We could not have said this better ourselves

If you want to learn about pro sports, yesterdays weather, police chases, lost pets, car accidents, fires and other headline catching news (all delivered by very sexy looking "script readers") then by all means watch local TV news. The type of news gathering that exposed the city of Bell and the other pension crisis issues in local government is not going to be on the local TV news. Well not until long after it is headline news on blogs and in newsprint. In fact even smallish newspapers like the press telegram don't cover this stuff. It takes "real" "investigative journalism". Not regurgitating press releases by the local government news machine like some "local" news papers are happy to do. In fact that was one of the uglier parts of the CIA leak case during the Bush years. Even the national media and government work hand in hand to promote each other. Its a dirty business but in some cases its the only way to get a story. The media does not have the time nor resources to "dig" by hand for everything they print daily.

This was a very good program highlighting the problem. Of course it was on PBS and advocated doing what we did in the late 1700's and early 1800's and that was using public funding structure to promote investigative journalism (sort of like what we do with PBS). The Founding Fathers made the First Amendment first as I think they realized that without a non governmental "check" on government we would have a real problem long term with our government. Just look at the countries that repress true and open journalism and see how well they pass the democracy test. The problem we have now is the "blogopshere" has taken over journalism so its really hard to know who to trust. Government or the bloggers.

Here at LAAG we wish we had a full time staff like the NY Times or LA Times just to dig around over at city hall. I am sure we would find some embarrassing stuff. But we don't have the staff the city does (nor the tax dollars). They can bury it a lot faster than we can dig it up.

Oh and in case you were wondering, still no "details" from the Lakewood City Council on how they are going to be more "transparent" in 2011. First I think Larry Van Nostran has to look the word up in the dictionary.

FCC report on media warns of decline in quality local news
June 9, 2011 | 3:21 pm
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/06/fcc-report-on-media-warns-of-decline-in-quality-local-news-.html

A new report from the Federal Communications Commission warned that the "independent watchdog function that the founding fathers envisioned for journalism" is at risk in local communities across the country.

In a 475-page report released Thursday titled, "The Information Needs of Communities: The Changing Media Landscape in a Broadband Age," the government regulatory agency, which has oversight over television and radio as well as certain aspects of the Internet, said there is a "shortage of local, professional, accountability reporting" that could lead to "more government waste, more local corruption," "less effective schools" and other problems.

"The less quality reporting we have, the less likely we are to learn about government misdeeds,” said FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in a statement released with the report.

A topic of discussion in the report is the Los Angeles Times' coverage of the abuses by the city administration in Bell. Although the Pulitzer-Prize winning efforts of The Times exposed the corruption, it went on for years before getting noticed.

“A lot of residents tried to get the media’s attention, but it was impossible,” community activist and teacher Christina Garcia told the FCC. “The city of Bell doesn’t even have a local paper; no local media of any sort.”

Indeed, the FCC noted that The Times covers almost 100 municipalities and 10 million residents. David Lauter, Metro editor of The Times, is quoted as saying that his staff is “spread thinner and there are fewer people on any given area.... We’re not there every day, or even every week or every month. Unfortunately, nobody else is either.”

Local TV is singled out in the report for not covering important issues enough. Although the number of hours of local news has increased over the last few years, too few stations "are investing in more reporting on critical local issues," the report said. Furthermore, the report said that although stations may be adding newscasts, they are doing it with fewer reporters.

Even with the additional newscasts, the stories often focus on crime and the reason for that has more to do with how cheap it is to cover crime stories than it does viewer demand.

While the report, which was originally to be titled "The Future of Media," said there has been an explosion of media platforms because of the growth of digital platforms, at the same time there has been a decline in quality as a result of the same technology boom.

"As technology offered consumers new choices, it upended traditional news industry business models, resulting in massive job losses," the FCC said.

The result has been "gaps in coverage that even the fast-growing digital world has yet to fill." Although the digital media may someday fill the void left by diminishing traditional media, "at this moment the media deficits in many communities are consequential."

-- Joe Flint

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Crime mapping in Lakewood gets a facelift (once it comes on line)

We of course were not surprised when the Sheriff's dept. (LASD) managed to once again drop the ball on crime reporting. We applaud the LASD in trying to find a cheaper (not sure how much cheaper or if better) alternative to crimereports.com which they have been using for some time as we reported. What bothers us the most is that the city of Lakewood NEVER even mentioned crimereports.com on their website or in any other literature we can find. Why? The Press Telegram did not even mention this safu below with the transition to crimemapping.com. We mentioned crimereports.com when we first happened upon it by accident in January 2009. Only time will tell if crimemapping.com gives us better detail and more customization than crimereports.com. In addition, one must remember that these third party privately run websites are only as good and as timely as the data supplied by LASD. One must also remember that these are only incidents that are reported AND where a report is taken or an incident number is assigned. In most cases people don't even bother to report stuff to Lakewood LASD as nothing good ever comes of it. And none of us will ever know how much of that crime goes unreported. (in speaking with some recent victims of Lakewood burglaries we were told by the victims that reporting it to Lakewood LASD was a total waste of time)

When we recently heard of a rash of residential Lakewood burglaries in March and April 2011 we became even more interested in the realtime crime data. Also we learned that the LASD Cerritos substation puts out a weekly crime related email with maps and a very nice one page summary of significant crime trends (and some insight) for residents to keep on the lookout for. Now what puzzled us is why is Cerritos substation putting out these weekly crime reports when Lakewood is not? Could it be that Cerritos has more crime than Lakewood? Hardly. They also have the same Sheriff service Lakewood does. Cerritos LASD also still uses crimereports.com and will be using crimemapping.com in addition to the email summaries they are sending out unlike Lakewood LASD. Its key to note that the emailed reports come from the CITY of Cerritos (crime_information@cerritos.us), not LASD (lasd.org). So there you have it. The difference is that the Cerritos city council acknowledges that crime exists in their city and they want their residents to be aware of an uptick etc in crime or abnormal pattern and the types of crime as well as where the hotspots are. Now on the other hand the Lakewood city council (which happens to have a Sheriff sitting on it) does not want to even acknowledge that there is any crime in Lakewood as this hurts reelection. So the best way to pretend there is no crime in Lakewood is to make sure the city never officially acknowledges any (by sending out crime reports like Cerritos) other than to say at the end of the year "crime is down..." Oh great. What about the rash of burglaries in North Lakewood. Oh well those just get merged into the overall yearly rate. Problem Solved. If you want to dig a little deeper you are on your own. The city of Lakewood is not going to help you and they are not going to ask LASD to help you either. Again as we said before there are lies, damn lies and statistics. Denial is not just a river folks. Again lack of transparency is very "apparent" when you take even a little bit of a closer look at what is going on in this city.


