Littlerock CA Protests LA Co Gestapo Tactics


Note especially the Littlerock Town Council Resolution documents following the exchange between Attorney Olaf Landsgaard and the Local Agency Formation Commission….for past context, see:

Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_001 Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_002Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_003Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_004Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_005Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_006Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_007Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_008Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_009Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_010Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_011Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_012Letter To Steve Knight 10-03-13_013

Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Lawrence Singleton & the Rape of Mary Vincent


Come and see a lecture on the Lawrence Singleton — Mary Vincent case, 10/10/13 —

Excerpts from Wikipedia

Lawrence Singleton

Lawrence Singleton

Lawrence Singleton (July 28, 1927 – December 28, 2001)[3] was an American criminal best known for perpetrating an infamous rape and mutilation of a teenage hitchhiker in California in 1978.

On September 29, 1978, Singleton picked up 15-year-old Mary Vincent of Las Vegas while she was hitchhiking in Berkeley, California, raped her, and then severed both her forearms with a hatchet, throwing her off a 30-foot cliff outside of Modesto, California, leaving her naked and near death. She managed to pull herself back up the cliff and alert a passerby, who took her to a hospital. By the time Singleton was arrested, Vincent was fitted with prosthetic arms.

At Singleton’s trial six months after the assault, Vincent faced her assailant and relived the traumatic ordeal in court. Her testimony helped convict him. As she left the witness stand, he swore he would kill her. Singleton received a 14-year sentence, the maximum allowed by law in California at that time.

While Vincent won a $2.56 million civil judgment against Singleton, she was unable to collect it when Singleton revealed that he was unemployed, in poor health, and had only $200 in savings.[5]

Along with the particularly gruesome and callous aspects of the crime, the case became even more notorious after Singleton was paroled after serving only eight years in prison. He was paroled to Contra Costa County, California, but no town would accept his presence, so he had to live in a trailer on the grounds of San Quentin until his parole ended a year later.[2]

In the spring of 1997, a neighbor called police and reported seeing 69-year old Singleton strangling a nude woman in his house. When police arrived, they found Singleton drunk with his shirt open and blood smeared over his chest. Inside, police found the nude, bloody corpse of 31-year-old prostitute Roxanne Hayes; she had been stabbed seven times in the face and chest.[11

CALI District Meeting Flyer_001

Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Peace & Freedom Party’s Illusion of Power



Subject: Re: The illusion of power—By Irv Sutley


(The analysis is followed by Bella De Soto’s email to which it responds)


PFPLogoThis attempt at a purge of Bella De Soto from the Los Angeles County Central Committee of the Peace and Freedom Party seems in large part to be in retaliation for Bella’s political stance in support of Palestine. It is a shock to see that in California’s most populous county which has the largest number of Peace and Freedom Party registrants in the state, there were apparently only four other people besides Bella bothering to show up at a meeting. As Jan Tucker can attest, the L.A. CCC in prior years and decades had a huge active membership and made political impacts which had both state and national consequences. And this latest meeting offers the spectacle of four people plotting to dump 20% of the participating membership.



Florida PFPThe failure of the L.A. CCC officers to notify Bella of earlier campaign meetings in Los Angeles and exclude her from participation is similar to the undemocratic purge of Paul Dahmen from the leadership of Florida’s Peace and Freedom Party and from the National Organizing Committee. Several of California’s PFP officers were involved in both Paul and Bella’s situations as well as engineering my six week suspension from the party’s discussion listserve for exposing the anti-Semitic attack on Jan Tucker. Paul paid a far higher price than I did for outing this racist, lying document.



This Los Angeles situation compares with the California State Central Committee which started the current two year term (2012-2014) with about 115 members but has declined to around 75 with 13 officers. These state officers seem to constitute an undemocratic Politburo who operate under questionable by-laws that denies organized out of favor counties (such as my own, Sonoma County) from any meaningful part of the decision making processes of the party. Under state law the registrants of each organized county are to have membership on the State Executive Committee – a principle which the officers have done away with in order to self tenure their own titles and illusion of power.



In large part, it can be considered as the “Politics of Powerlessness” as the state officers try to micro manage every single detail and facet of members political lives, while abandoning any pretense of feminism in the effort to centralize all endorsements, procedures, and events under their theory of Leadership Vanguardism.



From: Bella De Soto


Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2013 11:44 AM





Bella De Soto dancing at The Talking Stick, Venice

Bella De Soto dancing at The Talking Stick, Venice

Hi xxxx, et al: I will now be sharing a mail Notice I just received, but was expecting it for a very long time… xxxxx xxxxxxxxx, Secretary of the local Peace and Freedom Party local Chapter actually conspired to introduce a Motion against me, but it was not on the last Committee Agenda on Thursday Sept.19/13. This meeting which starts at 7PM, did not start till nearly 7:30, because I arrived 5 minutes after 7, and only xxxxx xxxxxxxxx and Husband xxxx xxxxxxx were present, who immediately walked out, to plot a motion of expulsion against me, which I overheard xxxx saying to his Wife xxxxx, in low voice outside the meeting hall door, reminding her that she could not present a motion, not reflected in the Agenda!. I began reading the Agenda and Minutes, waited a few minutes more in an empty room, and then decided to vacate, walked to my car, and I was approaching my automobile, I noticed xxxxx , Husband xxxx, xxxx xxxxxx (Committee Chair in paper only!), and xxxxx xxxxxxxx, who had just arrived together in xxxx’s car, all four were consulting across the sidewalk from the meeting hall. I quickly got in my auto and drove away.



There is much, but for later discussion…



Purge—– xxxxx xxxxxxxxx has been on a personal crusade to push me from the local P&FP Committee since 2008. I knew this was in the works since I joined the party in 2008, when Ralph Nader was running for President, and I helped him get elected as PFP Presidential Candidate in Sacramento at the party Convention. xxxxx has never addressed me personally on any of her bogus charges, instead has spread many rumors about me in the activist community. So I hear from other activists what the intent is, but during the monthly meetings, I am met with much animosity. I have maintained my attendance because Socialism is not about personalities, but a urgent global matter.



Regarding your LACCC membership


Inbox Peace & Freedom Party L.A. <>



1:14 AM (10 hours ago) to me (Bella De Soto) October 2, 2013






This is an official notice from the L.A. County Central Committee to Ms. Bella de Soto. At the L.A. County Central Committee Meeting of September 19, a motion for your expulsion was made, seconded and passed under provisions of L.A. County bylaw 5. Charges related to expulsion fall under L.A.C.C.C. by –law 3; section g: “…intimidation and interruptions, disrespecting the chair and the membership, and using abusive language.”



The expulsion vote will be placed on the Agenda of the LACCC meeting of October 17th, 2013, and will be voted on at that time. Per by –law 6, you will be given an opportunity to speak for yourself at that time. Following that, a maximum of two speakers for and two against may be heard from. A two thirds vote by secret ballot is required for expulsion.



A member who is expelled may appeal to the SCC or State Convention. (By Law 7).


In Struggle,


The L.A. County Central Committee.


<>Consider the environment when printing e-mails.


Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fundraising for Peace & Freedom


PFPLogoI hear tell that the leadership of the Peace & Freedom Party has gotten around to adopting one of my platform positions–from 1996.  I always knew that the cabal of control freaks that currently controls the party was a little on the “slow” side, mentally, but waiting 17 years to implement a sane idea after it was proposed is a bit much even for these imbeciles.  Since the PFP leadership can usually be counted on to do the opposite of whatever I propose, no matter how sane, reasonable, and/or necessary, my guess is that they forgot that I proposed and campaigned for this during my 1996 Presidential bid in which I placed second out of four candidates and beat the leadership’s candidate as well as the Feiginite faction’s candidate (the faction that the leadership “Berkeley Bullshevik” faction then proceeded to get into bed with to rule the party with an iron fist).

