Among the liberal, anti-business politicians that are listed as supporters of the unpredictable Department of Water and Power energy rate hike on residents and businesses in the City of Los Angeles, the website lists the usual suspects who care more about their union pandering than their constituents' wallets, including Assemblymember Bonnie Lowenthal, State Senator Jenny Oropeza, and "San Pedro" / L.A. City Council member Janice Hahn. All three of these ladies have a past performance of making such horrible endorsements, and all have received my support during the few times that they display a glimmer of understanding how the economic engine truly works. In this situation, it does not take a CPA to understand that increasing the energy rates for residents and small businesses throughout the city will reduce spending power and the ability of businesses to employ as many residents. But as far as our Democratic leaders are concerned, so long as it helps satisfy one of the largest contributors to local elected campaigns, they can check the box.
What surprised me was scrolling down the list of supporters on the IBEW propaganda website and noticing someone who I assumed would be a little more knowledgeable about how the rate hike will affect the families of his students, LAUSD Board Member Richard Vladovic, whom many of us conservatives worked hard to get elected over the two liberal, union-friendly alternatives in 2007. I consider Dick a personal friend, and his endorsement for this measure surprised me. Even though he has his own union ties, I would have assumed that his long-time association with conservative principles, including his registration as a Republican until December 2006, would have steered him toward the decision in the best interests of the voters and not the special interests.
If you want to know what the informed residents and small businesses truly think, all one has to do in Los Angeles is look at which way the 90+ neighborhood councils are leaning. So far, every neighborhood council that has taken up a motion to consider this measure has voted to oppose it! EVERY ONE! A complete list will soon be available on www.VoteNoMeasureB,com, but just take my word for it.
The only people endorsing this measure are either working for the IBEW (and willing to steal money out of the pockets of residents to give to themselves in undeserving jobs) or looking for some sort of recognition or acknowledgement from the IBEW for a future political campaign. Like I said, the usual liberal, business-hating politicos are front and center on the supporter list.
It's just a shame that someone I thought was above it has decided that the slop in the trough tastes just fine!
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Los Angeles Times Editorial - "Measure B: L.A.'s secret solar plan"
(from today's Los Angeles Times Editorial page - I've got more to write about, but this was very good, and from a source that usually gives the L.A. City Council a pass...)
Angelenos will be asked to weigh in on a solar power plan on the city's March 3 ballot, but officials haven't really told us what we're voting on.
January 29, 2009
The City Council was unfazed in November when no one from the Department of Water and Power or other City Hall offices could answer some of the most basic questions about a proposed solar power measure the council was about to put on the ballot. How much will it cost ratepayers? Is it financially feasible? How much money will it take to recruit and train new workers? DWP General Manager H. David Nahai said his agency would have the answers after Huron Consulting Group completed its independent analysis of the plan sometime in January, and council members promised one another that would leave plenty of time for open discussion about the "Green Energy and Good Jobs for Los Angeles" program that they seemed too rushed to deal with at the moment. They scheduled the measure for the March 3 election.
The Huron report is due next week, but don't expect that to spur a month of thoughtful City Council discourse based on the findings. The report is not about Measure B (or Charter Amendment B, take your pick); it's an analysis of the entire three-part Solar L.A. program, of which Measure B is one part. It won't tell ratepayers how much their rates will rise. It can't. There are too many variables -- just as there are too many variables to let voters know how much rates will rise without Measure B.Yet there was Nahai at last week's commission meeting urging everyone to hold their fire until the Huron report is out. "Until then, I feel that all of the conjecture really does a disservice to the debate," he said.The Yes-on-B campaign is in high gear, asking voters to adopt the measure. Voting begins Monday with mail balloting. Yet we're not supposed to ask questions until the Huron report is out? Meanwhile, where is the language of the measure we're voting on? Have voters seen it? Is it available? Is it on the city's website? No -- the city clerk's office is shooting for posting the language sometime toward the end of next week. (If you don't want to wait, you can find the ballot language on our website, at latimes.com/opinion.)
This page wants smart "in-basin" solar power as an integral part of the city's energy generation and distribution strategy, and we remain open to the idea that this ballot measure may be the best way to get it. But the process seems designed to get voters to sign off on a plan without sufficient knowledge of it, and it is undermining a broader discussion of solar power in Los Angeles. There is a point at which process gets so bad that it outweighs substance, no matter how good that substance may be. We're rapidly approaching that point.
Angelenos will be asked to weigh in on a solar power plan on the city's March 3 ballot, but officials haven't really told us what we're voting on.
January 29, 2009
The City Council was unfazed in November when no one from the Department of Water and Power or other City Hall offices could answer some of the most basic questions about a proposed solar power measure the council was about to put on the ballot. How much will it cost ratepayers? Is it financially feasible? How much money will it take to recruit and train new workers? DWP General Manager H. David Nahai said his agency would have the answers after Huron Consulting Group completed its independent analysis of the plan sometime in January, and council members promised one another that would leave plenty of time for open discussion about the "Green Energy and Good Jobs for Los Angeles" program that they seemed too rushed to deal with at the moment. They scheduled the measure for the March 3 election.
The Huron report is due next week, but don't expect that to spur a month of thoughtful City Council discourse based on the findings. The report is not about Measure B (or Charter Amendment B, take your pick); it's an analysis of the entire three-part Solar L.A. program, of which Measure B is one part. It won't tell ratepayers how much their rates will rise. It can't. There are too many variables -- just as there are too many variables to let voters know how much rates will rise without Measure B.Yet there was Nahai at last week's commission meeting urging everyone to hold their fire until the Huron report is out. "Until then, I feel that all of the conjecture really does a disservice to the debate," he said.The Yes-on-B campaign is in high gear, asking voters to adopt the measure. Voting begins Monday with mail balloting. Yet we're not supposed to ask questions until the Huron report is out? Meanwhile, where is the language of the measure we're voting on? Have voters seen it? Is it available? Is it on the city's website? No -- the city clerk's office is shooting for posting the language sometime toward the end of next week. (If you don't want to wait, you can find the ballot language on our website, at latimes.com/opinion.)
This page wants smart "in-basin" solar power as an integral part of the city's energy generation and distribution strategy, and we remain open to the idea that this ballot measure may be the best way to get it. But the process seems designed to get voters to sign off on a plan without sufficient knowledge of it, and it is undermining a broader discussion of solar power in Los Angeles. There is a point at which process gets so bad that it outweighs substance, no matter how good that substance may be. We're rapidly approaching that point.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Will the L.A. City Council get stung by Proposition B?
To give you an idea of just how much of a "third rail" the ballot measure known as Proposition B is here in Los Angeles, I've copied in the latest article from CityWatch, the publication that I trust to keep the best watchful eye on what the L.A. City Council is up to. I have some good friends writing for CityWatch, including Stephen Box (one of the writers below).
In addition to the article below about L.A. Councilmember Bill Rosendahl's lukewarm position, I was a personal witness to our own councilmember, Janice Hahn, giving a neutral response to her position on Proposition B when asked by DWP Committee chair, Dr. Soledad Garcia, at last night's Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council meeting. I think Hahn gave a good, politically safe answer, given the growing unpopularity of this measure, as well as the process of how the L.A. City Council placed it on the March ballot. As the newest appointee to the DWP Committee as the lead liaison for Hahn's district, I am committed to representing both the low to middle-income residents, as well as the numerous small businesses, who will be hard hit by the passage of this rate hike measure.
Here is the latest article from CityWatch (http://www.citywatchla.com):
DWP Workshop Notebook
By David Lowell and Stephen Box
DWP General Manager, H. David Nahai, spent Saturday morning giving a three-hour "Renewable Energy" presentation to a crowd of approximately 70 community leaders representing Neighborhood Councils from throughout the city, most of whom were sitting on the edge of their seats waiting for the discussion of Measure B to come up.
Measure B is the City's proposed "Green Energy and Good Jobs for Los Angeles Act," which has been called "risky" by the City's own analyst and will appear on the March 3rd ballot. Nahai and Assistant GM Aram Benyamin went to great lengths to steer clear of the topic, instead demonstrating incredible message control and sticking to the polished PowerPoint presentation that was well received.
Their efforts to bypass B went askew, however, when Councilman Bill Rosendahl dropped by and jumped into the mix, announcing "I have not made up my mind. I voted to put it on the ballot but I haven't voted to support it because, frankly, I want to understand the details that are to be presented to us as a Council. I might end up supporting it, I might not." (Click here for Rosendahl video)
Rosendahl echoed the sentiment of literally everybody by stating "I believe whole-heartedly in Solar. We're in California. It's Sunny. My roof is flat." He continued by endorsing the DWP's union and the opportunity to bring more people into the DWP workforce while at the same time developing the private sector partnerships and supporting solar housing collectives such as proposed in Mar Vista.
Rosendahl polled the room and found that many were opposed to measure B, that many were undecided, that everybody reckoned that they had an open mind and that there were two people in support of Measure B, one of whom was Gary Baratta who explained "Solar Power has to go forward. There is absolutely no reason not to go forward. The DWP is the only party in a position to develop the infrastructure necessary to deliver power." Gary went on to urge Nahai to ignore the City Charter and to stop contributing funds to the City's general funds.
This softball suggestion from Baratta allowed Nahai to respond vigorously that the DWP would by no means violate the City charter and that it was their desire to abide by the rules and obligations and processes.
Nahai called the meeting a success saying "I think it went well. There were many probing questions and the feedback from the audience was that the presentation was very comprehensive. It was a good meeting. As for Measure B, the DWP has no position on Measure B. We are waiting on financial reports from Huron and we will release them as part of our outreach."
Jack Humphreville “thought the presentation was great, very informative and very interesting. The thing is,” he said, “I came to hear about Measure B."
DWP Advocacy Committee Chair Soledad Garcia agreed, "Solar energy is not the issue, we're all for it. The DWP has much to answer for if we are to work together to develop a solar plan for Los Angeles.”
Rusty Millar, Co-Chair at the Silver Lake NC was unconvinced saying "The LADWP asks us to trust them but they never came to the Neighborhood Councils as required by the City charter and they never revealed any information on the cost of Measure B. I want to know how much, how it will be paid and what the fiscal impact on the city will be."
Barbara Moynihan Burke called the entire process "A travesty!. I was there in Van Nuys when they voted on Measure B. It was called as a "special" with 24 hour notice and then it was over. No financials, no information, no opportunity for feedback from the community. I protested to Council President Garcetti based on process and based on content and yet it's still underway."
Jeff Jacobberger and Tony Butka both referred to the meeting as an informative and comprehensive big-picture presentation of the future of LA's Renewable Energy program but both also left with their expectation of a discussion of Measure B unmet.
Observers Everett Littlefield and BONC Commissioner Al Abrams seemed destined for the Diplomatic Corps. They both argued for open minds. Littlefield said "I'm union and I believe in unions but not when we're getting less for more. I have an open mind and I think like an investor, I think like a rate payer, and I think like a homeowner who wants to install solar. I need to know that everything we do is financially sound." Abrams echoed and said "It's our DWP, we're the stakeholders. We owe it to the DWP to wait and see, to keep an open mind and to evaluate the Huron financial report."
In summary: the Department got good marks for their solar presentation but disappointed many when they avoided the hot-button Solar Energy Prop B issue. ◘
CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 4
Pub: Jan 13, 2009
In addition to the article below about L.A. Councilmember Bill Rosendahl's lukewarm position, I was a personal witness to our own councilmember, Janice Hahn, giving a neutral response to her position on Proposition B when asked by DWP Committee chair, Dr. Soledad Garcia, at last night's Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council meeting. I think Hahn gave a good, politically safe answer, given the growing unpopularity of this measure, as well as the process of how the L.A. City Council placed it on the March ballot. As the newest appointee to the DWP Committee as the lead liaison for Hahn's district, I am committed to representing both the low to middle-income residents, as well as the numerous small businesses, who will be hard hit by the passage of this rate hike measure.
