3rd: Cash on hand

Villaraigosa $658,022 $1.307 M $1.614M
Hertzberg $473,165 $1.573 M $1.604M
Hahn $472,882 $2.74 M $2.434M"


If you look at how much each of the leading mayoral candidates has raised, look at a couple of other statisitcs:

AV: $658K
BH: $473K
JH: $472K
RA: $188K
BP: ? (not posted yet)
WM: $94K

AV: 13%
RA: 48%
JH: 57%
BH(Bob Spendsberg): 67% (WOW!)
BP: ?

Now, some folks may have spent money out on all sorts of things, some good (slates, like Maxine Waters' mailer to S. LA) and some bad (blogads, expensive consultants, etc.). Some may think there is no way AV's true expenses can be this low (in other words, he is waiting for the bills from his fundraisers, from his consultant, and to pay his campaign staff). Others may think this reflects fat in the Hahn and Hertzberg campaigns.

OK, so this brings us to the next point. How much will folks have to spend, as money is king and will put all this carping on the Mayor Sam blog to rest?

If the race were today, this is how is would break down:

Hahn has raised $2.7 million, received another $400,000 in matching funds ($3.1 million total) and has $2.4 million on hand, but as someone who has accepted public matching funds, he can only spend a total of $2.25 million. He has already spent $776,000, which means he has about $1.5 million left to spend on the campaign unless the spending ceiling is lifted (see below).

Blogsberg has raised about $1.6 million, received another $646,000 in matching funds ($2.25 million total--the maximum you can spend, by the way). But as another matching funds person, he has accepted a ceiling of $2.25 million and he has spent out $662,000, leaving him with about $1.6 million to spend, a little more than Hahn.

Villaraigosa has raised about $1.3 million, received an additional $428,000 in matching funds (for a total of $1.73 million). With expenses of just $120,000 Villaraigosa has about $1.6 million to spend as well, a little above Hahn.

HOWEVER, Villaraigosa is the only person who can raise more to spend more. He is the only one who still has another $500,000 to raise (take out some money for expenses and you net let's say $400,000), giving him somewhere in the ballpark of $2 million to spend.

Either AV is running a very bare-bones, shrewd campaign, or else he has put off a lot of his bills. On the other hand, Hahn and Hertzberg do not seem to have low overhead.

Now, none of this means squat if the expenditure ceiling is lifted. What does that mean? It means that the voluntary cap of $2.25 million that candidates who accept public matching funds have can be lifted if one of two things happens. First, if a rich guy spends the amount of money for the cap (spends at least $2.25 million) from his or her own funds. Since we don't see that millionaire on the horizon who hasn't accepted matching funds (Moore has for instance), Martin Luther King Aubrey Sr, Ted Crisell, or Addie Mae Miller would have to win the lottery really soon for the ceiling to be lifted in this way.

Which brings us to way number two. If an independent expenditure or expenditures for one specific candidate reaches $200,000 in this race, then the ceiling is lifted. Now in the Pacheco-Villaraigosa campaign, individual IEs (independent expenditures) reached this level, so there is little reason to doubt that this will happen in the mayor's race. So, for example, if SEIU 347 dumps $200,001 into the campaign for Hahn, or Ron Burkle does the same for Villaraigosa, or if an Indian tribe did that for Hertzberg, then EVEERYONE'S (yes, everyone's) ceiling is lifted.

Under this scenario, the big pile of cash that Hahn is sitting on suddenly comes into play. And Hertzberg isn't done fundraising (as he would be under a cap today).

So, if the IEs come rolling down the hill, they have a dual impact: 1) they help a candidate out and 2) they lift the expenditure ceiling, helping that candidate (and his/her opponents) out as well.

So this would seem to put Hahn back in the driver's seat financially, with Hertzberg in second only if the ceiling is raised. Otherwise, AV is going to have the most dough to get his message to the voters.