Sheriff's online crime data unavailable as department switches software
By Brian Day, Staff Writer
Posted: 04/28/2011
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_17952798

LOS ANGELES COUNTY - Online public crime information from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is temporarily unavailable as the agency switches to a new crime reporting software, officials said.

For more than a year, the sheriff's department has provided limited information about the type, time and locations of crimes reported to the department via the website Crimereports.com. Several other Los Angeles County agencies, including the Baldwin Park, Covina and Whittier police, also provide crime information to the public via Crimereports.com.

The department has elected to start using a new system, effective this weekend, officials said, and the process has had the unintended consequence of no online crime information being posted on Crimereports.com since April 18.


"We don't know what the glitch was, but we're going to get it fixed," Los Angeles County sheriff's Capt. Michael Parker said.

"It was supposed to be seamless," Parker added of the transition between crime reporting systems.

The sheriff's department has paid for services from Crimereports.com through Saturday, Parker said, so it was unclear why crime data is no longer being updated. Once informed of the issue, authorities began looking into it.

Starting this weekend, Parker said, sheriff's officials will post crime data on the website Crimemapping.com, which is already used by agencies including Pasadena, Los Angeles, Arcadia and Sab Gabriel police.

When sheriff's data begins to show up on Crimemapping.com this weekend, Parker said, it will likely take a week or two to work out all the bugs.

"We expect glitches, because that's what happens when you do a big transition," he said.


Once in place, Crimamapping.com will retroactively pull all crime data from the previous six months

The switch is designed to provide better information to the public at a reduced cost to the sheriff's department, Parker said.

"We have changed systems because we found a system that was less expensive and was able to provide more information to public," he said.

Read more: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_17952798#ixzz1KwU1TI7F



Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Here we go again?

This is starting to become a problem. Now that city budgets are getting tight in the downturn the ugly truth is coming out: mismanagement or worse, fraud and deception. Again like with City of Bell we keep saying this is due to lack of transparency and voters and media that just dont want to take the time to scrutinize what is going on a local level and everyone is so obsessed with state and national political circus played out every day. Well this is where the news channels needs to focus their energy. Real investigative reporting at the local level. With all the media we have today there is more than enough to cover local politics properly. Without the drama and party bickering that overtakes state and national politics. But if the media does not shine the light on this type of stuff then voters will never see it. Quite frankly the two reporters that broke the City of Bell story last year deserve the Pulitzer.


State controller orders audit of city of Montebello, saying there's evidence of false financial reports
April 21, 2011
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/04/allegation-of-fake-financial-reports-prompts-outside-audit-of-troubled-montebello.html

The state controller took the unusual step Thursday of ordering an outside audit of the struggling city of Montebello, saying there is evidence the city produced false financial reports dating back several years.

The action, which marks the first time officials have launched a full city audit since examining wrongdoing in Bell last year, marks an ominous turn for Montebello, which is in danger of running out of money later this year.

The working-class city east of downtown L.A. has been mired in budget problems and allegations of mismanagement and missing money for months. Last week, the city manager brought in to clean up the mess abruptly resigned. Peter Cosentini warned councilmembers that former city officials for years had used accounting tricks to hide the true nature of the city’s financial picture, making it seem as though the city had more money than it actually did.

Montebello officials discovered more than $1 million in two off-the-book bank accounts. That prompted a probe by Los Angeles County prosecutors that is still ongoing. Last month, Montebello officials said they solved the mystery, claiming the money went to a local developer as part of a complex loan to build a restaurant in the city.

In a letter to Montebello announcing the audit, state Controller John Chiang said the city was out of compliance with state laws because it had not submitted annual audits and financial reports to the state. Chiang also cited comments made by several city officials to The Times and others that financial reports might be inaccurate and included false information.

“I have concluded that there is reason to believe that the Annual Report of Financial Transactions … [is] false, incomplete or incorrect,” Chiang wrote.

Montebello Councilwoman Christina Cortez, a critic of the city’s past financial dealings, said she welcomed the audit.

“It’s unfortunate that nobody in the city understood the severity and seriousness of all the illegal activities that have been going on,” she said. “I’m glad we are finally getting a third party to investigate.”


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Wonder where your law enforcement tax dollars are going?

Well when it comes to the LA County Sheriff's department it's not going to enforcement and keeping you safe, but to lawsuit payoffs. This Blake Dupree case was settled very quietly 2 months ago and we just recently came upon one article that just mentioned it. The only reason we mention it is because the incident happened at the Lakewood Sheriff substation in 2008. From the LA times story on yet another settlement for bad behavior:


"Lyznick's settlement comes less than two months after the county agreed to pay $4.25 million and other costs [so its even more money?] to Blake Dupree, a man who was paralyzed from the chest down after a sheriff's deputy Tasered him, causing him to fall from the top bunk of his jail bed. Dupree, who had been refusing to leave his cell, was then carried out to the station's fingerprint area and dumped on the floor, according to his lawsuit. Much of the 2007 [we understand it was 2008] incident was caught on tape." (keep those iPhones rolling!)

You ask yourself why the county settles these? Its because they cant take them to trial as it would be so obvious to a jury that LASD screwed up (per the LASD defense attorneys) and the jury would likely award a lot more money that then settlement. Also don't forget we still have this little gem yet to be "resolved". The LASD is very good at keeping these settlements out of the press as they dont want you to know where your tax dollars are really going. The Dupree settlement is almost half of he Lakewood LASD budget for a year! Like we said before, the Deputies that are causing these problems need to go. To never be hired again by another agency. Oh but wait the LASD union is in the way preventing us from getting rid of the "lawsuit magnets"....

