CommentsONE MAN’S OPINION-Case in point - the May 28, 2019 LA Times article by two of my favorite Times reporters (which is a very short list) Emily Alpert Reyes and David Zahniser, “Should L.A. Curb Charitable Fundraising by Politicians? Council Members Aren’t So Sure,” touches on bribery at LA City Council but closes its eyes to the Hufflaumpus Giganticus.
Perhaps the most that the LA Times owner would allow his reporters to investigate was whether the city should stop the work of these truly holy, saintly and generous councilmembers of raising millions of dollars for charity. Wow, that surely is journalistic alchemy! Corruption becomes charity without mentioning the core problem – criminal vote trading.
Councilmember Robert Blumenfield Unwittingly Admits that Corruption Controls the Council
Per the LA Times article, “…Councilman Bob Blumenfield warned that the measure would shut out contributions from unions and advocacy groups, triggering ‘a hard shift to the right politically’ at City Hall. If the measure goes into effect, an environmental group like the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters would be put ‘out of business,’” he said.
Blumy’s premise is that the city council responds to cash and not to sound public policy. If the cash ceases to come from the left wing, it will come from the right wing, and then the council’s policies will follow the money. So, we learn a couple things: (1) The council is corrupt (like that’s news) and (2) reporters can sneak some larger truths into their articles.
Then these devious reporters apparently evaded the LA Times’ censors by adding, “Unions and other groups also could continue contributing as much as they want to independent expenditure committees, which can raise and spend unlimited amounts to promote candidates.”
OK, this sentence is like admitting there’s a stench of pachyderm dung in the living room. Eliminate all public giving to councilmembers, the crooks can give as many gazillion million dollars as they wish secretly. Truths like this may result in Reyes’ and Zahniser’s being booted or win them the Woodward Bernstein Award.
The Wooly Mammoth Which Everyone Ignores
This particular member of the Elephantidae family is too large not to see, but at the same time, it is too large to address. The City Council is a criminal enterprise which operates in the open due to the protection of Judge Richard Fruin who ruled in December 2016, that the LA City Council’s violations of Penal Code § 86 and of its own city council rules are “non-justiciable.” That’s fancy legalese for “above the law.”
Without the Habitual Violation of Penal Code § 86, Los Angeles Would Have No Corruption
Sure, some councilmembers would cheat on gas mileage and steal pens and pencils from the office but stopping the city from its criminal voting pact would end developer corruption immediately. As explained 2,356,784 times in previous articles, the criminal voting pattern works as follows:
(1) Each member must vote “Yes” for each development project which is placed on the city council agenda. That is why every project passes unanimously – “No” votes are not allowed.
(2) A footnote: The city councilmember does not have to actually vote. The City Council’s vote tabulating machine automatically votes “Yes” so that no councilmember has to physically vote. Yes, they are this open about their criminal enterprise that they have it coded into their vote tabulating machine.
(3) Every project passes unanimously. If LA did not have the world’s dumbest or the most corrupt District Attorney, the DA would admit that 30,000 consecutive unanimous votes are indica of vote trading. The City Clerk’s public files have far more data than is needed to secure a Grand jury indictment or for a criminal preliminary hearing. The chance that this vote pattern would occur innocently approaches 1 in Infinity.
The Crux of LA Developer Corruption
Because any project which is placed on the City Council agenda is guaranteed unanimous approval, any developer only has to buy a single councilmember to make certain his project, no matter how illegal or how many poor people will be made homeless, will definitely pass.
This is how Garcetti’s Manhattanization Mania has destroyed the rent-controlled units for over 60,000 poor people and how Garcetti caused the homeless crisis. While America has had homeless people forever, the crisis is new. LA has had no influx of poor people. Rather, the homeless crisis is home-made. Garcetti’s densification policy preys upon the poor because they cannot fight back.
Also, the Buy Low, Sell High maxim applies. Rent-controlled housing provides a modest rate of return, while market rate housing has no upper limit. Thus, it is much cheaper to buy older rent-controlled units, tear them down, and build a mega project than it is to buy the more expensive market rate apartments.
Once people are evicted from rent-controlled apartments, they have to pay market rate for a new place. Thus, an elderly person with $1,000/month social security check may have a $450/month one bedroom, but after eviction her new apartment’s monthly rent will be $1,100. Some can live with children. Others live in converted garages, while some double up. Tens of thousands, however, have two options: (1) the streets or (2) die. As the data is beginning to show, streets vs death is becoming a two-step situation. Living on the streets hastens death. Of course, when the councilmembers support the evictions of 60,000 poor people, they never discuss the downside of their actions. All that concerns them is how much loot they rake in from developers.
The Vote Trading Pact Is as Ingenious as it Is Evil
Without the requirement that each councilmember must vote Yes for each project placed on the City Council agenda, developers would have to separately bribe a majority of the City Council to get anything passed.
Can you imagine how much oily Wesson would charge to be the last Yes vote? What would be the going rate for O’Ferret? Let’s remember the developers are dealing with city councilmembers who intentionally shove the elderly, the disabled and single mothers with toddlers onto the streets to suffer and die.
Ending Criminal Vote Trading Will End the Developer Corruption
If and only if the authorities end the criminal vote trading, which Penal Code § 85 specifically outlaws for city councils, can we end developer corruption. Once buying one councilmember will no longer guarantee approval, bribery will become too expensive. In Los Angeles, however, honesty is for suckers. Welcome to LA where the pockets of councilmembers are lined with gold and the streets are paved with human feces.
(Richard Lee Abrams is a Los Angeles attorney and a CityWatch contributor. He can be reached at: [email protected]. Abrams’ views are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
ags:
