Topic RSS




(135 votes) 3:19 am
November 10, 2011
OfflineI just sent the email below to Anita Meachem @ anita.meacham@lacity.org
Anita is the Recreation supervisor, scum bag Charles Singer is her dirt bag boss that sold out Venice.
9:11 am
July 3, 2010
OfflineVenice Vortex said
This thing smellls really bad. The guy from Recs and parks that signed this piece of sh*t conspiracy document is named Charles Singer, he is the Valley region superintendent. His tele number is 818.756.9404 WTF is this?????????
Venice do not let yourself get screwed.
Please show up to the next VNC meeting and let Linda & Company know that we care about our community and representation. Bill R you can kiss my ass. Atruro Pina you are a nice guy with a shitty job. You have to cover up for Bill’s lies and incompetency. I do not trust you. When your lips are moving you are lying.
Steve Clare you are a piece of crap that does not care about Venice residents. Just keep making money with those low interest mortgages and have the properties revert to you.
I agree that this thing smells but it's not about a lot of things here.
It's not about:
– Charles Singer. Somebody has to sign the permit and it's his responsibility. I expect he knows little of the politics but as an administrator of a huge part of the Parks and Rec Dept, he signs off on things like this. It seems reasonable to him to allow the containers use for time. The language of the permit allows him to pull it back with 60 days notice. Which of course is about when the shelter program ends and the summer fun times on the beach begin again in earnest.
- Arturo has a job working for Bill. He does as he is instructed or he gets replaced. He's the messenger so to speak. A clever one who minces words perhaps… but he's still employed.
- It's not about the money. $800 is chump change to the City of Los Angeles and no bid contracts are exactly how small sums like that get spent. You don't spend $3000 in city services vetting competing bids for a project that costs less than $1000.
It's about collusion and obfuscation. It's about behind the scenes dealings.
So let's keep the focus on those who would collude to obscure. Had they been above board and vetted the idea, who's to say that the VNC board would not have agreed to their plan? Who's to say that the board and others would not have been able to work out some reasonable compromise? Now they have to deal with collusion instead. Isn't that is the issue?
Gonzo said
- It's not about the money. $800 is chump change to the City of Los Angeles and no bid contracts are exactly how small sums like that get spent. You don't spend $3000 in city services vetting competing bids for a project that costs less than $1000.
Actually, the money is a part of the issue.
$800 is nothing, you are correct.
Think when the "program" gets renewed it is going to be $800 again, or will it be "we have discovered the costs are $xx,xxx.xx" … what would it cost to do this 12 months a year?
10:05 am
February 17, 2010
OfflineGonzo,
You are correct on all counts…. That said, this is the EXACT way that the residents were screwed over and over during the Galanter CD6 era. Everything was low key and done behind closed doors with the results posted as the programs were put into effect. Resident input was solicited, but all meetings were facilitated by social service PR flack/public interface people and all meetings were broken up into "focus groups" to come up with ideas, but all were either led, or dominated by social service employees (often not identified as such) and known social service advocates. I walked out on a number of these "kangaroo courts" during the decades long strife with St Jos Center, who's Operations Director Simone Best told neighbors that the sh!t in the alleys was deposited there by "German Tourists" because there were not "pisoirs" on corners all along Rose! That kind of stuff….
Ruth Galanter once said that she was elected to lead, and lead she would. The residents were inconsequential. Then the question of whatever would be put to the public at meetings that were dominated and disrupted by the same sort of people who attempt to do the same at sensitive issue VNC meetings today. She then would throw up her hands, complain that the people of Venice were a bunch of undisciplined children and did what she wanted in the first place… All set up before it happened… I would like to note that Linda Lucks is a Galanter disciple, who feels that she was "elected to lead" the VNC as well, and Mike Bonin was Ruth's Venice Deputy….