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

justice really slows down when the criminal is a deputy sheriff

This story below just popped up today on the news wires and in the interest in thoroughness (unlike some media) we wanted to post a follow up as we had posted on this years ago. A few things the nice little news article below does mention. First this first surfaced in October 2008 as we first noted and that was for a crime going back to 2001!  And just now Deputy Dyer is pleading no contest..in April 2011... two and half years later? Are you kidding me? For a no contest plea? What took so long? There was no trial. The no contest plea is used when the criminal wants to avoid the plea from being used against him in any later civil action. It is good to see that he is paying the money back. Ill bet he serves no jail time on this regardless of the three year potential. I also note he is apparently paying the money back with no interest? Nice. I guess the taxpayers can foot that bill as all the cities are hurting right now (many due to paying guys like Dyer). Also he must have a really sweet pension from LASD as a reward for all his good years of thievery in order to cough up $550,000 so fast. (44k in back taxes likely means you have a substantial income). I see he paid for the investigation costs. But was he given a free defense attorney via the LASD union (ALADS) which in the end comes out of your pockets? One final note. In a way its a good thing Lakewood never tows any cars...we would just have this to worry about as well.


Retired deputy pleads no contest to embezzling $450,000
From wire service reports
Posted: 04/08/2011 07:28:42 AM PDT
http://www.dailybreeze.com/latestnews/ci_17801387

A retired Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy pleaded no contest Thursday to a felony count for embezzling about $450,000 in towing fees that were intended for the city of La Puente.

Joseph Dyer, 56, pleaded no contest to one count of a public officer crime, according to Deputy District Attorney Amy Pellman Pentz.

Dyer is facing three years in state prison when sentenced May 31 by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Stephen Marcus.

Dyer supervised the impound program at the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department's Industry Station and collected towing fees from residents between June 2001 and December 2007 that should have been paid to the city of La Puente, according to the District Attorney's Office.

Dyer's wife, Lydia, 47, pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor charge of filing a false tax return and was immediately sentenced to one year of probation.

The couple repaid the sheriff's department $554,588, which included the loss along with $100,000 toward the costs of the investigation, according to the District Attorney's Office.

They also paid just over $44,000 in back taxes to the state's Franchise Tax Board, according to the District Attorney's Office.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Transparency and Open Government in Lakewood: Larry Van Nostran does not get it

The only thing that happened to LAAG's transparency pledge we sent to all candidates (including Larry Van Nostran) on 2/17/11 was that they used it for campaign fodder/spin but did not learn anything from it apparently (or heaven forbid agree to take the pledge, with the exception of candidate Marisa Perez). We watched the 3/22/11 city council meeting (first one after the 3/8/11 election) with interest and Larry Van Nostran did not disappoint. Larry’s quote from the 3/22/11 meeting: “Recently transparency has become a great buzzword and well Lakewood has for more than 30 years has communicated with the residents about all aspects of civic life, in the newsletter, on cable TV, through direct mail and public meetings and now on line”. As my third promise to you we will continue to listen to your ideas on improving transparency and we will explore this year [2011] how we can increase your ability to become involved in city government.”

Form this short quote it is obvious that Larry cant see the difference between "spin" and "transparency" (also known as "open government"). Lakewood Living Newsletters, bill stuffers in the water bill, Lakewood Community News (the free Lakewood Chamber “throw away” paper). Those are all examples of spin. This includes the Lakewood web site. Just look at the nonsense on the home page. Nothing revealing or meaty on the entire site. Just happy talk. Spin. The Press Telegram is hardly news. Its mostly regurgitated press releases from the city council. No investigative journalism there. Just a few tidbits of "news" ...just enough to sell ads. All the foregoing "media" always put the city and the council in a positive light (as this is how you get re-elected) Transparency is explained here (interestingly this granicus.com site is the same one that provides Lakewood council meetings on the web!) and here and how to implement it is set out here.

Larry also made a number of other "promises" that night. His promise number 1 was to prevent blight through code enforcement. Oh yeah they have such a great track record on that. So Lets apply the LAAG transparency “buzzword” to that claim/spin and see what we get. For example where is the listing of all actions taken on all properties in Lakewood under the so called code enforcement? What was done? Where are the before and after pictures of the property? What did it cost us in terms of redevelopment money, interest free loans or staff time to get that one property fixed? See Larry that’s transparency and how it differs from your version of it which is “spin”. Spin means you just say it in a soundbite enough times and magically it becomes gospel.

How did transparency become a great buzzword? LAAG made it so before the election. You did not hear it or see it in any Lakewood publications, or Lakewood's website (word never mentioned once on the entire Lakewood website)

Telling residents about "all aspects of civic life" like how and where to vote, or where the parks are is NOT transparency Larry. Sorry. Getting people involved in your crusades based on your spin is not transparency either. So in other words Larry just because you want to pick a fight with the state like every other city over redevelopment money supported by our taxes, and get the residents to help you, that does not equate with transparency. So how do we apply the LAAG transparency “magnifying glass” once again to Larry's spin claims re the redevelopment money he wants? Well for one lets post how much Lakewood received in each of the last 5 years in terms of redevelopment money, where those funds came from (i.e. state taxes, local taxes etc.. be specific) and then how those funds were actually spent…on “studies” or consultants, meetings, trips, bogus organizations, or real shovels in the ground word to fix the blight? Again show us some before and after pictures of the "redeveloped" property so we can see with our own eyes what OUR tax money did (not private developer money). See Larry that’s the difference between transparency and spin. Spin by definition is not backed up by facts as there is no transparency. That’s what makes it spin.

Also note that Larry said that he (and the council apparently) would continue to LISTEN to OUR ideas on transparency. Not that they would implement any. Just listen to them. See how tricky politicians are? You have to parse their words very carefully. That's why Larry was reading from a script. Need to choose your words very carefully.