Here is the latest article from CityWatch (http://www.citywatchla.com):
DWP Workshop Notebook
By David Lowell and Stephen Box
DWP General Manager, H. David Nahai, spent Saturday morning giving a three-hour "Renewable Energy" presentation to a crowd of approximately 70 community leaders representing Neighborhood Councils from throughout the city, most of whom were sitting on the edge of their seats waiting for the discussion of Measure B to come up.Measure B is the City's proposed "Green Energy and Good Jobs for Los Angeles Act," which has been called "risky" by the City's own analyst and will appear on the March 3rd ballot. Nahai and Assistant GM Aram Benyamin went to great lengths to steer clear of the topic, instead demonstrating incredible message control and sticking to the polished PowerPoint presentation that was well received.
Their efforts to bypass B went askew, however, when Councilman Bill Rosendahl dropped by and jumped into the mix, announcing "I have not made up my mind. I voted to put it on the ballot but I haven't voted to support it because, frankly, I want to understand the details that are to be presented to us as a Council. I might end up supporting it, I might not." (Click here for Rosendahl video)
Rosendahl echoed the sentiment of literally everybody by stating "I believe whole-heartedly in Solar. We're in California. It's Sunny. My roof is flat." He continued by endorsing the DWP's union and the opportunity to bring more people into the DWP workforce while at the same time developing the private sector partnerships and supporting solar housing collectives such as proposed in Mar Vista.
Rosendahl polled the room and found that many were opposed to measure B, that many were undecided, that everybody reckoned that they had an open mind and that there were two people in support of Measure B, one of whom was Gary Baratta who explained "Solar Power has to go forward. There is absolutely no reason not to go forward. The DWP is the only party in a position to develop the infrastructure necessary to deliver power." Gary went on to urge Nahai to ignore the City Charter and to stop contributing funds to the City's general funds.
This softball suggestion from Baratta allowed Nahai to respond vigorously that the DWP would by no means violate the City charter and that it was their desire to abide by the rules and obligations and processes.
Nahai called the meeting a success saying "I think it went well. There were many probing questions and the feedback from the audience was that the presentation was very comprehensive. It was a good meeting. As for Measure B, the DWP has no position on Measure B. We are waiting on financial reports from Huron and we will release them as part of our outreach."
Jack Humphreville “thought the presentation was great, very informative and very interesting. The thing is,” he said, “I came to hear about Measure B."
DWP Advocacy Committee Chair Soledad Garcia agreed, "Solar energy is not the issue, we're all for it. The DWP has much to answer for if we are to work together to develop a solar plan for Los Angeles.”
Rusty Millar, Co-Chair at the Silver Lake NC was unconvinced saying "The LADWP asks us to trust them but they never came to the Neighborhood Councils as required by the City charter and they never revealed any information on the cost of Measure B. I want to know how much, how it will be paid and what the fiscal impact on the city will be."
Barbara Moynihan Burke called the entire process "A travesty!. I was there in Van Nuys when they voted on Measure B. It was called as a "special" with 24 hour notice and then it was over. No financials, no information, no opportunity for feedback from the community. I protested to Council President Garcetti based on process and based on content and yet it's still underway."
Jeff Jacobberger and Tony Butka both referred to the meeting as an informative and comprehensive big-picture presentation of the future of LA's Renewable Energy program but both also left with their expectation of a discussion of Measure B unmet.
Observers Everett Littlefield and BONC Commissioner Al Abrams seemed destined for the Diplomatic Corps. They both argued for open minds. Littlefield said "I'm union and I believe in unions but not when we're getting less for more. I have an open mind and I think like an investor, I think like a rate payer, and I think like a homeowner who wants to install solar. I need to know that everything we do is financially sound." Abrams echoed and said "It's our DWP, we're the stakeholders. We owe it to the DWP to wait and see, to keep an open mind and to evaluate the Huron financial report."
In summary: the Department got good marks for their solar presentation but disappointed many when they avoided the hot-button Solar Energy Prop B issue. ◘
CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 4
Pub: Jan 13, 2009
Friday, January 9, 2009
Los Angeles Update: Proposition B ballot argument to keep its "teeth"
As many of you have learned over the past month, I have volunteered my services to fight a power grab by the IBEW union to pay for a sole-source boondoggle solar project for themselves on the backs of Los Angeles City residents & businesses. This measure threatens to double or even triple the electrical rates of all residents & businesses in the City of Angels; not just those registered as Republicans! ;-)
The opposition leaders to this deceitful proposition submitted a proper ballot argument for the March 2009 election, but the IBEW hired a slick law firm to challenge much of the wording in order to remove most of the "bite" from the ballot argument. Candidate for Mayor David Hernandez stepped up with his own resources to lead the fight in court against this attack, and I was able to get the news personally from him last night that he and the opposition leaders had scored a great victory in court.
Below is the article from the L.A. Times from the same reporter that originally blew the whistle on this scheme by the IBEW, DWP and the L.A. City Council. He tells it best:
Judge upholds wording of Measure B's ballot argument
He refuses to remove key passages warning that Los Angeles' solar energy initiative in the March 3 election would create a monopoly.
By David Zahniser
5:02 PM PST, January 8, 2009
A judge on Thursday refused to remove key passages used by neighborhood activists in their ballot argument against Measure B, the solar energy proposal heading to Los Angeles voters in the March 3 election.
Mitchell Schwartz, a political strategist who staged Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's 2005 inaugural gala, had asked the judge to take out wording in the voter pamphlet warning that the solar plan would give a monopoly to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the union that represents employees at the city's Department of Water and Power.
But Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe said the measure -- which has been embraced by Villaraigosa and the City Council -- is open to a range of interpretations. "The proposition is so vague and so encompassing that speculation about just about anything is fair game," he said.
Yaffe issued a tentative ruling that is expected to become final today. But his statements did little to end a heated debate over the solar proposal, which seeks to add 400 megawatts of solar energy to rooftops and parking lots by 2014.
Those who signed the argument against Measure B accused allies of the mayor of using expensive lawyers to squelch the opposition's political views. After Schwartz went to court, signers of the ballot argument against Measure B hired a lawyer -- city attorney candidate Noel Weiss -- and dubbed themselves "the Solar 8."
The group's members includes former DWP president Nick Patsaouras, now a candidate for city controller, and former Los Angeles Daily News editor Ron Kaye.
In his tentative ruling, Yaffe also refused to remove language that warned that "no competitive bidding" would be used by the solar program. And he declined to take out wording that warned that the DWP would use "outdated technology" for the initiative. "The judge did the right thing," Weiss said.
Schwartz, who served last year as state campaign director for President-elect Barack Obama, did not attend the hearing. But attorney Stephen Kaufman, who represented Schwartz, said opponents of Measure B had made false or misleading statements that would be corrected during the campaign.
In the opponents' ballot argument, "the implication is that this is a self-serving deal being foisted on the voters here, and that is simply not the case," Kaufman told the judge.
He said his client scored one important victory, by forcing opponents of Measure B to remove a passage stating that no public hearings had been held on the solar proposal. Instead, the argument will say that the DWP did not provide "engineering or operational input" before Measure B went on the ballot.
The measure was proposed by Working Californians, an advocacy group headed by two high-level officials from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The Measure B campaign paid for Schwartz's legal fees.
Schwartz, president of the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters, was part of a select group that attended a Feb. 29, 2008, presentation on the solar plan by the union's Local 18 business manager Brian D'Arcy. His public relations firm, Bomaye Company, provided services to the DWP between 1999 and 2003. During that period, the firm helped promote the DWP's green initiatives, including one of its existing solar programs.