January 10, 2005 7:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


One last note. If those poll numbers are ballpark correct, if I were Bernard Parks and really wanted to be mayor or if I were Hertzberg, I would be spending (or more likely, my Indian friends) would be spending money coming after Villaraigosa to knock him into second. Parks probably doesn't care enough about being mayor (and doesn't have the contacts/support), but I bet some friends of Hertzberg or the campaign itself starts going after Antonio Villaraigosa. I would be on my guard if I were AV. And if BH or his friends don't, he is able to get into third with his money, but I agree that his campaign will be known as Soboroff 2005.

January 10, 2005 7:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


I agree with MEATEATER. Couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for the thought-provoking post.

January 10, 2005 8:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Now that post actually had Meat to it. Very impressive. One might note that Blogsberg has a higher overhead because he doesn't have a built in staff of schedulers, staffers, city cars, etc.. that all four other current electeds have to capitalize on (and don't tell me that doesn't happen). Hahn is just bloated period, just like his PR budget. Villaraigosa did raise a huge amount. This should get interesting now that the field is quickly dwindling to three.

January 10, 2005 8:57 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Good post Meateater -- if Armando likes it than i do as well.

I can attest to the fact that Antonio is running a bare-bones campaign, with all the spinning i've been doing here and haven't been paid -- i am owed a lot!

What folks are forgetting is that Antonio entered the race last, so his overhead would be low. Also note that during the first mayoral race folks thought the same thing of Antonio's campaign and his financing, the fact of the matter is he runs a tight ship.

As for the LA Observe posting regarding the e-mail -- Cal-Peek is a highly regarded political newsletter -- if all Antonio did was repost something Cal-Peek made public how is that controversial? Its a slow news day for these guys (especially with the rains to deal with) if i was running Antonio's campaign i'd do the same thing. Whenever one of your opponents says you are doing ok in HIS poll -- than you pat yourself on the back and tell others.

As for Hertzberg attacking Antonio -- i think the negatives on Hahn are ripe for the purging -- anyone reading polling data on a daily basis knows this -- which is why all guns on Hahn.

Plus this campaign is a referendum on Hahn and no one else. Lastly, i suspect all the candidates would rather have Antonio as their opponent than an incumbent mayor - all guns on Hahn.

blog away.

January 10, 2005 10:12 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

RE: advice to Hertzberg for making a run-off.. Going after Antonio is not a good strategy for Hertzberg. He's got to pick up Reps and conservative Valley Dems in order to augment his base. That means taking on Hahn and, to a lesser extent, Parks. Hertzberg will move, but his movement will come at the expense of Hahn. Hertberg will be battling with Hahn for the second spot in the run-off.

January 10, 2005 10:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

These last two posts, from Villaraigosa sympathizers are just wrong. Villaraigosa has a better chance against Hahn than against Hertzberg. Hertzberg is the real threat to AV.

January 10, 2005 10:35 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"All guns on Hahn" sounds like a Hertzberg advisor unable to admit that he is pursuing a losing strategy. I think Pineda's poll is accurate ( and when will he be removed from Hertzberg's campaign for having distributed a document that clearly hurts his client?)and shows what a disastrous campaign Hertzberg is mounting. Hertzberg has the weakest campaign team of the three major candidates and now is the time for a major reshuffle or he is finished. He should solidify his Valley base and focus on the jewish, westside and eastside vote. That means taking on Villaraigosa, not Hahn. It is not Villaraigosa's message that has propelled him to front runner status, as Parke Skelton suggests in his memo, but rather Hertzberg's misdirected campaign. If Hertzberg is unable or unwilling to make such changes, next his support in the Valley will begin to erode.

January 11, 2005 12:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huggy needs to go after Villaraigosa big time if he wants to catch up. Drop the school issue and get focused on what's really going on. No one knows better than Huggy what Villaraigosa is really about cause they lived together. Villaraigosa lied to Huggy and has taken credit for Assembly Bills Huggy did the work on. Huggy needs to bring that out. Again, show Villaraigosa lack credibility and integrity. Show what a liar he is. Huggy is too nice. Nice is not going to get you in the run-off. This is sleazy politics at its best so get in there Huggy and show them what you're made of.