Money TreeBecause money doesn’t grow on trees, my stance on party reorganization in 1996 included using professional fundraising.   As reported by the Los Angeles Times, July 7, 1996, “Valley Man is a Rebel with Disparate Causes:”

“Our party’s organizational principles resemble those of the Marx Brothers more closely than those of Karl Marx,” Tucker wrote in a typically blunt candidate statement advocating professional fundraising and publicity coordination to spruce up the party’s image.

Soft Core PornOver the years, PFP had some very interesting ways of raising money and some very interesting contributors.  In the very early days of the party, when consenting adult pornography was still criminalized in California and PFP took a libertarian (and libertine) approach to abolishing laws against the criminalization of consenting adult behavior, many Los Angeles area underground pornographers were big contributors to the party’s coffers.  Some even donated what used to be called “blue movies,” then-illegal porn (and by today’s standards, very mild and tame) for screening at PFP fundraising parties.  Some of these pornographers were active members of PFP central committees.

FundraisingSometimes, PFP’s commitment to the full legalization of the use, sale, cultivation, and manufacture of Marijuana got some amazing results.  Michael Zaharakis, running a spirited campaign for State Assembly in the Santa Cruz area in the early seventies, found a large package of cash in the basket after passing it around at a speaking event.  It was labelled as being a donation from the Santa Cruz County Marijuana Grower’s Association.

Vote splittingIn the days when then-Democratic Secretary of State Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown Jr was enforcing filing fees to run for public office–later struck down as completely unconstitutional 9-0 by the United States Supreme Court–in 1972 PFP candidates throughout California got caught up in a scandal where Republicans doled out cash to pay the unconstitutional fees to help PFP siphon off votes from Democrats.  The Democrats didn’t actively pursue the investigation into these payments because they knew that if the government really got involved, it would lead to all sorts of questionable Democratic financing of right-wing American Independent Party candidacies to siphon off Republican voters.

Anyway, with the adoption of one plank of my platform for internal party reform seventeen years after I proposed it, maybe, just maybe, PFP is dragging itself kicking and screaming into the 21st Century.

Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pope kicks out pro LGBTI Priest


Pope Francis

Three men of god who are transvestites

Nothing has changed at the Vatican, except that the Pope continues the tradition of his predecessors of being a transvestite:

Pope Francis’ Vatican Excommunicates Pro-LGBT Priest– forwarded by Thomas Scott Tucker through Shane Que Hee with my commentary at the bottom per Judy Fjell….

Father Greg Reynolds--Excommunicated for supporting LGBTI and women's rights

Father Greg Reynolds–Excommunicated for supporting LGBTI and women’s rights

Last week, Pope Francis once again made international headlines by saying something nice about LGBT people. And just like the last time Francis had nice-sounding words for our community, I was the proverbial fly in the ointment, counseling caution even as others tripped over themselves to praise the pontiff. As I noted then, Francis’s words represented a change in tone, not in teaching — and while that’s very nice and all, the way the official Church treats gays and lesbians isn’t likely to improve in anything more than a superficial manner until Catholicism no longer calls us “intrinsically disordered.”

Sadly, just days after Pope Francis scolded his church for being “obsessed” with LGBT rights and women’s rights, his Vatican is proving exactly how little has actually changed: Fr. Greg Reynolds (above), a Roman Catholic priest from Australia, was excommunicated from that church — get this — because he supports marriage equality and women’s ordination. And the order came right from the Vatican.

The document excommunicating Father Greg Reynolds was written in Latin, and which gave no reasons, came from the Vatican, and came just days after Pope Francis’ speech.

Father Reynolds had told The Age that he expected to be defrocked, but that he did not expect to be excommunicated.

“In times past excommunication was a huge thing, but today the hierarchy have lost such trust and respect,” he said.

“I’ve come to this position because I’ve followed my conscience on women’s ordination and gay marriage… The Vatican never contacted me, and it gives no explanation.”

Excommunication is the method by which the Catholic Church kicks people out, formally excludes them from the community of believers. Its use as a penalty is exceedingly rare and is reserved only for what it views as the most serious of sins.

What sins exactly? Well, not child rape — no priests have ever been excommunicated for that. But supporting marriage equality and women’s ordination? In Pope Francis’s Vatican, that’s apparently far worse than pedophilia and, as such, an excommunicable offense.

If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times: when it comes to the way the Catholic Church treats LGBT people, actions speak far louder than words. And today’s actions confirm that on that front — breathless, pearl-clutching adulation for Pope Francis notwithstanding — nothing of substance has changed.


TAKE A LEAP, JOHN PAUL   ©1987 Judy Fjell (BMI)

Please Mr. Pope, John Paul,
Now that you’re here tell us all

In the safety of this drag queen town
You can whisper to us why you are wearing that gown
We won’t breathe a word to the press
If you will just confess
Why in the name of God you wear dresses to cover your bod
Are you afraid of your body?
Then you’ve learned your lesson well
The church proclaims the flesh is naughty
And leads us all down the path to hell
But now I guess we’ll be the ones to break it to ya
Wearing dresses ain’t the way to hallelujah
So, Johnny, jump down off of old St. Peter’s rock
And you can swish all you want when you walk
‘Cause we’re not ashamed of anybody in this city by the bay
We try to love everybody, man or woman, beast or priest
Lesbian, bisexual, straight or gay
So get down off your Vatican high horse
And stop all this papal discourse
All your hoo-hah on homosexuality and such
Well, we think thou dost protest too much
Don’t be ashamed of your closet
It’s the envy of so many men in this town
Don’t leave your hat in San Francisco
Unless you leave your matching gown
What we’re tryin’ to say, JP
Is to be all you can be
And if the pressure to wear pants is ever too much in Rome
Just put your skirts on and fly back home
Because here in this city
It’s more than okay to dress and be gay
No need for fear or pious pity
In a place where anyone, even you, can be queen for a day
So take a leap, John Paul, take a chance
Take off your loafers and join in the dance
If I’m a human you can be one, too
There could be room in this city for you, JP II
There could be room in this city for me and you

Honey Pie Music  PO Box 1515  Big Timber, MT 59011

Posted in Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

National Instant Criminal Background Check–a gaping loophole


NICSThe shooting at the Washington DC Naval Yard by Aaron Alexis has once again brought up the issues of background checks as a deterrent to criminals and the mentally ill getting their hands on firearms.  There is a huge loophole in the NICS–National Instant Criminal Background Check System–that gun control advocates and gun rights activists will probably agree there is a desperate need to fix.  The devil will be in the details, but the debate is urgent and needs to begin.


Title 28 CFR § 25.4 (CFR=Code of Federal Regulations)

Record source categories.

It is anticipated that most records in the NICS Index will be obtained from Federal agencies. It is also anticipated that a limited number of authorized state and local law enforcement agencies will voluntarily contribute records to the NICS Index. Information in the NCIC and III systems that will be searched during a background check has been or will be contributed voluntarily by Federal, state, local, and international criminal justice agencies. [Emphasis added]


So let’s consider the case of how you get overseas criminal records on convicted felons from nations that don’t consider their records to be public and keep them very close to the vest in dealing with the United States government?  It’s not like every nation in the world is completely truthful with us.

ScarfaceSo called Communist countries were very skillful in exporting their criminals and mental cases to the United States during the Cold War.  Some instances were rapid and dramatic like the Marielito Boatlift when Cuba cleaned out its prisons and mental asylums and sent thousands of its problems to the US to become our problems, as dramatically portrayed in Al Pacino’s Scarface.  Under its quota system for so-called Jewish refugees, the old Soviet Union made it a lot easier for criminals and the criminally insane to get into the United States than legitimate dissidents and gradually cleaned out many of its most despicable and heinous desperadoes and made them our problem.