Also note how Larry said he wants to "increase our ability to become involved" in city government. What he meant by this is he wants to enlist you in fighting Sacramento and Jerry Brown to keep the city's redevelopment slush fund. (which really needs a transparency magnifying glass focused on it from the looks of this report) That was encoded in the rest of his speech. But again that is NOT transparency. Maybe astroturfing but not transparency.

LAAG is betting that its transparency pledge is not implemented. Simply because the more transparency there is the more questions will be raised. The more questions raised the harder it is for incumbents to get re-elected. So the incumbents have no incentive to create transparency. Get it?

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Posted Comment:

Transparency is NOT a buzzword it IS a policy of honesty and accessibility to our government. It is what taxpayers deserve and voters expect. Unfortunately, it is lacking in or city along with integrity... Lakewood living "released" a residential survey one month before the election and 6 months after it was taken! The "facts" were spun to favor the council and city management. No where does it state the demographics of the 400 residents (registered voters only) mostly white, elderly, working in our city in the upper income brackets, or how many times the same residents have been surveyed(information collected by phone only!) the "newsletter" left OUT a lot of facts like 2% of those surveyed want a dogpark or how many answers related to traffic! and safety or that residents stated "from neighbors" as their second way of finding info about city issues. in other words gossip. Information that a lot of times has no basis in fact. why? because the city and council will NOT allow residents to bring community issues to agenda. Cameras are turned OFF at council meetings so residents issues are never seen and there is no record of issues. The city also will not post important information residents need on their web site although residents have paid for countless computer upgrades! Questions to lakewood one take far too long to answer (keep in mind that the city staff enjoy 2 three day weekends a month more when monday holidays are connected. (that's why no furloughs are necessary) So city staff works part time anyway! so often several days pass! AND the information given depending on the subject matter is often wrong! Council Members have no email links to the city and no responsibility to residents to respond to problems once elected. Mr Van Nostran claimed "we are a safe city" KNOWING he had a serious home burglary situation going on at least a month prior to his re-election. He sat in on meetings promising to deal with the unenforced trucking issue on clark PRIOR to the opening of costco and has refused to acknowledge or deal with the escalating problem ever since breaking his word! Several neighborhoods are plagued with traffic and parking issues that destroy are safety, peace of mind , quality of life, and family budgets, Residents are forced to pay for and deal with situations and issues city policy has created and council refuses to address. Advocates for this city handled themselves admirably during this past election in the best interests of this city . I was one of them. It was hard to stand by and watch as the lines of religion and politics were so badly crossed. If these are the "values that dont change" I want nothing to do with them! I walk my talk and I have taught my children better by EXAMPLE! We will be ready in 2013 because times DO change!

"Sunshine Week" turns out to be rather overcast

We have to agree with this editorial. Transparency is not hard but some government entities (especially local ones) sure like to make it appear hard. This week was supposed to be the celebration of "Sunshine Week" but as the Illinois editorial below points out things are not so sunny in these United States especially at the local level. Again this only repeats what LAAG has been saying for years now. Make transparency a goal, a basic tenant of local government. And transparency means fully accessible on the web. Not in a filing cabinet in the clerks office at city hall. Well perhaps our new city councilmember will make transparency a goal for 2011. We really liked the "Sunshine Review" website idea and have linked to it before on the links section of our page (right hand side of this page).

Our View: Basic transparency shouldn't be hard for local governments

Posted Mar 18, 2011
http://www.pjstar.com/opinions/ourview/x1664570603/Our-View-Basic-transparency-shouldnt-be-hard-for-local-governments

As newspapers, broadcast stations and websites across the nation mark the annual Sunshine Week focusing on government transparency and accountability, most of the attention goes to the typical themes: open records requests, compliance with open meetings rules, the various attempts by politicians to neuter the laws governing both.

On that last score, it's worth noting that despite a promise by President Obama to boost transparency, his administration faced more requests for documents over the last year but responded to fewer than the year before, according to an Associated Press analysis, with responses taking longer than in years past.

Meanwhile, Illinois' central clearinghouse for public data celebrated its one-year anniversary at www2.illinois.gov/sunshine, offering quick links to a treasure trove of information on state spending and oversight matters and sometimes laying bare the dysfunction of state government. Some local governments still don't quite get the Open Meetings Act - the most recent being the Midland School Board, which had to re-vote on a lawsuit settlement last month after trying to handle the matter behind closed doors. And last week we detailed in this space the latest effort by Illinois lawmakers to limit the queries some people can make for government data.

But the end-all, be-all of transparency isn't just Freedom of Information Act requests and compliance with the Open Meetings Act. What matters just as much on a daily basis are the common things that, if a municipality takes the time to establish and maintain a website, ought to be included there. That information would include meeting agendas, archives of minutes from past meetings, and the names, phone numbers and/or e-mail addresses of current board members.

To be sure, taxpayers interested in what their officials are doing in their name and with their money can already go to government offices to get meeting agendas and minutes. But it's far easier to have such information just a few keystrokes away. Absolutely, elected officials should make it easy for constituents to become informed. Representing people means being accessible to them.

As you can see from the chart included with this piece, our sampling of local government bodies across central Illinois found many are providing at least that information, and in some cases offering plenty more for inquisitive minds. A handful have slipped behind in letting citizens in on the debates held, the decisions made, the spending authorized. If your board met back in February, why aren't those minutes online yet?

To the others absolutely falling down when it comes to the basics - the Dunlap School Board, where voters only have contact information for one of seven board members; the city of Chillicothe and the Marshall County Board, where constituents searching online can't find e-mail addresses or phone numbers for the folks calling the shots in those communities (there are no minutes for anything the Chillicothe council has done so far this year either) - the message is simple: Step it up.

Even open-government advocacy groups like the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform acknowledge that it can be tough for public bodies to determine what documents citizens have an interest in finding online. What we've described above are the bare minimum. Citizens should complain - now and at the ballot box later if these situations aren't remedied - or things will never change. In our experience, a local government that isn't forthcoming about the basics will try to hide far worse, for the worse.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Lakewood City Council election results March 8, 2011

Update March 23, 2011:

I would not consider 14% of registered voters any sort of a "mandate" or a "seal of approval" for the status quo as some politicians like to claim. Voter apathy is a huge problem not just city wide but nationwide as voters tend to have less and less faith in politicians ability to actually solve problems (as opposed to just complain that one level of government is "taking away" "their" tax money.) The 61 percent of the vote that comes in by mail makes one wonder why all elections are not just done via mail. What a waste of time and money.