As Gonzo pointed out, it is not about who or why. It is about the suspension of proper process. That is why Mark Ryavec and the VSA are so valuable. We will need a group that will solicit funding and work with the legal system to get this sort of thing resolved… it is really unfortunate that we in Venice need to hire lawyers to fight a local totalitarian government that only presents a charade of public outreach…
As Andy Brown in the old Amos & Andy TV show used to say, "I feels a bamboozle commin' on….."
FYI, as sent this morning (Typo= 8:30am, I meant 9:30am)
Hello VNC Board,
Looking into the new homeless checkin center to be run by The Venice Community Housing Corporation at the paddle tennis courts on Recreation and Park Land.
Setting aside the issue of homelessness and what this storage locker will be used for, my concern is simply the politics of what went down here.
Can the board please explain, in writing, why this program was not brought before the residents of Venice and the VNC Board? (And no, discussing it unannounced at 8:30 am on a weekday morning without a vote is not "bringing it before the public".)
Is it not the duty of the Neighborhood Council to discuss projects like this with the public? I find it absurd that Yo! Venice! is doing more to inform the community than the Neighborhood Council about this.
Is there an "ethics" panel at the Venice Neighborhood Council that will be looking into how this happened? (The current VNC President is paid employee of The Venice Community Housing Corporation, is she not?)
Thank you in advance for your answers.
Bret
Bret said
FYI, as sent this morning (Typo= 8:30am, I meant 9:30am)
Hello VNC Board,
Looking into the new homeless checkin center to be run by The Venice Community Housing Corporation at the paddle tennis courts on Recreation and Park Land.
Setting aside the issue of homelessness and what this storage locker will be used for, my concern is simply the politics of what went down here.
Can the board please explain, in writing, why this program was not brought before the residents of Venice and the VNC Board? (And no, discussing it unannounced at 8:30 am on a weekday morning without a vote is not "bringing it before the public".)
Is it not the duty of the Neighborhood Council to discuss projects like this with the public? I find it absurd that Yo! Venice! is doing more to inform the community than the Neighborhood Council about this.
Is there an "ethics" panel at the Venice Neighborhood Council that will be looking into how this happened? (The current VNC President is paid employee of The Venice Community Housing Corporation, is she not?)
Thank you in advance for your answers.
Bret
Response:
Bret:
Thank you for your question. Although we have not yet set the agenda for our 1/22/2012 meeting, it is very likely that much of what you ask about will be considered at that meeting. The Brown Act (the State of California's open meeting law) required that items that are to be decided by one of the state's governmental deliberative bodies MUST be discussed at a public meeting. The VNC is considered one of those governmental deliberative bodies – so we can't discuss this subject by email or on an internet posting or blogging site as those do not constitute a public meeting.
I do want yo let you know that our Administrative Committee (which meets on Monday, January 14, 1013 at 7pm in the Extra Space Storage Meeting Room, 658 Venice Blvd.) will discuss and decide whether any (or all) of the motions and/or announcements submitted on this topic will be placed on Board's Agenda for its Jan 22nd meeting. Please feel free to attend the meeting on Monday (keeping in mind that we do not discuss the merits of a proposed agenda item at the Administrative Committee meeting) – or you might wish wait until our Jan 22nd Board meeting.
In the meantime, because of the Brown Act restrictions, it would be both inappropriate and against the law for VNC Board members to respond to your request. This is unfortunate; dealing with the requirements of the Open Meeting law can be frustrating. I will be happy to either speak to you (or designate another Board Member to speak to you) after the Board has had its public discussions on the subject.
Thanks again for your interest – and I look forward to working constructively with Yo Venice during the next VNC Board term.
Linda Lucks
President, VNC
2:52 pm
January 2, 2013
Offlinephew--perhaps now Ms. Lucks will comply with the Brown Act and stop commenting on the toilet facility thread on the VNC fb page. according to the above, the comments are a clear violation of the state's sunshine law. (unless, of course, she believes that the issue will never come before the VNC.)

Log In
Register
Home