Let’s look at some examples:

Getting out of the old Soviet Union was much easier--encouraged in fact--for criminals and mental cases than for real Jewish dissidents.

Getting out of the old Soviet Union was much easier–encouraged in fact–for criminals and mental cases than for real Jewish dissidents.

“Crazy Klenshteyn” ran a jewelry shop in the Fairfax area having immigrated as a so-called persecuted Jewish dissident from Odessa (now in the Ukraine, then part of the USSR) in the 80s.  According to his neighbors, he’d spent years in and out of mental institutions in the old country.  When they moved into an apartment in Fairfax he and his wife made  life a living hell for their neighbors:  he exposed himself to an old woman; his wife tried to toss boiling water at somebody!  When I accompanied an attorney to serve eviction papers on them, the wife took the papers and slapped the attorney in the face with them.  I displayed my handcuffs as a warning to her that if she didn’t calm down,  she’d face arrest and she later told the police that I’d twisted her arm behind her back and handcuffed her (luckily the police detective knew some of my police buddies and also knew  the reputation of the Klenshteyn family and agreed the charges were insane).  The night before they left the apartment following the judge’s eviction order, they hammered hundreds of nails into the wooden floor of their apartment to destroy it.

What really, really scared the Klenshteyn’s neighbors is that as a jewelry store owner his neighbors reported seeing him with a gun…but if he ever had needed a background check to buy one, do you think that the Soviet authorities would have ever admitted his mental or criminal record?  If they had, they’d be admitting to their whole scheme to export a huge part of their criminal problems to the United States back in the 80s.

Jerusalem Network criminal in custody in Israel

Jerusalem Network criminal in custody in Israel

Israel has been exporting many of its problems to the United States, whether by design or inadvertently, leading to the presence in the United States of serious cells of the Jerusalem Network of the Israeli Mafia.  One of the enforcers of the Jerusalem Network–let’s call him “Mr. DBB”–has a Nevada Concealed Weapons Permit and sports a handgun with him while he carries out unlicensed (and inherently illegal) “collections” for mobsters throughout Las Vegas.  According to reliable sources, Mr. DBB did time in an Israeli prison along with his co-defendant Gabriel Ben Harosh–another notorious Jerusalem Network degenerate–for crimes involving violence and extortion.  On one such Clark County, Nevada “collection” he came with Brett Gordon Pekrul…another real piece of work (like, check out his criminal record):

Pekrul Criminal_001Pekrul Criminal_002Pekrul Criminal_003Pekrul Criminal_004Pekrul Criminal_005Pekrul Criminal_006Pekrul Criminal_007Pekrul Criminal_008Pekrul Criminal_009Pekrul Criminal_010Pekrul Criminal_011Pekrul Criminal_012Pekrul Criminal_013Pekrul Criminal_014


Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Indy Film Production fund for California

Sharon Jimenez & Bill Duke

Sharon Jimenez & Bill Duke

On Tuesday September 24, 2013 the Bring Hollywood Home Foundation (BHHF) will announce a private sector film production fund for independent ventures in California.  This is a major step towards bringing Hollywood home and providing the kind of decent well paying jobs that have been critical to the economy of Los Angeles and other communities throughout California.  The Latino Weekly Review article linked above contains the press conference details, noting that:

Gerald Wolf, Jack Mansour, Martin Guigui, Jerry Heller, Polo Munoz, Ed Madinya, Stephen Seidel, Dr. Juan Rodriguez Flores, Gary Visconti, Doreen Spicer Dannerly, Lydia Grant, Kristee Clark, Jan B. Tucker among other guests will announce their participation in the press conference.

Sharon Hardee Jimenez

Sharon Hardee Jimenez

At the request of the BHHF, I have invited the participation of Mayor Eric Garcetti and am awaiting his response.  He picked up the mantle of promoting the “bring Hollywood home” message from Kevin James who’d made the issue a prime focus of his primary campaign and promised appointment of a Film Czar for Los Angeles (who I hope will be Sharon Hardee Jimenez of BHHF, who has been endorsed for the post by San Fernando Valley/Northeast Los Angeles NOW and the California League of Latin American Citizens).

Speakers at the press conference will include Bill Duke [] and Edward James Olmos [].

Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Aaron Alexis at first glance


The deceased alleged shooter at the Washington DC Navy Yard, 34 year old Aaron Alexis, raised my eyebrows because his last known address in Forth Worth, Texas was on “White Settlement Road,” but as a local historian points out:


White Settlement is blessed with many streets bearing names of people. Some of them are listed here. The oldest street in White Settlement is, of course, White Settlement Road. This original trail led from the fort to the “white settlement” about eight miles west into Indian territory. The area was called “white” because it was a settlement of “white” homesteaders, as opposed to other settlements in the vicinity that were composed of both white and Indian residents. As the Indian problems subsided and the settlement moved westward, the road followed. This was the only public road in White Settlement’s early history.


I hope it’s just a coincidence that Alexis lived on a street that makes one think of white supremacy….

Adrian Paul as "Highlander" Duncan McLeod

Adrian Paul as “Highlander” Duncan McLeod

More alarming though is the email address that one of the other people who lives or was living at Alexis’s house:  duncanmcleod@……..  Email addresses sometimes say something about the user’s mentality….I mean Duncan McLeod as in actor Adrian Paul’s “Highlander” character??????  Are you kidding me??????

Prior to living on White Settlement Road, Alexis had faced eviction proceedings at his former residence:


Court ID: TXTARM6 Court State: TX

Filing Date: 09/24/2010 Filing State: TX


Case Number: E00041704


Original Dept.: CV






Unlawful Detainer: Yes


2450 OAK HILL CIR #2023







Eviction Record


Court ID: TXTARM6 Court State: TX


Filing Date: 10/08/2010 Filing State: TX


Case Number: JP0610E00041704


Original Dept.: CV






Unlawful Detainer: Yes


2450 OAK HILL CIR #2023






Just so nobody goes off on a wild goose chase from that address, there’s a woman who’s first name happens to be Alexis who used to live at that address, but it’s a coincidence and not some weird alias that Aaron Alexis was using.

Alexis had been for two (2) years a Naval Reserve Petty Officer 3rd Class.  This is a very short term of service for the reserves and implies that he was probably kicked out.  He previously been employed at the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base in Fort Worth.

Hip Hop Performer Aaron Alexis from Brooklyn??????

Hip Hop Performer Aaron Alexis from Brooklyn??????

Aaron Alexis is apparently originally from New York and maintained a Post Office box in Brooklyn, which brings up another coincidence:  there’s an African American hip-hop artist from Brooklyn by the same name.  He’s also lived in Marietta Georgia, Great Lakes Michigan, and Flushing, New York City as well as Brooklyn in New York State.  He’s got older and younger sisters last reported living in Brooklyn and may have a twin sister who as near as I can tell was born eight (8) days before him (long time to be in labor….) who lives in Staten Island.  He may have a younger brother living in the State of Washington, possibility near or with their parents.



Posted in Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

LA City Auditor Calling It Quits


First off, read my last blog on Los Angeles City Office of Finance

Now, read what a former high level employee had to say about the chaos in that office when he retired and could no longer be disciplined or punished for expressing his viewpoint to management:

 Date: February 27, 2009  To: Fellow employees

 From: XXX XX

 Office of FinanceI wish to bid farewell to all of you with sadness. After 29 years of service to the City of Los Angeles, 28 years of which is dedicated to the Office of Finance-City Clerk Office, I have decided to retire effective today, a year earlier than I had planned. I am saddened because I felt like I am running away from my responsibility to you and all your struggles but I can no longer take the humiliation and insults from our current chiefs. I have gone through several chiefs before them and I have never felt this way.