Following certification of the official vote canvass by the City Clerk, the candidates received these final totals:

Lawrence H. "Larry" Van Nostran, Incumbent: 3402
Jeff Wood, : 2810
Joy Janes, : 2041
Marc Titel, : 1527
Marisa Perez, : 1263

The above totals represent the final tally for the March 8 election, and include all provisional ballots and Vote By Mail ballots turned in to precincts on election day. There are 45,920 registered voters in Lakewood and 6,328 ballots were cast in the March election. Turnout was 14 percent (well 13.78% actually). Turnout percentages are in line with Lakewood's 2005 and 2007 elections. The city is experiencing an all-time high in the overall number of registered voters. 61 percent of residents voted by mail, with 39 percent of residents going to a polling place to cast their vote.

3/8/11:

Unbelievably the Lakewood "incumbent machine" puts Larry VanNostran back into office. We hope our prediction about Larry was wrong. Jeff Wood wins the open seat, clearly benefiting from the "Esquivel effect" (yet more incumbent bias). Sigh. More later on LAAG regarding the results and what they might mean.

The unofficial vote count includes 22 of 22 total precincts reporting at 9:49 p.m. The total number of precincts includes 11 precinct counts of ballots turned in at polling places and 11 precinct counts of vote-by-mail ballots. Results are unofficial until the canvass of the election by the Lakewood City Clerk is completed.

Larry Van Nostran
Incumbent
3293

Joy Janes
Community Consultant
1961

Jeff Wood
Deputy Emergency Manager
2702

Marisa Perez
Environmental Policy Advisor
1200

Marc Titel
Educator/Businessman
1463

The City Clerk's "official canvass" of the March 8 election will contain the late vote-by-mail votes (ballots turned in at the polling places) and provisional ballots verified by the Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters.

The official canvass of the March 8 election will be presented to the City Council during the Tuesday, March 22 city council meeting. Following approval of the canvass, two council members will be sworn in that evening.


Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

Lakewood City Council candidate roundup for the March 8, 2011 City Council election

Well the day is almost upon us. Make sure you sharpen your pencils and make it to the polls on March 8, 2011 as this year, for a change, we actually have ballot choices (unlike in March 2009)

LAAG is not "endorsing" any of the Lakewood City Council candidates as we really don't believe in "endorsements". If there is one thing Lakewood candidates have plenty of its "endorsements" by their "pals". Quite frankly we think endorsements are not really worth that much. We want facts not facebook friends. LAAG quite frankly is more interested in who does not endorse a candidate (and why) rather than who does.

Elections are important for one reason really. It’s the only time elected officials will really listen (or at least pretend they are listening) to voters/taxpayers. Once elected look out. You just become a constituent that they have to mollify then do what they damn well please as after all they are now “in”, you are not, and they know what’s best for you as they got a "mandate from the 2500 or so people in the city that voted for them". Those small turnouts make it nothing more than a "popularity" contest, not an "issues" contest

The only good thing we can say about local politics is that they are non partisan so we don’t need to hear all the bickering from and regarding the parties. And quite frankly we are saddened that Lakewood voters want to know the party affiliations of the candidates. Without political party nonsense and chatter we can focus on the "issues". Problem is the only issues are "fluff" if you read the campaign “fluff fliers”. The candidates don't really address the "hard" issues adequately. Why should they if voters let them off the hook when they don’t do so? Of course part of the problem is that the hard issues are just that; hard to tackle and if you take a stand on them before an election you could be accused of not following through once elected. Now we wouldn’t want that.

Only one of the 5 candidates (Marisa Perez) took LAAG’s transparency pledge (well about 90% of it) and bothered to fill out our candidate questionnaire which had much tougher questions on it than those put forth at the ”debate”. All had an equal opportunity to do so as we emailed it it to all of them at the same time. Those that wanted to reach out to us did. We can only base our opinions below on what we have seen or have gleaned from public information. Again LAAG is not “endorsing” any candidates.

Larry Van Nostran (incumbent)

Interestingly Larry Van Nostran is running again while his colleague Esquivel is not. It was Van Nostran supported Esquivel and helped him get elected for the first time in 1990 (once again for an open seat). One of the things that came up in the 2011 debates was term limits for City Council (which are hard to do without a city charter or city wide referendum). Only Marisa Perez supported that. Obviously Larry would not (even thought he just taped a political ad for the debate and did not respond to the question). Larry Van Nostran has been on the city council every year since 1975, following a "special election" in 1975. So if he were to finish out the 2011 term he would be in office for over 40 years making him one of, if not the longest, sitting council members in the state. Well LAAG will say in writing what everyone else is afraid to say out loud (or heaven forbid write): Its time to retire. LAAG has nothing against the elderly. We just feel that after 36 years its time to step aside for the good of the city and allow some fresh perspective on the issues of the day. Unfortunately its why we had to institute term limits in Sacramento (term limits are also unpopular in the Middle East we hear)

One of the reasons Larry Van Nostran taped his "debate" speech and thereby ducked all the forum questions was some vague surgery or health problem (as noted in his speech). Again no full disclosure from the candidate from what we have seen on whether this or any other health problems will affect his next 4 year term (leaving him 81). Quite frankly at his age (77 per our research) and his vague health problems, we feel that there is a real issue related to him not finishing his 4 year term. This comes up with all candidates over 70 and most recently in Jerry Brown’s campaign. Again not a big problem in most political offices, however under current law (supported by most city councils of course) the sitting city council is now allowed to appoint a replacement for the remainder of the term and not hold a special election. Of course this is wrong democratically speaking and we all know will lead to even more manipulation of the “buddy system”. It was supposedly done to save money on elections (heaven forbid we don’t want to spend money on those). We all know that once there is an incumbent in Lakewood its hard to run against the "re-election machine". That is what happened in March 2008.