January 11, 2005 10:43 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It's incredible how Parks dropped from interesting to embarrassing in so little time. Where's that poster who said that there are plenty of mayoral candidates who'd like to be [Parks] right now? (See blog titled "Moore Leads in Mayoral Poll). Yeah - everyone would like to have no money, no campaign staff and no chance of winning. Guess the PPL and those cops are gonna' keep their 3/12 schedules.

January 11, 2005 11:45 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


If Hertzberg's numbers are right - if those are even his numbers. Then going after the guy in 2nd place is the right strategy -- Hahn is the corrupt one, Hahn is the one bleeding - Hahn is the one without a natural base. If Hertzberg does have stuff on Antonio??? Save it when people are just concentrating on them two in the run-off.

The most interesting item so one as really commented on is this -- Parks base. The leaders in South LA are reading the same stories we are and have to be getting nervous about their candidate, with Antonio making the only real inroads it seems -- i think we will begin to see a real campaign emerge in South LA for Antonio.

blog away.

January 11, 2005 12:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Unless Antonio truly is "the second coming of Tom Bradley", which I think many leaders in South LA laughed at, I highly doubt he is making major in roads. He'll need Ludlow to carry his water for him again to have a chance in the South.

January 11, 2005 12:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Black will usually join Latinos in a cause and be on the same page. I hear that South LA is waiting to hear from the Latinos in CD14 to see what to make of the recall. They don't want to put themselves out there for a candidate who is about to get slammed. They are not supporting Parks cause they can't relate to him. Antonio has been in the South talking the same cheap crap. ONly difference is they're not buying it this time. Finally people who started out supporting Antonio have backed off and sitting back and waiting. Antonio didn't nearly the endorsement he thought he would. That's what he gets for being so damn arrogant and telling the Latinos he had 80% of their support already. A lot of Latinos are jumping on the Alarcon wagon.

January 11, 2005 2:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


I guess this poll sponsered by WAVE newspaper (primarily a South LA publication must be wrong, huh)


Poll Result
Who would you vote for in the L.A. mayoral race?
13% Jim Hahn
29% Antonio Villaraigosa
9% Robert Hertzberg
46% Bernard Parks
3% Richard Alarcon

Let's all nevermind the fact that if all Antonio got was 29% of the black vote that would be nearly double what he got 4 years ago. So to that last poster, can't see how you are right if these numbers are coming out of that community already. Antonio already doubles up his South LA %'s and yet they are all waiting for the recall? hmm someone is fibbing -- and it ain't me....

blog away dum-dums

January 11, 2005 7:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

MEAT? Where is the list of the bar owners giving money to the recall? Where is the list of the 72 neighborhood watches. You got no credibility MEAT until you deliver on what you promise. As the guy said, MEAT is just a slab of FAT when it comes down to it.

January 11, 2005 9:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


I didn't realize i was barred from blogging until i published the info i said i would (and i will dum-dum), but i wasn't aware that i had to do it on your timeline not mine.

Facts are i like facts -- or some reasonable facsmile of them.

Calm down lil one -- i have a REAL job, so sometimes i get a lil busy when it comes to research.

blog away -- what am i saying, of course you will.

January 11, 2005 11:56 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Interesting that MEAT will answer only what he wants to and ignores facts. Poor Parks Jr. most likely had to sit and click on the votes for daddy because he's looking so badly these days. And MEAT that was 4 years ago and a lot has changed. Tony has gotten more bad publicity on the recall and his constituents being so unhappy that all the people I've spoken to in South LA aren't jumping to his side just yet. They're waiting to see what happens in the next two weeks cause you know that's when all hell is going to break loose.

January 12, 2005 9:42 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Nobody is "barring" you from blogging FAT. But I don't think anybody is taking your seriously either - until you do provide the facts YOU SAID YOU WOULD PROVIDE. You're not really the expert you think you are FAT. You have a lot to learn. The person you THINK you are would never make such an elemetary mistake as saying something (and saying you had proof) at the time when you clearly had no proof. That was being a DUM-DUM.

January 12, 2005 1:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home