 Anyhow, I just want to thank each and every one of you, especially those that I have worked with for the longest time, those who consoled me during hard times and those that worked directly under my supervision and friends. You have all been great no matter what the bosses say. I consider you all professionals and should be treated with dignity.


For those that are bitter because you believed we, your principals, did not work hard for you and went to the extent of accusing us without any “backbones” and do not know how to motivate people and went further and accused us as incompetent that we should be disciplined. That is uncalled for but I will consider that as your frustration for everything that happened without regards to your feelings but believe me, we stood by you, with you, and voiced our objections to matters that we believed have merits and reasoned out for you but we were not successful. More often than not, we are shut down because this or that is what XXX’s want and our Chief II has verbalized that he couldn’t say no to XXX. He also said that he has many more years to go before thinking retirement. Listening to these words makes you wonder, will we ever really get an unbiased support from our Chief as he often said? I cannot help but wonder whether there was a deal stricken after the not so popular incident that causes the rescinding of an unpopular appointment for senior tax auditors? I have no faith that reasons will ever prevail under this circumstance. I often wonder whether or not XXX really is the perpetuator of everything our chiefs are obsessed to accomplish?


Everybody knew what happened and the consequence after that. People found out through the Civil Service Commission web site and read the ruling. What’s puzzling in the mind of all of us is that, instead of reverting back to his old position, this person was given the top position as a reward? How can you figure that out? Is that the reason they often threatened us in return?

DemotionWe have always been threatened with disciplinary action or that our position would be taken away should we not do what we were dictated to say or write to you. One chief’s famous words were “my job or your job.” It goes without saying; we will be demoted first before they do. Simply, we’ll be reverted back to our former position. Isn’t that harassment? Often, he would even bring up the subject of our compensation. He would often say, “ this is why you are getting paid so much and you should do this or do that.” Can you imagine a person with his stature to even bring up the salary issue that has no relevance to issues being discussed and knowing that they get paid more themselves compared to ours? It’s really unnecessary and cruel, I think. They won’t listen to reasons because they focused more on the negative rather than the positive side of our jobs, like motivating you in a diplomatic way or a simple encouragement. We are constantly being judged rather than listened to. We are scolded more often than not. Can you imagine being scolded like a child? How would you feel? I cannot take it that is why I am retiring.

Just to give you a few examples. We have this project that was started during the time of XXXX and XXXXXXX. It was supposed to be a pilot project to determine the feasibility of using the list of AEA/AJE as an audit source. That took a year to complete and every month a report was prepared to show the result and at the end, when all the audits were finally completed, our Director said during our monthly meeting that we should continue and utilize the source AEA and may not continue with AJE due to less than desired recoveries. We thought that was it but it wasn’t.

Should employees be scolded like children?  Management at the Office of Finance thinks so....

Should employees be scolded like children? Management at the Office of Finance thinks so….

After the meeting with the executive management, we were called in to Mr. Cabrera’s office and guess what? He raised the piece of paper that showed the result of the pilot project and pointed in our face and started scolding us and saying “can anyone tell me about this or anyone explain to me about this? In my mind, what are you talking about? We were caught off guard; we don’t know what’s in his mind. I believed he expected us to read his mind. The Director’s words were that she believed the source is worth continuing and we heard her, but he started scolding us for unknown reasons. What’s wrong with just instructing us to continue using the same source and that should be it but he scolded us like kids before giving the same directive as our director? It’s like being judged without due process. Power?

Protest LetterVery recently the Senior Tax Auditors wrote a letter addressed to the Director. After we met with the executive management during our monthly meeting, we were called in again to a meeting in the office of XXXXXXX. Again, he started the meeting by raising the piece of paper, your letter and started scolding us for not doing something about your letter. As if we know what is in his mind? We told him we don’t have any knowledge of your letter but he was just incensed and blamed us for not acting on it. We responded that the letter was not addressed to us nor copied to us and if he wanted us to do something, he should have forwarded a copy to us. So you can see, how impossible to work under this circumstances. They pretty much rendered their judgment before listening to you. You are guilty until proven innocent. Isn’t that against the law? The scolding happens whether in person or over a conference call. When we tried to reason out, we were accused of not getting on board of what they are trying to accomplish. Accomplish what? Intimidate people? They even accused us of passing our responsibilities. I believed it’s the other way around.


 You know what happened during the thanksgiving party? The gathering needed to be approved and that there should be a time range and a warning that the lunch should only be from 11:30 to 12:30 and that any time in excess should be made up or the auditors should file for a vacation. At 12:30 our chief ordered one principal to go to the lunchroom and make sure that every auditor are out. What happen to the make up time? I believed its over blown and unnecessary. Now, we can no longer hold gatherings without their approval and even worse, if you do, it cannot be exclusionary. For a potluck, are you going to invite the whole division? They really have taken away people’s right to impromptu gatherings as a way of releasing stress and camaraderie among the staff. It is really sad. I just cannot agree of what they are trying to accomplish. In the past, people would love to provide lunch after passing their probation but now, we cannot do that without their approval with so many restrictions.

Management by dominance?

Management by dominance?

One more sample of their appetite for dominance was when I requested a vacation for two days, Dec. 24th and Dec. 31st. Our chief said I couldn’t take it because she implemented a policy that vacation will not be allowed if there is a “Continuum with our RDO and holidays” and yet they allowed XXXXXXXX to take the Dec. 31st and the next day was a holiday and the 2nd in Jan. is her RDO. The 24th that I requested falls a day before the holiday, 25th and the 26th was my RDO. Furthermore, the chief took Nov. 24, 25, 26 before the thanksgiving holiday herself which is 27th and 28th. How can you be so ridiculously insane that it only applies to us and not them? I thought of filing a grievance but I forgo because of my pending retirement. Imagine if we enforce her policy to the whole audit unit and can you imagine how many grievances would have been filed? Are we not entitled to take a vacation at a time that we need most and not on their choosing? Isn’t that the reason why we accumulate our vacation so that we can take it when we needed most and not at their disposal? After further request she relented to my request for the Dec. 24 but not the 31. Imagine the hardship of coming to work on Dec. 29, take a vacation on Dec. 30 and coming back again on Dec. 31. Isn’t that a cruel thing to do? It should not happen to anyone.

 Another incident happened to one principal who requested a three weeks vacation in November to be taken in January, the following year but this was denied, presumably because it overlaps with the chief’s vacation. That is very cruel because she has missed out on a promotional airfare that was to be taken otherwise loose it. That’s very hurting and very cruel and it should not go on like this. Again, it should not happen to anyone else. We saved our vacation time for the opportune time on our choosing and should not be theirs.


 That’s how crazy the situation is and is very unbearable. We were so often told that we are manager of this office and should make a decision concerning our operations but on the contrary, every decision we make is subject to their scrutiny and approvals. Every word we say is scrutinized and dictated from the top and we were asked to put our signature on every mail or e-mails to the staff and even cautioned that the correspondence is coming from us and not from them. How clever can you be?

I am truly sorry for you guys that were affected by the 1st quarter performance review. All the negative messages were not ours but dictated from the top. We wanted to consider all your efforts but we were ordered not to, or else. As I have mentioned earlier, many times we were threatened with disciplinary action or we could be reverted back to our former position if we don’t do or follow their orders. We were accused of not getting on board on what they are trying to accomplish but how can you get on board if there is disagreement on how to get there. We disagreed on so many matrixes (performance evaluation factors) that they wanted to impose but we can’t do anything without being threatened and scolded more often than not. We disagreed on the mix of audits based on number of class and locations, field time etc. One time I mentioned during our executive meeting that the true mix of audits should be based on different classification or industry, Sole proprietorship, partnership or corporation. Within a fund/class there are different occupation or activities. Instead of being listened to, I got scolded.