Nothing about transparency in his election materials of course. We don’t even know if he knows the meaning of the word. We tip our hat at his railing against "illegal fireworks" in his campaign material but quite frankly the March 2006 Dunrobin explosion (which gave birth to LAAG) was on his watch and due to the escalation of legal and illegal fireworks use and misuse and Los Angeles County Sheriff (LASD) incompetency, also on his watch. (LAAG wont rehash the whole issue of the LASD’s lapses in failing to prevent the Dunrobin explosion after numerous calls by residents over many years)

So overall Larry Van Nostran stands out as the worse choice for 2011 in LAAG’s opinion. We wish Larry well in his retirement and with his medical issues. We thank him for the years he has served.

Marc Titel (former Lakewood Councilmember)

The biggest questions we have about Marc Titel are not answered in any of his campaign material in our opinion. Why did you leave the council (he was not voted out) before 2001 and why are you trying to get back in NOW? He talks a lot about "experience" but quite frankly we don’t know of any other legal qualifications for the job other than living in the city and being over 18. It takes 2 days a month to do which is not a bad gig given all the perks, heath benefits, and government pension enhancements government employees get from it. Quite frankly it is not at all clear why Marc Titel wants to get back in. Why did he not run in 2009 when we badly needed a candidate? Not willing to run against an incumbent? Is that an unspoken rule in Lakewood? Again lots of unanswered questions.

What did he do in his last 17 year stint on the council that is noteworthy? (Again something specific, not just "supporting" law enforcement and puppies) Again silence. Seventeen years is a long time to serve without some long standing, bold or significant solo achievement. Marc Titel mentions nothing in his campaign materials about transparency. That does not surprise us as we don’t see anything from his campaign materials that speak to what he did to promote it when on the council.

Marc Titel seems to base much of his campaign on his "experience". In our opinion all the candidates are more than "qualified" for the job. Lets not get into the Sarah Palin qualified or not debates over city council. Please. There will be no 3 am calls from generals or nuclear launch codes involved in the job. As far as LAAG is concerned the most important qualifications for the job are being truly independent from special interests, being willing to go against the majority of the council to stand up for taxpayers and what is right, being smart enough to think outside the box, and truly listening to [good] ideas that don’t always come from other elected officials, municipal lobbying groups or city staff (many of which do not live in the city). Yes those of us outside government sometime know a thing or two about budgets and solving problems.

We do like the fact that Marc Titel is the only candidate without a government job or consulting position (at least currently) but that alone is not enough to essentially re-elect him to his 18th year on the council.

In LAAG’s opinion this election really boils down to the three candidates below, which although they can be distinguished from the prior two candidates, it is more difficult to see the fine distinctions between Joy Janes and Jeff Wood (based on what little we know from their campaigns). The problem of course is there are two seats to fill in this election so again it always comes down to choosing candidates which are the “least” bad choices.

Joy Janes (Sitting Chairperson Lakewood Redevelopment Committee)

Joy Janes is a smart person and politically well connected. In our opinion, perhaps too smart and too politically connected. She was one of the earliest to start campaigning (well before the vacancy was publicly announced as per years past in Lakewood) and she has run a very professional style campaign. Her campaign manager for this election has in the past or currently works for congresswoman Linda Sanchez (whose former “district director” now works as Lakewood’s “Public Info officer”) How cozy is that? (not to change the subject but could we eliminate that position or make it part time with and “enhanced version” of our transparency pledge?) Joy Janes also works in the office of State Assemblyman Warren Furutani (D-Lakewood) and before that was Chief of Staff in the 5th District at the City of Long Beach. You get the point. All these people that “work” in government are “lifers” and just get “recycled” from one position to the next either through elections, appointments or getting a “well paid gig”. All her connections to the city are not enumerated here but we are sure there are many given that Joy Janes was appointed many years ago to the “planning and environment” commission by former councilman Bob Wagner, who LAAG respects for the most part.. Again good and bad points about "insiders" with lots of political connections running vs true "outsiders".

We do not like the fact that to run for city council, commissioners who are appointed often get a better chance at winning election simply due to their knowledge of the how things “work” in Lakewood, but I guess that is politics. Based on what we have seen the city council likes commissioners to run as they often are their “pals” and as they have worked with them for a longer time they know where they stand on ensuring the "status quo" the current city council wants. Don’t want to rock the boat if you know what I mean. Outsiders are not given much encouragement.

Again on transparency Joy Janes has said more on her website than other candidates but given that she was aware of LAAG’s proposed legislation on transparency in December 2009 we expected more from her than some “vague commitments” (like: “Joy will work to encourage citizen participation in city government by making it more open and responsive to the needs of residents..” …from her campaign website). As she has been a “city hall insider” for many years we would expect to see more transparency on her own commission (see comments to this article) Did she take LAAG’s transparency pledge? Nope. Comment on it? Nope. Accept some part of it? Nope. So again we see more of the same status quo with Joy Janes on city council. We would like to be pleasantly surprised but we are not too encouraged when candidates wont even MAKE specific campaign promises, let alone break them once elected.

With all the potential loss of redevelopment funds and “name calling” going on between Governor Jerry Brown and the cities I would also have expected more detail from a long term planning commission member to show us just how those funds have been so well spent under her tenure and why cities have a right to that money. Or is it just a slush fund that should be cut?. Again nothing on her website of any substance. I guess that’s the reason Lakewood voters come to our website. Some substance. Some critical questions and analysis.

Jeff Wood (Sitting Commissioner Lakewood Recreation and Community Services Commission)

Jeff Wood’s day job is for the “state version” of FEMA created in Jan. 2009. (You recall FEMA the federal agency that forced us to buy silly flood insurance in the late 1990’s…how could you forget). So again another candidate that is already a government employee. 