Schwartz's latest firm, skImpact, has a contract with CH2M Hill, a company that has been accused by the DWP of overbilling. But Schwartz said he is not doing any work related to the city or its electrical utility -- and only joined the lawsuit at Kaufman's request.
"I'm not part of the insider crew at all," he said. "I know them, but I'm not part of them. I just think the solar thing is really good."
david.zahniser@latimes.com
The opposition leaders to this deceitful proposition submitted a proper ballot argument for the March 2009 election, but the IBEW hired a slick law firm to challenge much of the wording in order to remove most of the "bite" from the ballot argument. Candidate for Mayor David Hernandez stepped up with his own resources to lead the fight in court against this attack, and I was able to get the news personally from him last night that he and the opposition leaders had scored a great victory in court.
Below is the article from the L.A. Times from the same reporter that originally blew the whistle on this scheme by the IBEW, DWP and the L.A. City Council. He tells it best:
Judge upholds wording of Measure B's ballot argument
He refuses to remove key passages warning that Los Angeles' solar energy initiative in the March 3 election would create a monopoly.
By David Zahniser
5:02 PM PST, January 8, 2009
A judge on Thursday refused to remove key passages used by neighborhood activists in their ballot argument against Measure B, the solar energy proposal heading to Los Angeles voters in the March 3 election.
Mitchell Schwartz, a political strategist who staged Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's 2005 inaugural gala, had asked the judge to take out wording in the voter pamphlet warning that the solar plan would give a monopoly to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the union that represents employees at the city's Department of Water and Power.
But Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe said the measure -- which has been embraced by Villaraigosa and the City Council -- is open to a range of interpretations. "The proposition is so vague and so encompassing that speculation about just about anything is fair game," he said.
Yaffe issued a tentative ruling that is expected to become final today. But his statements did little to end a heated debate over the solar proposal, which seeks to add 400 megawatts of solar energy to rooftops and parking lots by 2014.
Those who signed the argument against Measure B accused allies of the mayor of using expensive lawyers to squelch the opposition's political views. After Schwartz went to court, signers of the ballot argument against Measure B hired a lawyer -- city attorney candidate Noel Weiss -- and dubbed themselves "the Solar 8."
The group's members includes former DWP president Nick Patsaouras, now a candidate for city controller, and former Los Angeles Daily News editor Ron Kaye.
In his tentative ruling, Yaffe also refused to remove language that warned that "no competitive bidding" would be used by the solar program. And he declined to take out wording that warned that the DWP would use "outdated technology" for the initiative. "The judge did the right thing," Weiss said.
Schwartz, who served last year as state campaign director for President-elect Barack Obama, did not attend the hearing. But attorney Stephen Kaufman, who represented Schwartz, said opponents of Measure B had made false or misleading statements that would be corrected during the campaign.
In the opponents' ballot argument, "the implication is that this is a self-serving deal being foisted on the voters here, and that is simply not the case," Kaufman told the judge.
He said his client scored one important victory, by forcing opponents of Measure B to remove a passage stating that no public hearings had been held on the solar proposal. Instead, the argument will say that the DWP did not provide "engineering or operational input" before Measure B went on the ballot.
The measure was proposed by Working Californians, an advocacy group headed by two high-level officials from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The Measure B campaign paid for Schwartz's legal fees.
Schwartz, president of the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters, was part of a select group that attended a Feb. 29, 2008, presentation on the solar plan by the union's Local 18 business manager Brian D'Arcy. His public relations firm, Bomaye Company, provided services to the DWP between 1999 and 2003. During that period, the firm helped promote the DWP's green initiatives, including one of its existing solar programs.
Schwartz's latest firm, skImpact, has a contract with CH2M Hill, a company that has been accused by the DWP of overbilling. But Schwartz said he is not doing any work related to the city or its electrical utility -- and only joined the lawsuit at Kaufman's request.
"I'm not part of the insider crew at all," he said. "I know them, but I'm not part of them. I just think the solar thing is really good."
david.zahniser@latimes.com
Thursday, January 1, 2009
"Rock the First" candidate takes on "establishment" candidate Garcia in Long Beach
[This was posted on LBReport.com, a truly grassroots internet newspaper for Long Beach that I recommend all Long Beach residents bookmark.]
Rick Berry, Spotted At City Clerk's Candidate Workshop, Will Formally Announce 1st dist Council Run Saturday...Using Political Consultant Who Waged "No on I" Campaign
(Jan. 1, 2009) -- Rick Berry, a 15-year 1st district resident and former LB Community Band President, has scheduled a Saturday (Jan. 3) event to announce his entry into the special election to succeed Bonnie Lowenthal on the City Council...and has hired political consultant Randy Terrell who ran the "No on I" campaign that blunted the $700,000+ Mayor-backed campaign for a City Hall sought property parcel tax.
We first spotted Mr. Berry at the Dec. 29 City Clerk workshop for prospective candidates (in photo below, bearded man across the table from Robert Garcia).
In a Dec. 31 emailed release, Mr. Berry states:
"After being involved in the district for fifteen years, and Long Beach all of my life, I have seen a lot of wasted opportunities that could be corrected easily with proactive, common sense thinking...My campaign is about bringing those qualities to the City Council, but also about challenging the status quo so that residents do benefit."
Mr. Terrell, who previously ran paid political ads on LBReport.com for the No on I campaign (including an animated ad of Mayor Foster's head peaking out from behind a podium, challenging him to debate the measure) recently purchased paid political ad space on LBReport.com listing a series of what the ads call "bad City Hall ideas." The ads link to a separate website by Mr. Terrell, saying an unnamed 1st district candidate will be announced Jan. 3 who'll be "the only one independent enough to stand up to special interests, and help transform our neighborhoods and our city for the better."
The campaign release quotes Mr. Berry as saying, "I am serious about this campaign, and serious about winning. From public health and a clean environment, to making sure that the City Council focuses on the needs of the residents instead of special interests -- these are issues I don't see any other candidate addressing adequately."
Rick Berry, Spotted At City Clerk's Candidate Workshop, Will Formally Announce 1st dist Council Run Saturday...Using Political Consultant Who Waged "No on I" Campaign
(Jan. 1, 2009) -- Rick Berry, a 15-year 1st district resident and former LB Community Band President, has scheduled a Saturday (Jan. 3) event to announce his entry into the special election to succeed Bonnie Lowenthal on the City Council...and has hired political consultant Randy Terrell who ran the "No on I" campaign that blunted the $700,000+ Mayor-backed campaign for a City Hall sought property parcel tax.
We first spotted Mr. Berry at the Dec. 29 City Clerk workshop for prospective candidates (in photo below, bearded man across the table from Robert Garcia).
In a Dec. 31 emailed release, Mr. Berry states:
"After being involved in the district for fifteen years, and Long Beach all of my life, I have seen a lot of wasted opportunities that could be corrected easily with proactive, common sense thinking...My campaign is about bringing those qualities to the City Council, but also about challenging the status quo so that residents do benefit."
Mr. Terrell, who previously ran paid political ads on LBReport.com for the No on I campaign (including an animated ad of Mayor Foster's head peaking out from behind a podium, challenging him to debate the measure) recently purchased paid political ad space on LBReport.com listing a series of what the ads call "bad City Hall ideas." The ads link to a separate website by Mr. Terrell, saying an unnamed 1st district candidate will be announced Jan. 3 who'll be "the only one independent enough to stand up to special interests, and help transform our neighborhoods and our city for the better."
The campaign release quotes Mr. Berry as saying, "I am serious about this campaign, and serious about winning. From public health and a clean environment, to making sure that the City Council focuses on the needs of the residents instead of special interests -- these are issues I don't see any other candidate addressing adequately."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