So you see, my dear friends I felt like abandoning you but I have to take care of my health and sanity. To my associates, I wish I could stay to suffer with you but I have had enough of all the controlling, dictating, judging, and winning attitude of our powerful chiefs. It felt like they have to win and hate to loose instead of listening to reasons and work on a practical solutions.



Now we are even required to produce a weekly time analysis of our own. Detailing every minute of our existence. In other word, I felt like I have to justify my existence. We objected to this as a case of harassment due to unnecessary hardship and are giving us a hard time and also a definite case of discrimination because it was not imposed to other division’s Principal TCOs. I wonder what will come next. The reason we were given when we questioned the purpose or benefit for requiring us to provide our time analysis or actually daily activities was that they did not know what to respond to XXX when they were asked what the principals are doing. How can you believe that when they were principals themselves? They often tell us that we are doing a good job and they knew the hard work that we do everyday and yet they don’t know what to say in response to XXX? Was it XXX’s idea for us to submit our daily activities? I can only wonder.


 At a later meeting regarding the time analysis, we were told that it’s a way to develop us to be a good manager. That is more insulting, imagine it’s like telling we are no good that is why they needed to look over our shoulder and see what we are doing on a daily basis. May be to pacify us a little, we were told that it’s going to be temporary, for how long? Can’t help but wonder? Temporary permanent?


 Now they came up with two pages of what they termed PTA matrixes. Imagine, how many hours have they spent to come up with about 25 activity items that they came up to evaluate our performance. I am attaching it for your information and analysis if you may. Even worst, they requested and want us to give our comments and feedback on how we want them to evaluate our performances. How can they think that we have no brain and stupid enough to dig our own grave? Imagine how many hours they might have spent developing the minute details on what they want us to do our job and grade us item by item and points by points. If they had developed a plan for the betterment of the tax auditors and our operation, then, I would have gladly provided my comments and or feedbacks. Not in this case. Imagine, we if we have to detail all of the items in our time analysis so that they can scrutinize our activities everyday? This is really a case of mistrust and micro-management I think.



I read the response to your letter that was addressed to our director. In their response they said that they recognized the merits of your request for flex time in the field with each member of your crew. Instead of listening to you, you are still required to go out 24 minimum hours per quarter with each member of your crew to replace the 8-hours/mo minimums per month per crew member to allow you the flexibility to adjust your field time. My conclusion is that they think you are a bunch of stupid or dumb people to fall into this trap. What are they thinking?



I understood that the reason why you asked for flexibility is that different tax auditors, taking into consideration their experience, knowledge and length of services requires different degree of supervision and assistance in the field. Imagine, how many times would you have to go out with an auditor in a month just to meet the 8 hours when all they need is a simple direction and guidance that most often you are not required to stay and waste valuable time that can be spent with other crew member that needed your help the most. Aren’t they aware of the availability of communications by phone, landline and cell phones or even e-mails?



With or without the city’s current financial problems, the unnecessary mileage is a way of savings isn’t it? It’s hard enough to comply with the 8 hours minimum per tax auditor in a month and now they want you to spend 10, 12 or more hours to catch up with the 24 if you were not able to spend during your first or second month of any quarters? How can they be so ridiculous to think that these Senior Tax Auditors have no brain and stupid and can be easily manipulated? Remember; don’t ever accept that you are less than professionals. You have your education like them. I can not understand why the same chiefs who were seniors themselves during the time of our Chief, XXXXX XXXXXX, also objected to the same field time requirements of 20 to 25% and the reasons were that the field time has no bearing on the productions of the auditors and seniors alike. The seniors’ field time should be based on the needs of the auditors and not just to fill up your monthly time analyses.



Most auditors do not need their seniors to be with them most of the time and if there are any problems that need immediate solution, we have telephones to communicate with our auditors? I believe they couldn’t accept that and they thought that the only way to solve it is to go out in the field. I have a feeling that they are afraid to be branded as a loser. They are thinking it is a defeat for them. Everything it seems like they have to win instead of listening to reasons. Isn’t one performance evaluation criteria under the civil service was to discourage excessive supervision and encourage independence? A senior tax auditor can be very effective without the necessity of going out in the field. I think they cannot accept that because it’s what XXX wants? I wonder if they ever tried to explain this to XXX? Or, may be this is really their idea that they passed on to XXX that they have to sustain? I don’t think XXX is that unreasonable?



I am truly sorry to XXXXX XXX, who was given an unsatisfactory review (actually it was all written by our chief) because our top management’s insistence that we can only consider the crew’s production on a cut off date and disallowing audits that are completed at the end of the quarter but not yet billed and yet was not due to their fault. In their response to you regarding your Oct. 17, 2008 letter to the Director, they stated that the performance review is intended as a constructive feedback regarding individual performance. What happened to the constructive feedback when all they want us to focus is the negative side to justify the unsatisfactory performance? Much worst, the memo threatened the senior with corrective action, which is against my conscience because I knew for a fact that he was on tract when the unbilled items are recognized or taken into consideration. What justification can you demand from the senior when you knew for a fact that his crew has the necessary numbers, unfortunately not counted? This senior has contributed a lot during our early stages of LATAX. He developed this program so that auditors can utilize in the organization of their audit work papers. Yet, for one quarter, you make a judgment that this senior’s performance is unsatisfactory. I am really embarrassed. That goes with other tax auditors that were given such a warning.



How can you make a judgment of an individual’s performance after only 1 quarter? How can anyone know that you are not meeting your goal at the end of the fiscal year after only a month or a quarter? We are not prophets and have no power to predict the future. There is really no justification to do that without recognizing other factors that affected the performance goal. How can you make a fair evaluation when you are not allowed to recognize all the factors that affected the performances during the whole period, instead of any cut off date? This is what I can’t live with knowing that it is wrong, unjustifiable, cruel, and insensitive. Instead of motivating auditors, we get the ire of the tax auditors that resulted in bitterness and resentment, which is very hard to repair.



It’s really very hard to repair any damage that this action can do when I know for a fact that XXXXXX’s crew have completed enough audits but the management decided not to count due to the cut off date. Remember, the goal was for the fiscal year and not a monthly or quarterly goal. We should give you a constructive feedback on where you stand and needs to be done and not threaten you with corrective action and give you an unsatisfactory performance when it is known that you have the audits to support your efforts. It’s so frustrating that we cannot do what is right without being castigated. We are referred to as managers of these operating units but we are like puppets with strings attached to every part of our bodies.



You all know what happened next? Tax auditors that were affected filed grievances and they have to deal with this and it’s ongoing. People are filing for worker’s comp. Isn’t this a case of frustration and dissatisfaction with our management who want to develop us to be a good manager? Imagine the case of XXXXXX. This auditor was ready to retire but she was forced to move to the office audit on her last month without consideration for her physical impediment. Again, the reason given was, its what XXX wants. From what I remember, XXX made a suggestion and we reasoned out that it will not help her because she have to use her bad hand more so than just staying and try to complete her audit inventory. When the auditor failed to get their consent to stay in field audit the auditor filed for worker’s compensation and she had to withdraw her service retirement application to avail of the benefits. We could have gotten a replacement auditor already to help our production but what is happening? We are down by one body. Good manager?



We are now on the second quarter review. There are a few tax auditors that according to the crystal reports may lack sufficient number of audits based on averaging. Again, we have two quarters to go to try to meet our goal of 55. The principal(s) again have to write a memo according to their wishes and had been submitted to the chiefs for their scrutiny & approval. However, it has not come back to this writing. I believe it’s still in the hands of the personnel division. What’s holed up? I am not sure but hopefully grievances can be avoided. I like to close my message with a little friendly advice to you my friends.