Same problem here as Joy Janes in terms of already being a city hall "insider". Apparently appointed to the “Recreation and Community Services commission” by Joe Esquivel roughly 10 years after Esquivel was “elevated” to city council. I don’t equate “Parks and Rec” with Planning and environment as the latter usually involves ticking off homeowners by saying “no”. Parks and Rec we assume involves making hard choices like how often to water the lawns and what time to turn off the park lights. We do like the TV show though and assume its not far from real life? But over all, the same issues Joy Janes has as a commissioner, even thought he is not the chairperson. The real purpose we assume of commissioner positions (each council member gets to appoint one) is to “groom” a councilmember successor. That’s how politics work. Now that Esquivel is “retiring” its Jeff’s "turn" to be in the spotlight.

Again the dog park issue has come up in debates and with residents that want one but we don’t see Parks commissioners coming out and taking a bold stand on this. It just gets shoved off to staff (who ever that is), laden with costs and then sent out to pasture as “too costly” (of course we don’t know any details about the city budge but a juvenile colored pie chart…please) Am I missing something? How about creating some park space with all the vacant land laying around or commercial space likely to never be leased this decade? Again no outside the box thinking that we can see. We don’t see anything in his campaign materials that scream “outside the box thinking” either. Maybe its just that parks commission does not offer a true opportunity to shine. Not sure.

On transparency once again Wood at least mentions (almost as an after thought; bottom of one campaign flier) that he supports the “idea” but with no details or pledge its nothing but a hollow promise. We also note that again same problem as with Joy Janes to some extent. If you truly supported transparency all along (as opposed to a “recent convert” to the idea for the campaign as someone else mentioned it) what specific steps have you personally taken to promote transparency in your own commission? Examples please? Silence.

So with Joy Janes and Jeff Wood it’s a tossup really. To close to call.

Marisa Perez (“Environmental Policy Advisor” per the ballot)

Marisa Perez appears to be the only “outsider” running. We say that as she has not been on any Lakewood commissions or been closely aligned with any past or current council members that we can see. No real insider connections to city hall (at least when compared to all the other candidates)

Right off the bat we will say that we are impressed that she completed LAAG’s Candidate Questionnaire and took some if not all of LAAG’s transparency pledge. (her pledge is here) Trust us. This is a good thing. As we said before transparency is the key to everything that goes on in local government. Never forget that. Most voters are learning that lesson too late. There is no investigative journalism going on at the local level and we have the City of Bell debacle as our reward for that.

People already in government, especially those in elected office tend to get the “bubble effect”, which is what Obama feared once inside the Oval Office. That is you only get to hear from staff and “yes men” and the rest of the public’s legitimate ideas are thrown out or never reach you. People in government are also loathe to accept ideas from outside as they often feel as they are elected they somehow are better or smarter than “non electeds/non insiders” and are surrounded with a “cloak of wisdom” once elected. They are not. Again not true of all elected politicians and government bureaucrats but unfortunately we have seen it happen too many times lately. And the reality is the longer in office or in government the more susceptible you are to the “bubble effect”.

So again Marisa Perez does not have the support system that Joy Janes and Jeff Wood have as she is coming from outside the system. That is very rare and can really only happen at the local level. Meg Whitman tried it and you see what it cost her.

In our view Marisa Perez is fully competent, qualified and is a quick study. She is personable and seems committed to the cause. Her background as represented seems more than adequate for the task at hand. Will she know the job inside and out from day one? No. No one could. But that’s why we have the City manager, City Attorney and City Clerk (“the pros”) all sitting there at council meetings holding the councilmember’s hands. Just to make sure all the “formalities” are completed. (wasn’t that why we just couldn’t let Howard Chambers retire...he was too damn good?) The real work is the reading and time that goes into prep for the meeting and the votes. Put it this way, Marisa is more qualified that Larry van Nostran or Joe Esquivel ever were when they were first elected. In fact I would go so far as to say she is better qualified for the job now even as Larry and Joe are at the end of their “reigns”.

She also supports term limits which in a non charter city like Lakewood may be attainable with a city wide vote and we would support that measure as well given that “incumbent bias” in this city is just too strong and voter turnout just too low (in terms of a percentage of votes). Marisa stated that she wanted to limit herself to three terms (12 years) on the council. LAAG applauds that. But then again that is the type of thinking you get from an outsider candidate. Try one. You might be glad you did.

So there you have it. The 2011 candidate roundup. They’re not much but they’re all we have got. So look at all their websites, read the candidate statements but most of all make sure you get out and vote on March 8 2011. City council elections can mean more to your quality of life than an national election can in many ways.

Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email

The need for transparency in local government grows

See our related post on our proposed candidates transparency pledge

This story from the LA Times is quite timely given our prior post and sort of begs the question. Its hard to know what is going on in a city until you have the transparency. There is virtually no local media doing any investigative real journalism at the local level as they are all focused on state and national politics as that is where the headlines are. The problem is that most people fail to realize that the biggest quality of life issues can be at the city level and the biggest scandals can be there as well simply because there is no transparency or real journalism. It is much easier for Bell like scandals to take place, simply for that reason alone.

Again no one addresses what the down side to more local government transparency is. There is none that we can see when compared to the downside of not paying attention to what may really be going on beneath the surface. Even if there are not "scandals" going on, there simply may be things going on that voters do not agree with. But they will never know that under the current system.

Bell's corruption scandal has boosted scrutiny of other cities
City hall watchdogs are popping up across California to oust officials, scour public documents and organize rallies. But whether residents have rooted out corruption or just imagined it is up for debate.

latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lindsay-bell-20110221,0,4945039.story

By Catherine Saillant, Los Angeles Times
February 21, 2011

Reporting from Lindsay, Calif.
Advertisement

Awakened by the salary scandal in Bell, newly engaged citizens are turning out at community meetings and city halls across California, demanding public documents, asking tough questions and pushing for change.

The common theme is suspicion that something underhanded is going on in city government. But whether residents have rooted out corruption or just imagined it is up for debate.

In Hercules, a city of 25,000 north of Berkeley, Mayor Ed Balico stepped down in January after residents threatened to recall him. Balico was seen as being too close to a city manager who had already been pushed out following allegations that his relatives had received $3 million in affordable housing contracts.

Redlands council members considered dismissing City Manager N. Enrique Martinez in November after residents objected to his $231,229 salary, and residents in Chula Vista pressured the City Council to study the salaries of top officials.

Even in leafy, upscale Thousand Oaks, citizens are demanding big cuts to council members' health benefits.

But in the wake of the civic implosion in Bell, some of the strongest tensions between a city hall and its citizens are playing out in Lindsay, a tiny city smack in the middle of the San Joaquin Valley farm belt.

On a recent day, Lindsay's newest activists — two realtors, a corrections officer and a federal data clerk — sat around a dining room table, stacks of city documents in neat piles in front of them.

Six month ago, Yolanda Flores, Lorena Vasquez, Steve Mecum and his wife, Delma, didn't know a general fund from an enterprise account. Now they toss the terms around like budding lobbyists, eager to explain their suspicions of malfeasance at City Hall.

For years, Lindsay has struggled to overcome white flight, rising poverty, vacant storefronts and a 19% unemployment rate. City officials have spent tens of millions trying to reverse the slide, sprucing up walkways in the business core, building a new aquatic center and a sports and entertainment complex, and launching a Mexican-style outdoor market that reflects the city's predominately Latino population.

But some residents, including those gathered at the Mecums' rambling home, see a dark side to the work. The city manager, they say, was overpaid at $214,405 a year and city leaders showed favoritism in awarding grants and contracts. This fall, they rallied hundreds of residents to demand salary cuts, lower water rates and greater transparency at City Hall.

Things got so heated that City Manager Scot Townsend — the man credited with shepherding the redevelopment efforts — resigned after allegedly receiving death threats. Three other officials also quit, including the town's finance director and a City Council member. Allies said the four were weary of being verbally attacked.

Delma Mecum, a realtor, was questioned by the Tulare County Sheriff's Department about a flier left at Townsend's home that allegedly threatened the city manager and his family. Mecum flatly denied that anyone from her group sent the flier. But the Mecums are unapologetic about Townsend's abrupt departure.

"Things happen when no one is looking," said Steve Mecum, a correctional officer at nearby Corcoran State Prison. "And we walked into a big mess."

Angered and in the mood for change, residents in Lindsay enlisted the help of BASTA, the grass-roots activist group that has championed reform in Bell. Lindsay is one of at least five cities in California that have turned to the group.

Tucked against the Sierra Nevada foothills, Lindsay has one main corridor, Honolulu Street, leading into its downtown. Attractive aging brick buildings grace several blocks of a business core that includes an old movie theater with a high neon marquee and a family-run hardware store. The vibe speaks of a Mayberry past, when the city was thriving with two auto dealerships, an olive-packing plant and dozens of agricultural businesses.

Many downtown buildings are now vacant. The surrounding neighborhoods are filled with modest, single-story homes, the kinds that flew up after World War II. The sidewalks are busy with Latino mothers pushing strollers and surrounded by children. The white farming elite still hold many positions of power, but Latinos, who make up 80% of the city's population, increasingly have joined the City Council, business groups and civic associations.

When BASTA leaders arrived in the Tulare County city in October, armed with T-shirts and loads of advice, more than 800 residents turned out to meet them.

Unlike Bell, however, there is no united front among Lindsay's 11,600 residents.

At meetings, pro-City Hall forces sit across the aisle from critics and letters to the editors in the local newspaper rage back and forth between the two sides. Lorena Vasquez said she is sometimes snubbed by acquaintances at the neighborhood grocery store.

"We've been called thugs, a Mexican cartel and rabble-rousers," she said.

Beatrice Robinson, 32, was raised in Lindsay and remembers a tired, crumbling town with few things for young people to do. Now she sees promise.

"The leaders in the community have done so much," she said. "Mr. Townsend spent 20-plus years trying to bring up the people who unfortunately tore him down."

The uprising started in September when the Visalia Times-Delta published the salaries of Lindsay's top officials. Though modest in contrast to the extreme salaries handed out in Bell, the pay of the city manager angered some Lindsay residents.

Others were upset about high water rates charged by a city-owned utility and city documents that they said revealed low-interest home loans being awarded to City Hall insiders. Vasquez, a data clerk, said she was on a waiting list for seven years before she finally gave up and bought a house on her own.

Mayor Ed Murray said the city's critics are simply misinformed. Water rates are higher because Lindsay is unable to draw from polluted local aquifers, and Townsend's salary was higher than administrators in other like-sized cities because he was experienced in leveraging the state and federal dollars that made Lindsay shine, Murray said.

"When we hired him, we knew we were willing to pay more to get Scot to do those jobs, and he's done them well," he said. "But people didn't want to hear about that."

The mayor confirmed critics' assertion that many of the low-income mortgages were being awarded to city employees. The city gives preference to police, firefighters and teachers to encourage them to live in the city where they work, he said.

Murray believes that much of the dissent is based on misinformation, the long shadow of the scandal in Bell and frustration over the slow pace of economic recovery.

"We are not Bell," he said, noting that council members are paid $100 a month and receive no health insurance. "We're not awarding huge salaries and we're not giving the city manager $100,000 loans. Nothing illegal has been done here in Lindsay."

For his part, Townsend said he was disappointed to leave under a cloud but no longer feels bitter. He declined to talk about the alleged death threat.

"We had a great run. I got paid 10% to 20% more than my counterparts," he said. "And the citizens, it's their community and they have a right to ask how much you get paid."

Townsend now works as a real estate consultant and divides his time between Lindsay, where his oldest son is a senior in high school, and Salt Lake City, where the rest of his family settled.

Last month when the Lindsay City Council appointed a new member, they selected a social program case manager at the local school district over nine other candidates, including Steve Mecum, Vasquez and Flores.

Steve Mecum said he wasn't surprised, calling the social worker the hand-picked favorite of the other council members. Undaunted, he and other activists returned to City Hall the next morning to request documents relating to a local low-income housing developer.

"We're not going back to our couch to watch television," Mecum said. "We're going to see this through."

catherine.saillant@latimes.com



Lakewood Accountability Action Group™ LAAG | www.LAAG.us | Lakewood, CA A California Non Profit Association | Demanding action and accountability from local government™ click here to receive LAAG posts by email