"Uncontrollable tirades"

“Uncontrollable tirades”

Somewhere at the beginning of this message, I mentioned that you are professionals and I truly consider you as such. However, please refrain from excessive demonstration of your gripes with loud noises. You are only embarrassing yourselves and at the same time put your principals at an awkward position or even embarrassed them because of your seemingly uncontrollable tirades. Your tirades and repeated loud comments become annoying instead of getting empathy from your peers. I believe you should write to top management of what you dislike and not the seemingly unending loud noises of your gripes against the management. If you care for the people under you, please do something peacefully and not to incite other people by continually portraying the negatives and telling bad things instead of motivating them. I believe these people could make their own decision without you telling and inciting them. If you have a personal gripe, you don’t have the right to incite other people to advance your agenda. You may think you are helping them but in reality, you are ruining their career. That’s not professional, I think. They can see and feel for themselves and know what is good and beneficial for them. Remember, we are working for the City and not for a particular person. You have a responsibility to give back a fair return for the City’s investment on you.



I am retiring with sadness and believe me my heart bleeds for all of you. I wish our top management would learn to listen to you rather than be judging and give you guidance rather than dictating.



Sincerely, XXX


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

ParkMaggedon for Los Angeles?



For background on the following open letter to Mayor Eric Garcetti, first see

Dear Eric:


Mayor - Elect Eric Garcetti at press conference

Mayor – Elect Eric Garcetti at press conference

First, excuse the familiarity of this letter’s opening salutation as I would normally address you properly as Honorable Mayor Garcetti, but in the spirit of transparency that I believe that you will instill in your administration of Los Angeles, and because in that same spirit I am issuing this letter openly to the public it is important that readers know up front that I endorsed you in the runoff election and that we have come to know each other over the last year. Likewise I campaigned for you, wrote and published blogs supporting your candidacy, and solicited my friends and supporters to vote for and assist your campaign in any way possible.



Jan B. Tucker & Angel Luevano @ Garcetti Press Conference

Jan B. Tucker & Angel Luevano @ Garcetti Press Conference

As I have recently cc’d you, members of your staff, City Attorney Mike Feuer, and City Controller Ron Galperin a California Public Records Act request directed to the Office of Finance I want to clarify my public policy concerns that may not be obvious or apparent from its text. During endorsement interviews with both you and City Controller Ron Galperin earlier this year I specifically raised issues that arise from the past conduct of the Office of Finance based upon my direct experience as a licensed investigator and consultant to several different small-medium parking lot operators in the Los Angeles area. Based upon a recent meeting I attended (August 27, 2013) in City Hall Room 152b, I have gained some significant new insights into the inner working and thinking within the Office of Finance that you should be aware of in your management of the City of Los Angeles and in the formulation of public policy moving forward in governance.



At the outset it is important that these issues be considered by people at the top of the organization because they are best in a position to “see the forest from the trees.” It is likely that personnel, including management in the Office of Finance, have higher education in such fields as accounting, finance, and business administration, as opposed to public administration and/or political science or some other social science. Therefore the application of Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and one of the Impossibility Theorems (concerning the impossibility of certainty since you can’t know the effect of that which you don’t know) is not likely to have ever entered into the self-analysis or internal critiques of how the Office of Finance operates. This initial analysis also makes the supposition that overt corruption is not involved or does not necessarily need to be involved for the questionable behavior to have occurred. That said I do not and can not rule out overt corruption being involved due to what I learned in recent years from a whistle blower within the Office of Finance.






One of my areas of specialization in graduate school was International Relations and “Clientitis” is a terminology primarily used in that field. However there are analogous attitudes amongst regulatory bureaucrats in public administration within the United States and I would expect, in any national, regional or municipal bureaucracy anywhere in the world. As Wikipedia defines it:



Clientitis (also called clientism[1][2] or localitis[3][4][5]) is the tendency of resident in-country staff of an organization to regard the officials and people of the host country as “clients”. This condition can be found in business or government. The term clientitis is somewhat similar to the phrases “gone native” or “going native”.



A hypothetical example of clientitis would be an American Foreign Service Officer (FSO), serving overseas at a U.S. Embassy, who drifts into a mode of routinely and automatically defending the actions of the host country government. In such an example, the officer has come to view the officials and government workers of the host country government as the persons he is serving. Former USUN Ambassador John Bolton has used this term repeatedly to describe the mindset within the culture of the US State Department.[6]



An example from business would be a representative for a company living in another nation, representing that company to the host nation and other institutions in that country. A business representative suffering clientitis would defend the host country government and operating environment as if those were his employers.[7] [For original with citations, see]



Virtually every profession or industry has its own advocacy organizations, frequently known as “501(c)(6)” non-profits. As explained in IRS regulations:



Reg. 1.501(c)(6)-l defines a business league as an association of persons having a common business interest, whose purpose is to promote the common business interest and not to engage in a regular business of a kind ordinarily carried on for profit. Its activities are directed to the improvement of business conditions of one or more lines of business rather than the performance of particular services for individual persons.



LobbyistsI am reasonably well versed in the role of advocacy, both before regulatory boards and legislative bodies. I served an unprecedented seven (7) terms as Chair of the Board of the 501(c)(6) California Association of Licensed Investigators, the world’s largest private detective organization. Prior to me, nobody in the history of the organization was ever elected to more than three terms as either chair or president. As the world’s largest private eye group, we are sought out internationally by regulatory and legislative bodies seeking to begin their own initial regulatory schemes or to improve existing ones.



Regulatory clientitis occurs when the regulatory authorities come to think of the organization of a profession that they regulate as valued customers, as in a business setting, to the exclusion of non-members who are treated differently or less well as individuals. It is of course to the advantage of the professional organization, its officers and directors, and its legislative advocate (lobbyist) to have this occur, but in the theory of government that we practice in America our fundamental constitutional belief in due process of law and equal protection of the law cautions against regulators adopting clientitis as a general practice.



Ed Cabrera, Assistant Director, Los Angeles City Office of Finance

Ed Cabrera, Assistant Director, Los Angeles City Office of Finance

It is intuitively obvious from the statements made at the August 27, 2013 meeting in City Hall 152b that Assistant Director of the Office of Finance Ed Cabrera suffers from a serious case of clientitis. I noted in my August 28, 2013 California Public Records Act (CPRA) request to Cabrera a series of statements he had made and following is my hypothesis for which I have sought corroborating evidence pursuant to the CPRA:



Ed Cabrera’s claims

My hypothesis and/or questions

  1. The meeting was an “attempt to provide education and outreach”

  2. The Office of Finance did “outreach” to parking lot operators to invite them to the August 27, 2013 meeting

  3. That you and/or the Office of Finance went through Gregory J. “Greg” Spiker of KSA, a firm which represents the Parking Association of California and the Los Angeles Parking Association as a lobbyist registered with the City Ethics Commission for purposes of inviting people to the August 27th meeting

  4. That you stated “I don’t know many of you. You’re here because you want to get it right”

  5. That you stated “I’d like to thank Greg for reaching out to you”

If it was a legitimate attempt at outreach to the industry as a whole, then why were companies who don’t happen to be clients of lobbyist Gregory J. Spiker not invited?

Cabrera didn’t known many of the people there because they weren’t Spiker’s clients and only showed up because a whistle blower leaked the existence of the meeting to them just a couple of days before. Thanking Spiker for reaching out to those people shows Cabrera’s clueless.

  1. You [Ed Cabrera] made a reference to “each operator registered with the Office of Finance” in connection with parking lot ownership or operation

  2. That “administration of tax should be fair and consistent across the board” referring to Parking Occupancy Taxes (POT)

If the meeting really was an effort at outreach why weren’t all registered parking lot operators notified?

If you invite only a registered lobbyist’s clients to a meeting to educate people on their legal obligations and not “each operator registered with the Office of Finance” how can you say with a straight face that your “administration of tax should be fair and consistent across the board?

1. That you told a person at the meeting asking a question “I would prefer that you run them [questions] through Greg”

2. That you stated “After Greg and I discuss it we can come to some agreement”

These comments speak for themselves as examples of pure, unadulterated regulatory clientitis!

Why should companies have to belong to an association to deal with a government regulator? This is not a rhetorical question; it is a serious philosophical one which segues into the next issue…do we live in the United States of America, EEUU, or do we live in the United Mexican States?



Corporatism vs Pluralism



A 2005 College Board Briefing Paper: Mexico by Caroline Beer of the University of Vermont echoed some of my own learning from CSU Northridge where I studied communitarian philosophy—stemming from the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas–as an undergraduate student of Dr. Larry Litwin and Professor Blase Bonpane (I was also later to become Blase’s graduate assistant). I also extensively studied corporatist governance in connection with my term paper on Mexico for a graduate seminar on Authoritarianism conducted by Dr. Kit Machado. Caroline Beer notes the three well-known sectors of the longtime Mexican governing party, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional or “PRI:” National Peasant Confederation (Confederación Nacional Campesina—CNC), the Confederation of Mexican Workers (Confederación de Trabajadores Mexicanos—CTM) and the middle class or petit bourgeois sector, National Confederation of Popular Organizations (Confederación Nacional de Organizaciones Populares-CNOP).



CommunitarianismWhile these groups were within the structure of the ruling party, the PRI, many discussions of communitarian or corporatist politics in Mexico miss a critical point. Even when you are both theoretically and actually outside the ruling party, i.e. by being grande bourgeoisie it does not mean that you are excluded from negotiating with the government, but in a corporatist or communitarian system you must do so through an organization representing your class interests as opposed to your individual interests. In Mexico, there were two major capitalist organizations that the PRI government dealt with, negotiating with those organizations as outsiders. If you attempted to deal with the government as an individual or as a business, de facto you were not going to get the time of day.



The theory behind corporatism, of which there are right, middle, and left varieties (the right wing version being known as “fascism”) is that, as enunciated by Italian fascists:



Fascism’s theory of economic corporatism involved management of sectors of the economy by government or privately controlled organizations (corporations). Each trade union or employer corporation would, theoretically, represent its professional concerns, especially by negotiation of labour contracts and the like. This method, it was theorized, could result in harmony amongst social classes. []



In general communitarian theories of the role of government, social classes have rights and you exercise your personal rights through your class, whereas in Anglo-American pluralist theories of government, you have individual rights by being a human being that the government must accord you along with your right to associate and your right to refrain from association. The middle of the road manifestation of communitarian philosophy is usually represented by so-called “Christian Democratic” political parties, while left wing communitarianism may be exemplified by the organization of Cuba, even though the governing Communist Party purports to be ostensibly Marxist. That Salvador Allende’s vision for the transformation of Chilean society was so manifestly communitarian (even though ostensibly Marxist), the left wing of the Christian Democrats split off forming the Popular Unitary Action Movement or MAPU (Spanish: Movimiento de Acción Popular Unitario) which became part of the Unidad Popular as part of the coalition that elected Allende president.



Whether communitarian or pluralist doctrine are inferior or superior to one another is a question of values and outcomes. Not every institution in the United States of America (EEUU) is pluralist. The entire theory underlying the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act) and the National Labor Relations Board is plainly communitarian in nature, while purportedly protecting the pluralist notion that people have a right not to associate collectively if they so choose.



With that framework from which to analyze the Los Angeles Office of Finance, whether it thinks it is operating this way or not, the Office of Finance has a de facto practice that is corporatist and non-pluralist in nature and both by its deeds and its words operates more like the traditional authoritarian government of Mexico than of the ostensibly pluralist United States of America. “Words may show a man’s wit, actions his meaning.” ― Benjamin Franklin. In the case of Ed Cabrera both his deeds and his words demonstrate that the Office of Finance only goes through a registered lobbyist for a certain set of companies that pay their lobbyist for consultation of any sort on how to regulate the parking industry. The clients of that lobbyist exercise the de facto use of City Hall rooms to hold meetings in that are intended to be private and limited to them and them only. The lobbyist benefits by being legitimized in his appearance of having power by the words of Ed Cabrera referring to that particular lobbyist’s role in the formulation of regulatory and legislative policy and by his access to the use of a City Hall meeting room for his clients. That the Office of Finance fails to inform or include the rest of those whom it regulates sends a signal to the non-clients that if they want something from City Hall and the Office of Finance, they’d better join the association and pay fees to its lobbyist.



By my values, this is wrong.



The Existing de facto Governance Model is Incompetent



If nothing else, the existing practices and procedures promote corruption within the parking industry and within City Hall. This has been going on for decades if not for time immemorial in Los Angeles.



Mayor Tom Bradley

Mayor Tom Bradley

When Tom Bradley was Mayor, a scandal broke out concerning the management of the LAX parking lots in which numerous low level employees, almost all of them Thai immigrants, were arrested and charged with felony embezzlement. I was consulted as defense investigator by two different defense lawyers, Arthur Azdair and Lou Bernstein, neither of whom knew each other but yet both told an identical tale. Their clients insisted that the real culprits were the managers of the company that employed them and that just to get and keep their jobs they had to kick up percentages of the embezzlement take which went all the way up the corporate ladder.



Both Arthur and Lou’s clients offered to roll over in exchange for a plea bargain. The Deputy District Attorneys prosecuting the case refused. Both Arthur and Lou were told point blank by a very pissed off District Attorney Investigator that the District Attorney’s office refusal of any plea deals for these underlings was because if they started the ball rolling and went up the ladder, “it would lead straight into City Hall.”



Miguel Contreras2When Miguel Contreras was a member of the Airport Commission and this same company tried a comeback bid to get back its old contracts at LAX, I provided him with my case file and gave him a list of questions to ask the managers appearing before the commission. The questions I formulated were designed to lead to who in City Hall had been on the take to cover this little fiasco up. When Miguel got to the third question on my list that company abruptly pulled out of the bidding process. I can’t imagine why.



Rockard "Rocky" Delgadillo

Rockard “Rocky” Delgadillo

Then there is the little story I’ve written about in the past concerning campaign contributions that coincided with the dismissal of a lawsuit brought against Grant Parking, one of the many parking companies owned by the Ullman family. On March 8, 2006, City Attorney Rockard “Rocky” Delgadillo, the City Attorneys Office and a private law firm retained by the Community Redevelopment Agency file suit against a whole bunch of companies and organizations–including Grant Parking owned by the Ullman family–in an eminent domain case On March 15, 2006, Richard Ullman contributes $5,600 to “Californians for Rocky” — Delgadillo’s campaign committee for his 2006 Primary run for Attorney General On March 16, 2006, two things happen: the lawsuit is dismissed only against Grant Parking and Cathryn Ullman makes an additional $5,600 contribution to Californians for Rocky. Enough said, come to your own conclusions…..



Five Star ParkingThen there’s Five Star Parking, a company originally formed to take over management of County of Los Angeles owned parking lots which had employed County workers under SEIU contract. The company was formed as a dba of three different competing parking lot companies, amounting to what was arguably a conspiracy in restraint of trade in violation of anti-trust laws. The net result: wages and working conditions went down for the employees over night while parking fees escalated.



At some point Five Star Parking became a suspended corporation, but that did not stop it from operating. Under the tutelage of its law firm, the company transferred its assets as though it had a right to do so as a suspended corporation (which it clearly did not) and started operating first under one fictitious business name statement filed with Los Angeles County and then another. Both of the dba filings factually contradicted each other and both were filed by the same law firm. Did anybody in the City of Los Angeles—which became well aware of these facts during litigation—do anything about this state of affairs? Of course not.



If the Office of Finance and other city regulatory agencies bothered to engage on a periodic basis with all parking lot operators—a practice in effect prior to Antonio Villaraigosa’s administration that was altered for who knows what reason—they might actually hear through the proverbial grapevine what’s actually happening in the industry and be able to fight corruption before it gets out of hand. However, when people are in authority in the City who feel themselves to be unaccountable to anybody, that isn’t a practice that’s likely to be implemented. In one of my investigations, I uncovered extortionate activity by another private investigator and the head of a certain Jewish/Israeli crime family of Hungarian Jewish descent, of which I have publicly written:



In connection with the City of Los Angeles’ prosecution of [two of my clients] J.B. Tucker & Associates sent two (2) letters to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, neither of which he has bothered to respond to (including but not limited to violating the California Public Records Act time deadline). The second letter, dated May 11, 2007, asks Mayor Villaraigosa to explain a campaign contribution he received from a certain very notorious convicted felon (made before the man’s felony conviction). In my letter, I posed the issues as:



“If you know why xxxxxxxx made this contribution, I would like you to explain it. If you don’t but know (or can find out) what persons from your campaign staff might have information regarding this contribution I would like to interview them regarding it.



I am also asking that (1) you disclose to me whether you ever used xxxx’s services for “opposition research,” (2) if you used him for “reverse research,” (i.e., investigating yourself in order to anticipate what a political opponent might find out), (3) whether xxxxxxxxx’s payment was by check or some other instrument that would enable him to ascertain the bank account number in which it was deposited (in the event that you were the target of one of his investigations), and (4) you make yourself available for an interview regarding this matter.”



For some strange reason I never got a response from Antonio….draw your own conclusion.



Workers in Little Boxes



Folk singer Malvena Reynolds wrote and sang in part in her seminal song, Little Boxes, that:



And the people in the houses


All went to the university,


Where they were put in boxes


And they came out all the same,


And there’s doctors and lawyers,


And business executives,


And they’re all made out of ticky tacky


And they all look just the same.



Malvena Reynolds

Malvena Reynolds

Malvena’s acolyte, Los Angeles Folk singer Joanna Cazden updated the concept in More Little Boxes when she sang that “Andy they’re grey ones and they’re grey ones and they’re grey ones and they’re grey ones and they’re all on Wilshire Blvd and they all look just the same.”



Eric: do you want to preside over an administration of obedient proles who see themselves as cogs in a wheel, sitting in their little cubicles without innovative thoughts and afraid of their managers or do you want to lead an active and engaged workforce that is self-critical and respected by the people it regulates in the public interest?



If City regulatory authorities didn’t have tunnel vision and if they were interested in peering outside their little boxes they might have actually thwarted a case of espionage and treason against the United States simply by doing their job to regulate the parking industry. Some years ago, I detected it in what should have been a routine investigation, contacted the FBI Anti-Terrorist Division which in turn handed me over to Counter-Intelligence for the follow up. More details I cannot go into here, in public, but suffice it to say following September 11, 2001 there was much lip service paid that every single public servant needed to be the eyes and ears on the watch to keep America safe. Some people actually take that seriously. It doesn’t matter whether one is a dog catcher, a mail carrier, or even a parking lot regulatory official; if I can stumble onto a case of espionage and treason just by a routine investigation in the Los Angeles parking lot industry, so can the Office of Finance. If that is, they actually cared to take into consideration all the stakeholders in the industry and not just those represented by a single lobbyist.



U.S. Bank Tower, Los Angeles

U.S. Bank Tower, Los Angeles

This is not some theoretical exercise. It is well known that Al Qaeda has twice planned to take out the U.S. Bank Tower in downtown Los Angeles; and in case you are not personally aware of it, the Al Qaeda linked cell taken down in Spain some years ago were caught with surveillance photos of San Francisco Bay Area bridges and the Los Angeles U.S. Bank Tower. Whether it is the Office of Finance or the investigative staff of the Police Commission, their vigilance might have earlier detected a player in the parking industry engaged in potential terrorist activity before I had to stumble upon it.



On February 26, 1993, the terrorists who detonated the truck bomb in the underground parking lot of the North Wing of the World Trade Center were unable to get the truck parked close enough to a corner of the building, screwing up their logistical plan. What if the parking lot operator was in on that plot (and incidentally, the FBI could have prevented it had they taken one of my former colleagues seriously when he gave them dossiers on five of the people they wound up arresting for the crimes, warning the FBI that they were planning to bomb something).



The City of Los Angeles has a stake in dealing fairly and openly with all of its parking lot operators in the interest of public safety as it does with many other occupations. Allowing the Office of Finance to limit its outreach to a single lobbyist and his clients does not comport with such an important public policy goal.



The Alternative: ParkMaggedon



Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved….”–Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, Chapter 27.



In the modern world, Machiavelli’s advice is well taken by collective classes of people as well as the government and certainly by individuals.



Gregory J. Spiker, registered lobbyist

Gregory J. Spiker, registered lobbyist

In light of the ordinance that was passed and effectively hidden under the previous Mayoral administration from the entire Los Angeles parking lot industry, with the exception of Ken Spiker & Associates clients’ and with the admitted participation of KSA in the formulative process of the ordinance requiring surety bonds to guarantee the payment of taxes held in trust by parking lot operators, the non-clients of KSA have felt very little love from the City of Los Angeles and may have to resort to exercising their collective power. As Chief Little Turtle of the Miami Indians cautioned, “If our people fight one tribe at a time, they will be cut off like the fingers from a hand. But if we join together, we make a powerful fist.”



HuelgaFrankly, several of the operators with significant market share in downtown Los Angeles are discussing a action of perfectly legal civil disobedience, i.e., una huelga general, a small business general strike. To bring Los Angeles to a standstill, they do not even need the cooperation of the Los Angeles Parking Association members, KSA’s clients. As far as many non-members are concerned the ordinance was sold to as a bill of goods to the Office of Finance by KSA in the interests of the association’s members and very carefully designed to force smaller operators out of business. As noted, this will not be the first time that governmental authorities in Los Angeles have stood by idly or even collaborated as they did with Five Star Parking’s conspiracy in restraint of trade.



Aside from the fact that calling a general strike is in the financial and political interests of the smaller operators, to many of them it is a matter of dignity. All of the small and medium operators I deal with happen to be immigrants and their workforces are universally immigrants. I cannot actually disagree with the perception they have that what the Office of Finance has done to them by giving favorable treatment to KSA’s clients is in no small way attributable to national origin discrimination and other distinctions of social-subgroups.



ParkMaggedon for Los Angeles?

ParkMaggedon for Los Angeles?

One of the simplest tactics to pull off during civil disobedience against the Vietnam War was the “Park-In,” which we might in contemporary terms call a ParkMaggedon. You buy four running vehicles from junk yards. You drive them in tandem on four lanes of a freeway, slowing down and finally stopping in tandem at rush hour. You get out of the vehicles, take the keys, lock the cars and walk away. However, a contemporary ParkMaggedon launched by parking lot operators requires nothing unlawful…..



Imagine what happens if one or two or three companies with say 50-60 parking lots in Downtown Los Angeles shut down for a day. Imagine if that figure goes up to four, five or six companies.



Imagine the traffic jams….the traffic chaos. Imagine lawyers, judges, and litigants trying to get to court. Imagine municipal employees trying to get to work at City Hall. Imagine all the downtown businesses trying to receive their deliveries on time. Imagine chaos.



Please consider this carefully. Parking lot operators who are not members of Los Angeles and/or the California Parking Association are ready and willing and desirous of meeting with you and/or your staff to discuss the immediate and long term problems within the parking industry in an effort to prevent a general strike against the proposed bonding ordinance. Feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience to effectuate such a meeting.



Respectfully yours, Jan B. Tucker


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments