Civil Action Press

Shrader asks DWP Board and Mayor Villaraigosa for change agents

2006-12-05T19:53:00.000-08:00

Daniel N. Shrader made the following public comment to the Board of Water and Power.

The city’s civil service system was created in 1903 to prevent political patronage from dominating decisions of employment. The idea was that city government should search for those people with the skills and experience to do each city job and assure that jobs were allocated on the basis of merit. Moreover, it was designed to protect those who performed their jobs responsibly from arbitrary or retaliatory suspension or firing. Ten years later on November 5, 1913, Chief Engineer William Mulholland delivered the aqueduct system on schedule and under budget.

I have dedicated the majority of my career in service to this city and this Department. During my first week on the job in 1983, General Manager and Chief Engineer, Paul Lane, knew me by name and articulated a vision of our potential. Since that time, I have served proudly under many General Managers and Chief Engineers who have advanced through merit and qualification and shaped the vision and culture of our organization.

In 1995, city politicians convinced voters to change the Charter and increase the ranks of exempt executives who serve at the pleasure of the mayor, his appointed commissioners, and the city council. The reason for vesting this power with the mayor was to ensure our management was accountable and responsive to the public. The change in our culture is tied to the influences of these mayoral appointments. In the aftermath of deregulation, we downsized. Exempt positions and 1014 transfers were to be used to reposition existing employees of merit. But instead, these hiring privileges have been abused, qualifications lowered, and the quality of our management undermined. In effect, we are restoring the patronage that civil service was designed to prevent – doling out jobs to those with connections.

On November 7th, I questioned management integrity and the direction of these personnel investigations, because I have spent 6 years working my way mano a mano through an organizational labyrinth of agents, loopholes, and dead ends controlled by exempt executives sitting before you. I can claim with reasonable certainty that this organization is in denial and its management spends more time ruining employees rather than addressing their concerns and refocusing their efforts to the benefit of our customers.

My complaints about management are not unique to personnel. I hope you can recall calming an elderly woman, a residential customer, who came weeping into the Board meeting with bill in hand. I don’t know how or if the situation was resolved but, it is important to note she came here as a last resort. Our organization could not address her needs without executive deliberation and she had to return 2 weeks later for a resolution.

In another instance, the Chancellor of the Los Angeles Community College District demonstrated to you at this podium that our executives treated him cavalierly and would not address his needs. It was no surprise that the Los Angeles Community College District announced, it planned to build and generate its own green power.

These two customer service failures are noteworthy not because they demonstrate that we treat a broad range of customers equally poorly, but because the failure of one exacerbates the failure of the other. Each commercial customer lost will result in a multitude of residential customers weeping about their bill.

Coupled with a lack of operational transparency, an inability to assess, foresee, avoid, or, at the very least, provide a managerial explanation of the latest media covered fiasco without having to wait 6 months for a blue ribbon investigation bona fide by the city attorney, these instances reflect poorly upon city management.

These management issues are not specific to DWP. The video clips of ruffians in blue, cruel antics of firefighters, refusal to hold managers accountable, and millions in settlements, have soiled our reputations, violated our civil rights, and cost the city its integrity, its standards, and its vision. These examples have come to characterize our expectations from city management. They contribute to middle management malaise, the lack of accountability, and the inability to change the culture where we work. These deplorable examples of managerial incompetence have become institutionalized and seem unaffected by scores of proclamations, appointed second-career managers, investigations, and reorganizations.

Consequently, I believe management, merit, and accountability have been compromised. I am asking Mayor Villaraigosa and this Board again, to take advantage of the employees who risk their careers before you for the sake of this city department and its stakeholders. Rather than labeling us as inflammatory and demanding our patience, harness our passion, energy, and diligence as change agents and employ our talent and loyalty to achieve your goals and the mayor’s vision.

The partnership of change agents and culture changing opportunities is priceless.

I am submitting a recent article from the Wall Street Journal about an unlikely change agent who seized an opportunity and saved an entrenched and failing company. He effectively changed the culture of his company in two years by changing the traditions and attitudes of management.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

No account accountability

2006-10-17T19:57:00.000-07:00

The seventy or so employees who reported abuse, mismanagement, and retaliation to the Board of Water and Power Commissioners in January 2006 waited to hear the second installment of words describing the investigatory findings commissioned by the Board of Water and Power Commissioners.

On May 3, 2006, it was disheartening, but not unexpected, to hear David Nahai, Board President, sum up the investigations into management of Custodial Services, Landscaping, Fleet Services, Security, and Information Technology. He said management was found to be "woefully incompetent." We can be assured those were carefully chosen words. Incompetence, most assuredly, is not, and most likely will never be, a violation at DWP.

In today's Board meeting, David Nahai took another peddle back and seemed to say the personnel problems at DWP amounted to isolated instances of management miscommunication that were allowed to fester. Moreover, Nahai indicated that the problems were, in many cases, attributed to managers who had retired and were not there anymore. He suggested a little management training may be in order.

This, of course, flies in the face of recent and ongoing litigation, confidential personnel settlements, mismanaged contracts, power outages, a backlog of infrastructure maintenance, high overtime, low productivity, low morale, a number of poor performance audits, and increasing rates.

Spontaneous woeful incompetence must be the new paradigm at DWP. No one seemed surprised enough to ask, "Who is in charge of the woeful incompetence at DWP?"

Villaraigosa Pulls Cops out of Household Trash

2006-05-02T22:13:00.000-07:00

Robbing Peter to pay Paul has never made things better. It just makes finances harder to track and impossible to hold anybody accountable for not getting things done.

Take for instance the scheme to have Lotto pay for schools. Tell me, since Lotto was sold to the public, has education improved? Or, how about the 30 percent fuel tax that is supposed to pay for roads, has that made the streets any better?

I think the reason why Los Angeles does not want anymore police officers is because they have a questionable reputation. When city attorneys defended the City from suits brought about by its citizens, it did two things. One, it saved Los Angeles a ton of money. And two, it protected the managers that fostered the abusive culture.

In protecting the City, the City Attorney’s protected the problem. As a result, the LAPD still can not meet the terms of the consent decree even after five years. Incidents continue to remind citizens why they should vote against adding more officers to an undesirable culture that can not protect its citizens or embrace a court ordered mandate.

I for one know full well that the price of trash collection will be going up because we can’t seem to settle simple things like where to put all the trash once it is collected. If the City can not manage the Police Department, why would I want to raise the price of trash collection? Leave the trash alone! Fix the Police Department. For that matter, stay out of the School District too. Please don’t mismanage another area until you can demonstrate that you can handle what is on your plate with some consistency.

See the need. Hear the calling. Ask for reform.

2006-01-24T22:07:00.000-08:00

See the need. Hear the calling. Ask for reform.

The following DWP Announcement was circulated to DWP Employees today via email. Many do not have access to email. Please pass this along.

"Meeting Notice - Opportunity for DWP Employees to Address Board Personnel Relations Committee"

"The Board Personnel Relations Committee (Committee) will be holding a meeting on January 27, 2006 to provide DWP employees an opportunity to address the Committee on employee relations issues. The meeting will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m in Room 1555 of the John Ferraro Office Building. Please see the attached Personnel Relations Committee agenda for additional information about the upcoming meeting."

AGENDA

PERSONNEL RELATIONS COMMITTEE

BOARD OF WATER & POWER COMMISSIONERS

FRIDAY, JANUARY 27, 2006
9:00 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. (NOON)
ROOM 1555 JFB

COMMISSIONER H. DAVID NAHAI, CHAIR
COMMISSIONER EDITH RAMIREZ, MEMBER
COMMISSIONER MARY NICHOLS (ALTERNATE)
____________________________________________________________

Opportunity for the public to address the Committee on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Committee. (Speakers may be limited in speaking time dependent upon the press of business and number of persons wishing to address the Committee.)

Opportunity for DWP employees to address the Committee on employee relations issues. (Speakers may be limited in speaking time to four minutes each, dependent upon the press of business and number of persons wishing to address the Committee. Employees wishing to attend will use their own time, such as “B” time or vacation time. Release of employees to attend is subject to supervisor approval based upon operational needs.)

*Note: Employees unable to attend this meeting can submit correspondence relating to the above item to:

Personnel Relations Committee
Board of Water and Power Commissioners
111 N. Hope St., Room 1555
Los Angeles, CA 90012

PR 1-27-06

Got Control? (!)

2006-01-22T07:23:00.000-08:00

Got Control? (!)

Why the flap over bottled water? In the midst of employee complaints about management-orchestrated retaliation, intimidation, and harassment, increasing power outages, run away contracts, and a union that finds it more fun staffing managers and cutting lucrative deals at the utility, bottled water is nothing. Until the utility gets under control, drinking bottled water might be the safest thing for the employees to do.

Recently, every Board meeting has been grueling. For all their spending and lackluster performance, top executives send underlings to the podium rather than risk taking responsibility for what they have done.

For two and a half months, the Board has praised managers for being straight forward about their problems. But each meeting, there are problems anew – layer upon layer of mismanagement.

For the last several weeks, employees have come forward complaining of high-level mismanagement and corruption. From the audience’s perspective, no one seemed to be bothered. Neither Assistant Managers Thomas Hokinson and Henry Martinez nor General Manager Ron Deaton turned around to look at employees who came to the podium to make their pleas for management reform.

Rather than management keeping the Board informed, it is these employees and Jeffrey Anderson, of LA Weekly, that are most abreast of the travails at the troubled Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. What is going on, you ask? Read the latest. DWP management is rife with scandal in All Charged Up. What it will take to save L.A.’s troubled utility?

Hopefully, Commissioners H. David Nahai and Edith Ramirez have realized that the first order of the day must be to diligently investigate the personnel mismanagement issues that have driven the utility’s personnel into hiding. No amount of overtime, no amount of pay increase, or confidential settlements is compensation enough for stealing employee dignity nor will it hide the fact that this management lacks the legitimacy or wherewithal to lead.

First, if it plans any improvement at the utility, the Board must enforce the zero tolerance policy on harassment and hostile working conditions. Reports of Union and management harassment upon employees are increasing. The easiest way to clear the ranks of illegitimate bullying managers and union agents is to strictly enforce the policy. Those who orchestrate, permit, or condone harassment, intimidation, coercion in the work place should be subject to immediate dismissal. Going after his own peers at DWP would surely give Rocky Delgadillo a boost in the polls.

We have had fanfares of investigative committees, reports, and proclamations. Viva the new DWP Board. Take control. Take action!

DWP and the Steady Drumbeat of Personnel Complaints

2006-01-15T12:43:00.000-08:00

Beat the Drum for Balance and Management Reform

Note Corrections:

At the January Board meeting, Commissioners H. David Nahai and Edith Ramirez responded to the "steady drum-beat" of personnel and mismanagement complaints. In the January 10th meeting, David Nahai told the public that he had scheduled two special public meetings to be held in the Personnel Relations Committee (~~City Hall~~ Location not certain) on Friday, January 27th and Tuesday, January 31st between 9 a.m. and 12 p.m. Each person who speaks will be given a minimum of four minutes and will be granted "whistleblower" status. He said that both direct account and hearsay will be accepted and that he and Commissioner Ramirez, both attorneys, would weigh them accordingly.

Many believe that this is a means to move these complaints from a televised medium to an obscure un-televised medium. But, when you consider the Brown Act, it may be to get complaints and issues into a committee first, so that they can be properly addressed and acted upon according to the Brown Act. In any case, employees are requesting time off work to attend.

So far now, Thomas Hokinson, Assistant General Manager and former Chief Deputy City Attorney, and Ed Miller, second to Acting General Manager Henry Martinez, have announced they are leaving DWP employment. There is considerable rumor about other issues motivating their timely decisions and plenty of rumors about others leaving as soon as they can get people to replace them. Even Deaton is rumored to have told a number of MEA superintendents that he has identified several executives at DWP that have to go. Several employees have made public comments to the Board of Water and Power Commissioners that mismanagement is not confined to a few executives. Since the downsizing in 1996-98, employees have alleged that many positions have been created and filled on the basis of patronage.

Commissioner Nahai announced that he, Commissioner Ramirez, and Assistant General Manager Hal Lindsey would be attending the special Personnel Committee meetings.

The location of the meetings has not been ascertained as yet. Please forgive the following which has been lined out:
The Personnel Committee meetings usually take place at Los Angeles City Hall, 200 North Spring St., Room 1050, Los Angeles, CA 90012. The Personnel Committee meets regularly on the 1st and 3rd Wednesdays of every month at 2:00 p.m. in Room 1050. The Personnel Committee is chaired by Council member Dennis P. Zine, and presided by Council members Eric Garcetti and Herb J. Wesson, Jr. More information can be provided at cityofla.org, by M. Espinoza at (213) 978-1078, or mespinoza@clerk.lacity.org.

Anyone having information regarding the situation at DWP is encouraged to attend. Your personal account of experiences with DWP management including but not limited to: harassment, intimidation, coercion, waste, corruption, promotional opportunity, merit, cronyism, or patronage, are crucial to bringing about management reform at DWP and reducing the cost of services to the public. It is a rare opportunity for many to educate the commissioners about the problems and ineffectiveness city employees, citizens, and consumers face everyday. If you are unable to attend, please feel free to write down your issues, complaints, or observations (include follow-up information or anonymous), email them to the DWP Commissioners or, to ensure they meet Brown Act criteria, submit them at the committee meetings. Any information emailed to Civil Action Press entitled “Drumbeat” by January 25th 2006, will be submitted at the meeting.

Please forward and pass this along to others who may also wish to beat the drum for management reform at DWP.

Rob from the poor and give to the greedy

2005-11-29T19:58:00.000-08:00

Here is the vision we see based upon Federal statistics and set against the averages for the State and Nation. Los Angeles is not doing so well.

Estimated population (2004) in Los Angeles County was 9,937,739. In 2000, 69.9 percent of the population 25 years or older residing in Los Angeles County completed a high school education. This percentage is much lower than the State or the Nation with 76.8 and 80.6 percent (respectively) graduating from high school.

In 1999, 17.9 percent of the population of Los Angeles County was below the poverty level. The State and the Nation as a whole faired better with only 14.2 percent for California and 12.4 nationwide.

In 2000, per capita personal income in Los Angeles County was $29,522, $32,149 for those living in California, and $29,469 nation wide.

Statistics from: http://www.fedstats.gov/qf/states/06/06037.html and http://www.fedstats.gov/qf/states/00000.html

Using these numbers, here is a way to consider how much the raises that Villaraigosa and the City Council gave to their strongest supporters, DWP and (possibly to) EAA.

Assuming a closed static system. If the population of Los Angeles County is 9,937,739 and per capita income is $29,522, then the total income for Los Angeles County amounted to $293,381,930,758. If 16,000 workers (8,000 DWP/IBEW workers and 8,000 LA/EAA workers) received 20 percent more than the average worker and then they received a 15 percent cost of living adjustment (COLA), their per capita income would increase to $39,855 totaling $637,675,200.

If we subtract that amount from the total Los Angeles County income ($293,381,930,758 - $637,675,200 = $292,744,255,558) and then divide that by the number of other (non-DWP/EAA) citizens, the adjusted per capita income has been reduced by $17 to $29,505.

Essentially what that means is that these little raises without any off-setting productivity increase or cost savings, cost each and every citizen in the County of Los Angeles about $17 (about three lunches). And frankly, as long as we have the high numbers in poverty and low numbers in education, I think the Mayor has made a big mistake.

We would have faired much better for us to each give $6 amounting to
$59,530,434 to the schools and to the Goodwill. Can you imagine how much $60 million could help? You'll notice that is only $12. $1 will go to the parking meter, $1 to the pan handler, and the rest will be lost in city administration and fees.

A New Vision -- Self Service

2005-11-22T23:06:00.000-08:00

Antonio Villaraigosa gave 10,000 or so employees at DWP a really great pay raise, a minimum of 17.9 to a maximum of 31 percent, over the next five years. Villaraigosa had to know the pay raise exacerbated an already huge disparity between DWP employees and other city employees.

It is hard to believe that Mayor Villaraigosa having come up the hard way would foster and support the inequality of city workers. It is also hard to believe that Mayor Villaraigosa would not know the financial situation of the city having been a Los Angeles insider and councilmember for so long. It is especially hard to believe that Mayor Villaraigosa would think that he could give one group of city workers a sweetheart deal without considering that he would have to provide the same equal treatment to all his union brothers and sisters. One for all, all for one, and all that.

If he were concerned about the finances of Los Angeles, he would have concluded that an across the board increase in labor cost would have to be balanced by an equal across the board decrease in operating expenses such as infrastructure maintenance or long term development, or an increase in taxes or city revenue such as trash collection, business fees, lot cleaning, etc., which also amounts to a tax.

Moreover, Villaraigosa would have known that the Los Angeles infrastructure is in bad shape, potholes and such, foregoing infrastructure maintenance is not a viable option. Consequently, increasing revenues or tax would be preferred over decreasing operating costs. Villaraigosa realizes increasing city costs will cause more businesses and employers like Nissan to leave this area for other lower-cost business-friendly cities. And, those relocated businesses will transfer their prized technical and craft employees and layoff the rest – increasing the numbers of unemployed. In any case, it would result in a net loss in the number of highly skilled workers required by manufacturers and big employers. It also reduces the number of citizens that can buy high priced homes (causing prices to fall) and that pay taxes to support our schools and communities (speeding the decline of our communities).

It is surprising that Villaraigosa can visit so many places, meet so many people on the bus and private jets, and not realize that when he satisfies the short-term greed of his union brothers that he robs each one of us of the vision he promised to all the citizens of Los Angeles. And the inevitable city deficits result in the destabilization of the jobs and pensions that all city workers depend.

The possible bankruptcy of General Motors, the layoff of 30,000 workers, and the closing of 10 factories is a clear example of what happens to strong companies that neglect customers for self-serving management and union endeavors.

It is very clear to us at Civil Action Press that city managers need to be held accountable for their actions. Union leaders are not accountable to the citizens of Los Angeles and consequently they should not be running Los Angeles government as they have been permitted to do under Hahn and Villaraigosa.

In the next few days, Villaraigosa will demonstrate again who he serves. You should take notice. Tell him that driving up the wages of a few thousand at the expense of the millions that live and work here is not fair or right.

Civil Action Press Ponders Civil Action

2005-11-21T17:44:00.000-08:00

A poorly administered city and costly ineffective city services contribute to the underlying costs of every single citizen. It is about time we started holding administrators responsible for their decisions and actions.

Many citizens, business owners, builders, employers, vendors, and employees have become frustrated because it seems this city's managers just don't care about running city services in a manner that best serves the public.

Civil Action Press believes the citizens of Los Angeles could use an advocate for improved city services, accountability, and reform. Too many businesses and employers are leaving Los Angeles.

Consequently, we would like to assess both the need and the possibilities for launching such a service.

If you are a citizen, business owner, vendor, etc., with a complaint, improvement, an issue (especially waste fraud, and/or abuse), or you have suffered retaliation as a result of making a report or complaint about city services,

Or, if you are an attorney wanting to use your talents to bring about city reform and accountability and are not afraid of the City Attorney's Office,

Or, if you are frustrated on one of those neighborhood councils...

Or, if you would like to donate to the cause...

Please email us at civilactionpress@yahoo.com.

This is a call for action. If there is enough of a response we will be considering giving new meaning to Civil Action Press.

What Is In Center Stage?

2005-11-21T04:30:00.000-08:00

There were a couple of comments made in the November 15, 2005 DWP Board meeting that give the impression that this new Board might be just what the doctor ordered. If so, we are most thankful. For those of us who are more experienced with the means and methods of politics, we remain cautious, vigilant, and perhaps too tolerant.

Department of Water and Power Board seems to have two goals: one, move the DWP as quickly as possible to green power and two, to get a handle on contracting. Both goals are aimed at symptoms and don’t get to the root cause. Emphasizing a few statements and reading between the lines, we would venture to say the Board has chosen not to identify the root cause because it might implicate one of the most influential political organizations in Los Angeles, the City Attorneys Office, and their relationship with the DWP. Logically, one looking for a root cause would ask, “Why isn’t the DWP green?” and “Why have the contracts run amok?” In both cases, the answer would lead to leadership, decision makers, and systemic mis-management. One such comment was from Commissioner Nick Patsaouras. By the way, we at Civil Action Press are really getting to enjoy him.

Let us preface with… the meetings are long and grueling. And, the brain can only assimilate what the butt can endure. So, the facts might be a bit hazy but the Commissioners are clearly tripping over the heart of the matter.

The Department apparently invested some millions in a research and development firm, which developed exchangeable off-peak rechargeable battery packs for electric vehicles and are in the process of presenting their achievements to the world. Apparently, the new Board knows nothing about the investment or the subsequently developed products and they have been unable to discuss it because the DWP is in litigation with the firm. Like many of the employees, vendors and whistleblowers at DWP, the firm’s representatives are communicating with the Board in two-minute sound bites via channels normally reserved for public comments. To say that communication is rather guarded at the DWP grossly understates the problem. Board President Mary Nichols suggested discussing the matter in closed session. By insisting on transparency, Nichols could save a bundle wasted in litigation. Patsaouras made a comment referring to too many attorneys. Patsaouras’ comment hit pay dirt.

At meetings, City Attorneys frequently outnumber DWP management. At the Board meeting Assistant General Manager and former Chief Deputy City Attorney, Thomas Hokinson sat to the left of General Manager Ron Deaton and to his right sat Assistant General Manager Hal Lindsey, also an attorney. At a preceding Commerce, Energy, and Natural Resources Committee meeting, Chief Administrative Officer, Robert Rosanski was surrounded by City Attorneys Cecil Marr, Daniel Lowenthal, and Assistant General Manager Hal Lindsey. What the Department severely lacks in leadership, it makes up for in litigious might.

Attorneys are not a good sign. Attorneys are defenders and advocates. They should never be mistaken for judges. It would be a conflict of interest. Ask any divorcé, their presence clearly says to the citizens of Los Angeles we are in an adversarial position, we are not going to be amicable, and the costs are going to be high.

Recall the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) Rampart scandals. The situation was bad before and with the help of the City Attorneys Office, the situation has been institutionalized. In 2001, Rocky Delgadillo was quoted in the Metropolitan News,

“Mr. Hokinson’s combination of talent, experience and familiarity with the City Attorney’s Office will help us hit the ground running, and tackle critical issues such as improving our children’s education, reducing the city’s liability expenditures, ensuring the highest level of public safety, reforming the Los Angeles Police Department, and improving the quality of life in our neighborhoods,” Delgadillo said in a statement. “Hokinson headed the Los Angeles City Attorneys Office Liabilities Division, and has been the city’s point man on reducing lawsuits against the LAPD. He took a lead role in cutting LAPD-related payouts in 1993, in the wake of the Rodney King beating and subsequent riots. But city liabilities have since soared—especially those stemming from suits against the LAPD. Hokinson helped craft multimillion-dollar settlements last year in lawsuits stemming from the Rampart police corruption scandal. Although the move drew public criticism, inside City Hall, Hokinson is credited with keeping the city’s payout in the Rampart scandal to a minimum.”

In retrospect, the City Attorney’s Office has grown to be one of the biggest law firms in the State and its main function has become to contain, squelch, tie-up, and retaliate against anything and everything that threatens or questions the status quo. The status quo we are talking about here is mismanagement and lack of accountability. After 35 years, Hokinson says he is ready to retire (good riddance). His accomplishments are the prerequisites to the problems that have become the culture at LAPD, DWP, and the pinnacle of City achievement – unabashed lack of accountability. Lack of accountability will remain a pox upon this city. To this day, LAPD still is understaffed in comparison to New York and Chicago Police Departments for good reason – No accountability. We citizens pay the price of not holding our city managers and their cronies accountable.

Did the City Attorneys Office go after the city managers that authored, requisitioned, and approved Fleischman-Hillard contract expenditures? No. Instead, they identified and went after the resultant symptoms (Fleischman-Hillard) rather than the root causers.

Does the City Attorneys Office bend the rules to protect its friends? Yes. It seems there is no concern for public opinion.

When the City Attorneys Office was investigated, what happens to those investigators? In the case of Dan Carvin, a retired Federal Investigator who was hired to investigate City corruption, he was fired, tied up in litigation, and the City paid $490,000 to settle and the facts of what he was after remain buried from the public in the City Attorneys Office. It seems Laura Chick has relegated her investigations to the periphery, parking lot skimming at $800 a pop.

The Owens Valley Lake is another billion dollar boondoggle tied up in litigation. Patsaouras asks simple questions. Each management response is carefully couched and delivered in closed session with the City Attorneys carefully positioned in every other seat. The crux of the matter is that the management at DWP and the purely advocate roll of the City Attorneys Office has become a barbed-wire no-man’s land for the truth and a costly liability for the citizens of Los Angeles.

Patsaouras’ comments seem to reflect that DWP management and the City Attorneys Office have clearly insulated the Board. DWP employees have made every effort to tell management about systemic mismanagement problems and issues brewing at Owens Lake. Until the Board removes these managers, they will have to be content to steer the organization from a trailer hitched to the back of the organization based upon information they receive from the media. The Board would not be talking about Owens Lake or CH2MHill, if it were not for a rightfully concerned handful of dedicated civil servants and Jeffrey Anderson at LA Weekly. What is wrong with this picture?

Is this just a continuation of the Hahn administration? True to form, executive level management sent employees working in the Owens Valley letters with their checks advising employees to forward media requests to the Public Relations. So rather than holding management accountable and establishing an obviously needed flow of information on projects and operations, is the Board further insulating itself and condoning more of the same policies that have caused the problem in the first place?

http://civilactionpress.blogspot.com/2004/11/root-cause-analysis.html

The New Water and Power Board

2005-11-01T20:46:00.000-08:00

Mary D. Nichols, President
H. David Nahai, Vice-President
Nick Patsaouras, Commissioner
Edith Ramirez, Commissioner
Forescee Hogan-Rowles, Commissioner

WOW!!!
If first impressions count, we were extremely impressed. When this Board starts counting the pennies on the DWP contracts, they will soon realize that increased contract expenditures are a result of mismanagement. Nick Patsaouras (A+) we are absolutely ecstatic. H. David Hahai (A) we are so very impressed.

Mary D. Nichols (B+) There is no need to hold back Nick and David. The expenses are soon to exceed revenues. This is long long long overdue. A well run company means long safe retirements and a healthy competitive organization. It took a little warming up but Edith Ramirez and Forescee Hogan-Rowles got into the question mode, too.

Man, what a wonderful change! It seems this Board wants to serve in the best interest of the citizens. We remain hopeful. We're not jumping to conclusions just yet. Not until we see some action anyway.

Now about the management-orchestrated bullying and mobbing? It took some guts to throw that wet blanket.

Dereliction of Duty and Wanton Mismanagement -- Mayor & Council Condoned?

2005-10-13T13:31:00.000-07:00

Three major power outages in a month. One of outages at the City Hall coincides with citizen complaints and a management sick out at DWP. Intimidation, retaliation, and coercion against DWP employees reported regularly. Heart wrenching comments from employees and vendors at City Council meetings. DWP management personnel actions overturned by Superior Court because they are arbitrary and capricious. $Millions of public funds spent in supposedly illegal confidential settlements. Contractors Fleishman-Hillard, Ch2M Hill, et al running amok under DWP management.

These are not isolated issues. These are not irrational employees. These are very clear indicators of systemic wanton mismanagement and dereliction of duty and deserving of your immediate and full attention. Why do you think this should continue to be condoned by you? This cannot be your new vision for Los Angeles.

And now Sandra Miranda is being harassed by Faye Strong who works for Gary Wong who works for Thomas Hokinson, Assistant General Manager. These retaliatory personnel actions are being orchestrated at high levels of the organization. Does every employee who exercises their first amendment rights get harassed at DWP?

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Council Members please exercise your authority and stop this right now.

OCTOBER 14 - 20, 2005
DWP’s Endless Storm Therapists summoned to deal with angry workers on desert project by JEFFREY ANDERSON

Villaraigosa vs. Hahn -- Is the difference solely in the packaging?

2005-10-01T10:10:00.000-07:00

Jeffery Anderson at LA WEEKLY has exposed some frighteningly obvious problems with City Hall in his article, "The Hidden Empire: What DWP’s massive raise says about L.A.’s leadership."

In essense, a couple of nameplates have changed at City Hall, but the spots, the players, the motives, and the outcomes remain disgustingly the same.

How does Mayor Villaraigosa and company intend to reach fairness, honesty, and transparency in Los Angeles city governance with patronage and spoils being the first and it seems only order of the day? Might as well switch from Marlboro to Winston to quit smoking or from coke to crack to get off drugs. Funny how Villaraigosa and Cardenas defer to the City Attorney's Office for rulings. Isn't that like consulting a mirror? How about asking a rate payor?

How much longer are we going to placate these scoundrels?

Cost escalation no resistance

2005-09-17T23:16:00.000-07:00

What the devil is going on at the Commerce Energy and Natural Resources (CENR) Committee? The committee passed the IBEW raise 2 zip. Tony Cardenas and Bill Rosendahl aren't tough on cost escalation. To the contrary, they turn into door mats and fall over the red carpet. The meaning of the acronym CENR now stands for Cost Escalation No Resistance.

Henry Martinez volunteered that the damage to DWP infrastructure was minimal. Contrary to his report, the Haynes Generating Plant is still out of commission because of the outage. Employees claim the plant will most likely remain out of commission for the next couple of weeks.

The cost of living raise seems to be sailing straight through. The wage disparity between DWP and similar civil service classifications in the City seems of no concern to the CENR. They are okaying the raise hike as if it is a matter of due course. It is amazing that they don’t inquire about the discrepancy, ask for justification, or demand a plan to use the union windfall momentum to figure out a solution to the City’s wage disparity problem.

All these snafus are going to result in increased costs and decreased efficiencies.

Power Outage to Pump Up L.A. Gas Prices

Gas prices in Los Angeles inched lower on Friday, but Monday’s power outage caused refineries to interrupt operations, a situation that could likely send prices higher next week, said the Automobile Club of Southern California.

The average price for regular self-serve unleaded gasoline in the Los Angeles-Long Beach area dipped 1.6 cents to $2.976 on Friday from $2.992 one week ago. Prices haven’t reached a new record high since Sept. 6, when they hit $2.999. The price was $2.762 per gallon one month ago and $2.071 one year prior.

“Effects of the power outage likely will be felt beginning this weekend as Southern California motorists deal with thin supply caused by interrupted refining operations,” said Auto Club spokeswoman Carol Thorp.
The Orange County area had the lowest average price in Southern California, falling 1.4 cents to $2.947. The Bakersfield area had the highest gas price for the second straight week, losing 2.9 cents to $3.129. Of all the areas surveyed, only the Bakersfield, Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc and San Diego areas had average prices above the $3-a-gallon mark on Friday.

The Weekend Gas Watch monitors the average price of gasoline as of 12:01 a.m. each Friday.

Hear no, Speak no, See no

2005-09-15T22:05:00.000-07:00

Backhoe mistake causes gas blast

Is it no surprise?

The water outage in Westwood, the Sylmar intertie, the retaliation complaints at CENR, and now a major outage, the pattern should be obvious. We think all these things are new and unrelated. These things are symptomatic of poor management and a culture that is in denial, closed to communication, hostile toward criticism, and blaming of its employees.

This is not to say that if there was a new manager in there a week ago that this latest catastrophe would not have happened. Culture does not turn on a dime. It has had a good many years to brew. What is happening is that DWP Mayoral appointments and organizational changes are taking their toll. 1) the culture is no longer empowered. 2) management is not stable enough to withstand criticism. Consequently, employees who are aware of the situation find it best to remain uninquisitive and quiet in this type of an environment. Best for them to serve as drones – loyal minions. “I didn’t know.” “I wasn’t told.” “It was not my responsibility.” Be quiet, do what you’re told, and hope the blame does not get them.

In this environment, no one dares risk a decision or take responsibility. In effect, it reduces the decision-making and productivity to one person, Deaton. Deaton is no leader. You'd think the most powerful highest paid city manager could do better than,"I'll get back to you." He will look into it and find an answer, human error – no doubt anybody but himself or the current oligarchy. Maybe even spring for a consultant or a blue ribbon committee. And at the next level we have in musical chair number two, an expired engineer, Enrique Martinez, and two (should be) retired attorneys, Thomas Hokinson and Hal Lindsey – well equipped to argue, defend their positions, tag individuals like the ones in LA Weekly, and to work the personnel patronage system (spoils), but again ill-equipped to lead.

The DWP is a very complex and integrated organization. Much of it created in a different environment and in a different era. Just as New Orleans claims that most of the pumps are not replaceable, the situation is quite the same. Many of DWP generators were built a long time ago. DWP has let go engineers and shops craft persons without passing on information. Buying and contracting out much of the expertise. What that means is that the inhouse deep understanding and familiarity is no longer available. And of course system and quality of service is likewise diminished.

Much of the motivation for maintaining system quality is based upon ownership. The concept is one of the underlying tenets of Civil Service. Entitlement – if one owns his or her job than he or she is motivated to act in good faith in the best interests of the public. With the cronyism of late, those motivational factors are refocused on a bigger prize – the next promotion a choice appointment. And with the number of carpetbaggers of late getting their spoils and further undermining the merit system, no one in their right mind is going to speak up about a latent problem or a fault that may not happen.

Even Local 18, which has benefited richly from the influence of late at the expense of those they represent, has let system important crafts, etc. go without passing on system-critical craft information. The advantages for turning a blind eye should not be.

People who speak up are labeled “chicken little” by the current management. The sky is not falling. Aren't we just making a mistake allowing these ne’er-do-wells continue in their positions? It seems we could have much better leadership.

Short of that in the near term, protecting whistle-blowers, people that have spoken up about system problems, is a critical step to culture change and ensuring that we (the citizens of Los Angeles) get some transparency on how the system is performing.

Could this be symptomatic of something else?

2005-09-12T13:58:00.000-07:00

Are the number of outages increasing relative to the rates? Costs going up quality going down? Who to blame?

Article Last Updated: 9/12/2005 01:46 PM
Large portion of L.A. blacked out
Staff reports
LA Daily News

A large portion of Los Angeles -- from downtown to the San East Fernando Valley -- along with areas of Burbank and Glendale were blacked out this afternoon when electrical power was lost.

A Los Angeles Department of Water and Power spokeswoman said two "receiving stations'' were impacted, and that crews were working to determine the cause. She could not immediately estimate when power would be restored or how many customers were affected.

Terrorism was not suspected, according to Sgt. Catherine Plows, though the Los Angeles Police Department went on "full tactical alert,'' meaning no officers were allowed to leave duty.
Traffic lights throughout downtown and the Valley were not working, causing major traffic tie-ups, officials said. Electricity was out briefly at City Hall and Los Angeles International Airport, and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority was running its subways using back-up generators.

Labor Dispute?

2005-09-03T23:34:00.000-07:00

What is in store for LA?

The DWP’s Perfect Storm
By Marc Haefele, LA Alternative Press

"Three sunny, blissful days before Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s al fresco inaugural, the Los Angeles City Council’s labor negotiating team offered perhaps the most generous labor contract in the city’s history to its highest-paid workers. Apparently, no one else on the council was aware this was happening. But there was probably frenzied celebration at the headquarters of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 18, who’d glommed on this bounty for its members… "

Find the rest of Marc Haefele’s article under Polis scroll down to about the middle of the page.

A Tribute to John Wesley

2005-09-02T07:53:00.000-07:00

"Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can,
in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can,
as long as ever you can." John Wesley, c. 1750

Time for some house cleaning at DWP

2005-09-01T07:10:00.000-07:00

With the scandals at Tyco, Enron, Worldcom, Edison, PG&E (to name a few), many companies have had to look inward to find out what has been going wrong. Except of course, the largest public utility, DWP. General Manager Ronald Deaton has proclaimed "zero tolerance" on violence, intimidation, and harassment in the workplace. However, the policy is not new. The same rules have been in the administrative policy manual for years. The DWP seems to be in denial that the situation exists.

If the policy is not going to be enforced, it is not significant. All the whistleblower protections, zero tolerance policies, and laws don't do a thing until someone takes some action on them. Think of making a no cockroach cupboard policy in an infested kitchen. Opening doors and shining lights will cause a lot of scurry, but nothing is going to happen until you take appropriate action to eradicate the little critters.

We question the leadership at DWP, the Board of Water and Power Commissioners, and the City officials for their part in allowing this to go on so long. The news articles are an embarassment to the citizens of Los Angeles. And for you high powered policy-makers, that does not mean shoot the messengers! It clearly means take appropriate civil action.

Mr. Deaton, you sir are on the hot seat. No more musical chairs. There are some underutilized city attorneys that should be directed to start perusing emails, gathering unfettered facts and statements, and preparing a defense for some high-level terminations at DWP. Direct those young hungry city attorneys to take appropriate action for "just cause" and conduct it with "due process." City Attorneys can start with the DWP Administrative Policy Manual Section 50-04, Guide to Employee Discipline. Make the cases similar to the one constructed for Luciano Yi. Only this time, let the punishment fit the crime. Start with the millions paid in illegal confidential settlements; adjust it appropriately for the level of management, expectation, responsibility, and the overall damage to the culture and integrity of the City.

I don't believe for a nano-second that the failure of DWP corporate values has anything to do with a storekeeper and a couple of custodians. "Zero-Tolerance," that is what you promised and that is what we expect -- Nothing less. Any questions?

See Jeffrey Anderson's latest DWP Dirt at http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/41/news-anderson.php.

And if you would like a little more this will take you to a search of more DWP antics at http://www.laweekly.com/search.php?searchfor=DWP&go.x=17&go.y=8

More Signs of Trouble

2005-08-25T05:02:00.000-07:00

News article, such as the one that follows, signal take-aways and reduced compensation for workers. As in the case of United Airlines and U.S. Airlines and soon to follow Delta Airlines it may mean loss of jobs and benefits altogether. To avoid this situation workers need to demand competent management that acts ethically and in good faith.

GM, Ford credit rated junk
BY JAMIE BUTTERS and JEFFREY McCRACKEN
DETROIT FREE PRESS BUSINESS WRITERS

May 6, 2005

Automotive icons General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. fell into junk-bond status Thursday for the first time in either company's history, as the nation's leading credit-rating agency said the combination of plunging SUV sales and rising health care costs made it nervous about the automakers' futures.

Though widely expected, the decision by Standard & Poor's Corp. to downgrade both automakers is a historic marker on Detroit's bumpy road.

In the short term, it could make borrowing more difficult and more costly for GM and Ford at the same time they are losing market share at home to Asian automakers, seeing sales of their most-profitable vehicles soften, and trying to deal with some of the largest retiree and health care debts in the country.

Find the rest of the story at http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/cuts6e_20050506.htm

DWP BUMs (Business Unit Managers) are no match for Union Bull

2005-08-24T22:00:00.000-07:00

AUGUST 5 - 11, 2005
DWP’s Frayed Deal
Shorted-out union contract poses big problem for Antonio and his powerful pal by JEFFREY ANDERSON

The Department of Water and Power’s recently exposed deal with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 18 hit a major obstacle this week when the Hahn-appointed board of commissioners, meeting for one of the last times, refused to vote on the matter.

At least one commissioner said a new board, appointed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, should review the generous five-year pact that calls for 16 percent to 30 percent salary increases for the IBEW’s 8,000 workers.

Details of the sweetheart deal, which had all the makings of an intimidating relationship between a union boss and a compliant city leadership, were first reported in the Weekly on July 28, and drew criticism from some City Council members and leaders of other city unions.

Find the rest of the story at http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/37/news-anderson.php.

DWP - Fuel for Thought

2005-08-20T08:35:00.000-07:00

When you drive past a gas station, do you find yourself thinking about where you are going to buy your next tank of gas? Do you find yourself counting gas stations that are still under $3.00 a gallon? I recall my parents drawing a line in the sand, stopping only at stations that sold gas under 28.9 cents a gallon. Back then, they used the streetcar, the bus, and pinched each penny as hard as they possibly could.

It seems ridiculous that each gas station still tacks on 9/10 of a cent at the end of each billboard price, doesn't it? It only represents 1/300th of the price. Nevertheless, that 9/10 of a penny is an example of how minutia can be predictor of fact. Maybe they started the 9/10 of a cent convention to get the extra two bits out of every $5.00 (20 gallon) fill-up. Now though, we need to make better sense of the convention since two bits out of every $60.00 (20 gallon) tank full is minutia and hardly seems worth the effort. They must have known the price would go up tenfold and they justified the tenths place would drop off when priced crossed the 99 cent mark. Of course, if you give them credit for predicting the price was going to go up tenfold, then you should also credit them for recognizing that the situation has not changed. Since the convention remains, we should expect the price to go up another tenfold but this time figure it happening in terms of months rather than decades. Consider the price of fuel is $3.00 a gallon while not 6 months ago it was only $2.00. The price is related to increasing demand, decreasing supply, and to a lesser degree, manipulation, mindset, and choice.

Ponder for a moment how many things are driven by fuel or energy and derived from fuel. Now this time, before you go and change the subject, let’s see if we can improve our chances of transition (survival) and make some choices that might mitigate the effects of exponentially increasing fuel costs and its effects upon our relative prosperity, our city, and our nation’s economic place in the world of tomorrow.

On one hand, you could surmise that fuel costs affect us all and like boats in a rising tide – we will all float through it. On the other, you might consider that the majority of boats are tied economically to terra firma and that the ability to float is directly related the length and flexibility of their obligations and financial moorings. Without some serious adjustments to these constraints, there will be a number of boats that will be drawn under the rising tide by their choices and self-induced encumbrances. Those businesses most susceptible are those that are directly dependent on fuel – airlines and utilities. Their survival will be a function of how well their leaders are able to maintain flexibility and prudently avoid other encumbrances.

Consider the rising price of fuel on the airline industry – fuel is a primary resource. The cost of fuel is affecting all airlines. However, it is the flexibility of other constraints that dictates who remains. Case in point, United Airlines and Delta, which maintained top equipment, compensation rates, benefits packages, and facilities are going under while Southwest, whose management chose prudently, is flying high. In hindsight, what was the true worth of demanding lucrative labor contracts in terms of today’s layoffs, salary, pension, and benefit cuts? I would contend it was United Airlines and Delta management’s inability to respond prudently to labor’s demands for more that contributed to their endangered status. Southwest managed its constraints conservatively – in terms of survival, less is just a little bit better. An inch of restraint and prudent decision-making across the board, in the selection of planes, negotiating costs of labor, and benefit packages, etc. resulted in longer-term survival to the benefit of their employees and customers.

Our utilities are in the same situation. All face rising fuel costs. Survival will be based upon leadership in terms of strategy, fitness, and flexibility. DWP may be the very least prepared. Edison, PG&E, et al went through – or almost through – bankruptcy. In competitive lingo that means they faced insolvency, considered their situation deeply, developed an action plan, and responded to adverse economic conditions. Their strategy is age old. They did not have to be the fastest – just a bit more nimble than tiger’s supper. Whether economic, technological, or strategic, a monopoly is a temporary volatile condition. Survival means constant improvement, innovation, and evolution because competition never goes away.

DWP took a short cut. Politics bought out and replaced DWP leadership. The new management decided not to play deregulation. Instead, they exercised a political loophole and took a temporary hiatus from competition. DWP management looked good. They took credit for the harvest and the fruits of previous leaders. They leaned back and grew fat and happy on their plagiary. They did not break a sweat like the other utilities.

Now, after a few years of carpetbagger influence, forgotten laurels, and conflicted interests, they do not look so good. They cannot seem to raise rates fast enough to cover infrastructure maintenance costs, much less survive their own mismanagement. The overwhelming culprit here is conflicted leadership, city managers whose decisions reflect the near-term interests of politics and labor rather than maintaining a long-term focus on the well-being of their customers, the citizens of Los Angeles. Their decisions have had a systemic degrading effect on merit-based promotional systems, customer service, productivity, and employee morale.

The politicians have repeatedly poked holes in DWP’s financial health: increasing City transfers, saddling DWP with non-DWP benefiting contracts like Fleishman Hillard, transferring real-estate holdings to other city departments, subsidizing special political endeavors like the Democratic National Convention, providing lighting for Banning Park, rebuilding Van Nuys City Hall, or chauffeur services to foreign dignitaries. The DWP leaks cash like a sieve all over the city.

From a responsible citizen’s point of view, it is fleeting political bliss from accountability. There will be hell to pay. To this debilitating mix, demand a 15 to 30 percent increase in labor, benefit, and contract demand and top it with the threat of a strike. Albeit deserving, this is DWP management’s nightmare. The union threat is real no doubt. DWP management served their reign like couch potatoes. D’Arcy will turn off the TV if they do not get more apple pie to complete their vision American dream. Pray tell, how does this mismanaged civil hostage situation under the auspices of “joint labor management” represent good prudent stewardship?

It seems nothing has changed in recent politics. Ron Deaton, the Water and Power Board of Commissioners, and Antonio Villaraigosa are moving too fast to endorse D’Arcy’s slicing steaks out of the City’s cash cow. Instead of holding back, the 3 year contract has been extended to 5 years. Presumably to avoid a re-election issue. We should ask, "Who is serving at the pleasure of whom?" It is wonderful that Antonio Villaraigosa is on the scene to establish a new vision and leadership for Los Angeles. But, we are not fools. D’Arcy has been stoking the fire and has had the coals burning hot. He does not need Villaraigosa’s endorsement or help in clearing the way to throw another filet on the fire.

Words and promises are trumped by leadership and action. Good faith negotiation should have resulted in prudence. Like the airlines, it is long past time to jettison incompetent leadership, close the backroom and sideline interests, and focus on either running the DWP consistent with the long-term interests of its customers and its employees. Or, sell it before it is trampled into insolvency, its employees set free, and its infrastructure turned over to the highest bidder. Can wiser heads prevail? Let us think this through again. We are talking about our city’s centurion provider, aren’t we?

Mayor Out & About

2005-07-06T22:15:00.000-07:00

It is good to see a Mayor that is out and about. Smiling, rubbing elbows with the “common worker.” The trouble is the “common worker” in Los Angeles doesn’t make over $70 grand with health, dental, and retirement benefits. How quickly they forget. They voted for the other guy, didn’t they?

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1663827.html

I must hand it to the Mayor he has identified crucially important areas: Education, Transportation, and Corruption. We have come up short on education and transportation and gone long on corruption during the past administration.

The ethics commitment puts everyone on notice. Sounds fair. Did anyone mention that the City laws, Administrative Code, and oaths required by all city personnel already contain a Code of Ethics? It wasn’t the oath that was the problem, it was the enforcement – holding individuals accountable. It just wasn't done. When the Mayor starts using the “A” [Accountability] word and gets serious with some of its managers, then we will have somebody special.

Consider it a Mismanagement Surcharge

2005-06-30T21:31:00.000-07:00

Why did you say the rates were going up?

Does it come as a surprise that DWP rates are going up?

Almost anyone will tell you the legal system is expensive, time consumming, and inefficient. If anyone would stop and count how many times the City attorneys have spent $ millions to save a pennies worth of over-paid egos, it would quickly become very clear why rates are going up, up, up!

The truths, albeit delayed, are coming out.

Rocky Road Suit tarnishes city attorney’s polished image By Jeffrey Anderson.

It is a wonder that managers can continue as if the main stream news has not covered the extent to which the DWP has been mismanaged and undermined. It seems Mayor James Kenneth Hahn Blue Ribbon committees, hand-picked Board, and General Manager Ron Deaton have not stemmed the tide on the millions spent undermining its own employees in the courts and administrative hearing rooms. Anything to protect the the status quo. The list keeps growing, and growing, and growing...

It seems the managers at DWP have seen the new Mayor as another opportunity to maintain the status quo. We will be regularly updating this list.

March 4, 2005 News; The lid comes off by JEFFREY ANDERSON http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/15/news-anderson.php

February 28, 2005 Los Angeles mayor's administration dogged by corruption probes by CNN.com http://edition.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/28/lamayor.investigation.ap/

February 11, 2005 Tony Cardenas hammers DWP on integrity by Civil Action Press http://civilactionpress.blogspot.com/2005/02/tony-cardenas-hammers-dwp-on-integrity.html

February 4, 2005 http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/11/news-anderson2.php by Jeffrey Anderson http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/11/news-anderson2.php

November 12, 2004 News; Tapping pension funds by Jeffrey Anderson http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/51/news-anderson.php

November 5, 2004 Features: The Rise of Empire by Jeffrey Anderson http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/50/features-anderson.php

October 22, 2004 Edison Says Safety Data Were Rigged (Los Angeles Times)Edison Says Safety Data Were Rigged (Los Angeles Times)

October 1, 2004 http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/45/news-anderson.php by Jeffrey Anderson http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/45/news-anderson.php

September 16, 2004 Letter to Honorable Mayor James Kenneth Hahn by Mahmud Chaudhry http://www.laweekly.com/images/ink/05/15/15dwp.pdf

August 13, 2004 http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/38/news-anderson.php by Jeffrey Anderson http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/38/news-anderson.php

August 13, 2004 Letters: Letters to the Editor: Whistleblowing by Daniel N. Shrader http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/38/letters.php

July 23, 2004 Features: The Black Avenger by Jeffrey Anderson http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/35/features-anderson.php

July 23, 2004 Features: DWP’s Public Relations Boomerang by Robert Greene http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/35/features-greene.php

July 23, 2004 Features: Who Will Stop This? by Christine Pelisek http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/35/features-pelisek.php

April 30, 2004 http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/23/news-kelly.php by William J. Kelly http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/23/news-kelly.php

Competition never goes away

2005-05-26T05:17:00.000-07:00

Competition never goes away we just turn a blind eye to it. It seems we have a choice. We can clean up the LADWP or we can privatize it. In either case, the citizen's would benefit. Don't think there is not money enough to buy the DWP...

http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/2005/Buffet-Berkshire-PacifiCorp24may05.htm

Edison and PG&E have risen from the ashes of deregulation. DWP is still floundering in the mire of politics. Rotating the old mayor's cronies is not going to cut it.

LA Weekly's Jeffrey Anderson is on the scene. Go get 'em Rocky.

2005-04-21T22:34:00.000-07:00

LA WEEKLY
APRIL 22 - 28, 2005
Where’s the DWP’s $12 million
Two secret training institutes remain unaccountable to the public
by JEFFREY ANDERSON

On his way into the Henry Fonda Theater last month to celebrate City Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa’s victory in the mayoral primary, S. David Freeman stopped and shared some of his plainspoken wisdom about the Department of Water and Power. The former DWP general manager was reacting to a recently released “for your eyes only” memo to Mayor Jim Hahn, in which DWP Assistant Vice President Mahmud Chaudhry warned that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 18, was driving the nation’s largest public utility toward a “moral and fiscal crisis.” (See “The Lid Comes Off,” L.A. Weekly, March 5.) To Freeman’s way of thinking, it seemed that Local 18’s tendency to “blur the lines between [negotiating] and criminal extortion” — as Chaudhry described its squeezing of concessions from DWP management — was a good thing. Local 18 business manager Brian D’Arcy should be proud of himself, crowed Freeman, as he stood near Hollywood Boulevard in his trademark Western hat. “Hell, if I was Brian [D’Arcy] I’d nail that memo to the wall of the union hall as a badge of honor,” Freeman said. “It’s his job to do his best for the members. If managers can’t stand up to him, that’s their fault.”

More at LA Weekly

Rocky Delgadillo made a big claim about going after anyone taking the taxpayer's money... Any movement from the City Attorney's Office?

Is it justice? No, it’s Fleishman-Hillard.

2005-04-20T22:26:00.000-07:00

Criminal justice takes on a new meaning

Los Angeles Daily News, PR firm settles for $6m Fleishman-Hillard issues apology to citizens of L.A. by Beth Barrett.

Los Angeles Business Journal, Fleishman-Hillard Agrees to Settlement to End Claims it Overbilled L.A. Departments. By Amanda Bronstad.

Los Angeles Times, PR Firm Settles DWP Billing Suit for $5.7 Million. By Patrick McGreevy.

Don’t let this settlement fool you. There is no justice here. This is a perfect demonstration of two totally different perspectives and the politicians ability to spin off accountability.

From Fleishman-Hillard’s perspective they have their reputation and fiduciary duty to their stock holders. There are real consequences. People lost their jobs. Some have had their careers ruined. The settlement money comes out of their pockets. And hopefully, if appropriate, there are criminal penalties to deal with.

From the city’s perspective, they too have a reputation to uphold as tattered as it is of late. But that is about where it ends. The City Attorney’s office draws on endless funds and resources. It is common knowledge, don’t fight City Hall. They have no qualms of spending millions in taxpayers money to save hundreds on boondoggles. And as far as fiduciary duty to the citizens, honestly, I don't see anything resembling accountability.

If you listen to the experts, Hahn and Villaraigosa, they point to each other. The sad part is they are both right. But the only one confessing and paying the price is Fleishman-Hillard.

Why are we focusing on Fleishman-Hillard and not on the agents with the assigned responsibility for administering our tax money and city services? If we put all the responsibility on the vendors, we are creating a monster. Think about it. Who used their political clout to secure the contract? Hahn says Riordan started it. If we look at Riordan’s situation and what was going on at that time and place, it was the middle of deregulation. The DWP was going to be entering into competition with other energy providers. Consequently, an argument can be made there was a need for marketing. But once the deregulation fears were ended, there was no need for a marketing contract. It should have been terminated or left to expire with no additional expenditures. But, it wasn’t. Why?

Who were the agents administering the contracts? Did they continue to ask for the services? Did they complain about the services they received? Did they check the invoices? Did they do anything along the way to indicate some unhappiness with either the services received or the price paid? Or did they just maintain an accomplices’ silence until they were caught? It stands to reason that we should expect these agents should be charged with misuse of city funds, dereliction of duty, or incompetence for failing to administer these services. If they didn’t, I would keep moving up the chain to find the root cause. Was anyone deemed negligent? I for one am not going to settle for a lame excuse like, “Well the guy retired already.” I thought we established that this was supposed to be a just society and that we would not rest until justice prevailed. Justice doesn’t just happen all by itself. Delgadillo is making big claims that he will pursue any “vendor” ripping off the city. I noted that he is very careful to limit his search to one side of the transaction. I applaud Delgadillo’s zeal but it is obviously weak on the concept of “blind justice” and “justice for all.” I would like him to pursue the insiders, the instigators, and the perpetrators, too. The mismanagement of this PR contract and one sided enforcement gives reason to investigate the city’s legal services contracts as well.

Curtailing this kind of gross negligence and wanton mismanagement is much the same as any other crime. Take for instance prostitution. As long as law enforcement continued to focus on and arrest the vendors, prostitution merely adjusted and reached a workable new equilibrium. It continued to flourish because we failed to control the instigators—the Johns and the enforcers. As soon as the enforcers were directed to hold buyers accountable, the situation began to improve. It is the same with the city’s agents. If the agents have the option of behaving badly and taking all their booty, promotional perks, and retirement without consequence and the attorneys maintain relationships with the perpetrators and only prosecute the vendors, we have ensured continued mismanagement of tax dollars and the exodus of citizens, businesses, and employers that expect no less than good faith and fair dealing from city leaders and administrators.

The fact that the City Attorney’s office has unlimited funds, selectively controls the application of city laws, and has considerable influence on all the city’s departments and enforcement bodies is a recipe for disaster. When investigators like Dan Carver get fired for investigating the City Attorney’s Office clandestine operation, it is a clear indicator that this policing agency has gone awry. We surely can’t expect them to police themselves. Anyone in Fleishman-Hillard’s shoes would have to make the same decision given the odds against justice. Didn’t Delgadillo and company also benefit from Fleishman-Hillard’s services? The settlement is not justice. It is a blatant display of the imbalance of power and unabashed political clout running this city.

The rhetoric we hear from Hahn and Villaraigosa, has reduced evidence of city corruption to baby banter:
“Look what he did!” “He did it first!”
By the sound of things thus far, I anticipate few if any definitive character changes and no significant changes in plot or story line for the city.

When Monopolies don’t take care of their customers…

2005-04-11T21:31:00.000-07:00

Customers go elsewhere. In November, I wrote an article on the Mayor’s inability to manage the Harbor effectively. The following article in Saturday’s Los Angeles Times is another harbinger of the beginning of the end of the Los Angeles Harbor heyday monopoly. It should also be a wake up call to the other monopolies in this town. If you don’t want to loose your monopoly status, you need to take care of your customers.

Posted on Sat, Apr. 09, 2005
Shipping lines look to build Mexican port because of LA backlogs

Associated Press

LOS ANGELES - A group of shipping companies says it wants to build a $1 billion port complex about 150 miles south of Tijuana, Mexico, because of severe congestion at Southern California ports.

Plans announced Friday by Marine Terminals Corp. include a complex of berths, warehouses and cranes that could handle nearly one-seventh the current volume at the Los Angeles port, or about 1 million standard container units a year, by 2012.

Company officials hope to connect the proposed Punta Colonet harbor, located on undeveloped farmland, to California with a new rail line. Construction would take at least five years.

"We have to get Colonet developed," said Walter J. Romanowski, an executive with Marine Terminals, a Los Angeles-based holding
company owned by shipping giants Evergreen and Yang Ming of Taiwan, Hanjin of South Korea and China Shipping of Shanghai. "There are no other viable West Coast options."

The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, together the nation's largest port complex, have become so congested that ships often
must wait up to a week before unloading their cargo. Environmental and other restrictions limit expansion, while backups at other West Coast terminals are increasingly common.

The companies have begun lobbying the Mexican government. If approved, the facility would be one of Mexico's largest public
works projects, requiring the construction of roads, housing, public buildings and other infrastructure where none now exists.

But company officials claim it would attract enough investment and business to pay for major costs of building the harbor and an accompanying city. By competing with California ports, it could siphon away part of the $200 billion in revenue generated each year by shipping through the state.

Mexican Sen. Hector Osuna Jaime said the port could create jobs and industry in Mexico, which has lost manufacturing jobs in recent years to China. Among the hurdles facing the project are Mexican laws that would bar foreign ownership of the rail line.

Over the past three decades, Southern California's twin ports
have grown into the country's main entry point for cargo containers. In 2003, the equivalent of 11.3 million 20-foot containers passed across the docks. Only the ports of Hong Kong and Singapore saw more cargo.

Why would you want to put your money in anything lacking in trust, integrity, or direction?

2005-04-05T00:02:00.000-07:00

What goes up most come down. What goes up rapidly, if it follows the normal laws of physics, comes down rapidly, too. Recall the junk bonds and the dot-coms. Real Estate is no different.

As far as investments go, the prudent pundits will tell you to "buy low, sell high." Villaraigosa’s plan to invest pension fund money in subsidizing low income housing may not be well thought out.

At first glance, the plan seems like a real loser. Force pensioners to invest a portion of their pensions to entice the poor to buy into an already high balloon-ready-to-pop housing market. At second glance, it is a real loser – “buy high, sell low." When interest rates go up, buyers will run and hide. Consistent with current city government fiscal policy, this market is good for spending as long as it’s somebody else’s money. It begs to ask whose interests are being served. Way too many eggs in the labor, building, construction, and real estate basket.

What investor in his or her right mind would invest in Los Angeles when the experts advise otherwise? The contenders for Los Angeles City Mayor, James Hahn and Antonio Villaraigosa, both self-bonified experts, seasoned and knowledgeable political leaders, and manipulators of Los Angeles city policy, openly agree the City lacks trust, integrity, and direction. Not to mention alleged rampant city corruption, State and Federal investigations, or that they are the purported leaders of the parade driving big business investors out of town. Again, all that aside, with all the other available choices, why would you want to put your money in anything lacking in trust, integrity, or direction?

It seems to me that rather to invest in an over-priced and over-speculated residential market, it would be better to invest in creating a better climate for businesses and education to help us sustain or, at least, minimize the effects of the bust that follows an oversold housing market. Without employers, entrepreneurs, and an environment conducive to supporting them, e.g. an educated workforce and a consistently business friendly city government, one should anticipate turning the housing market into a glut of foreclosures.

Here are some comments from Vince Foley, Chair of the Retirees' Health Care and Benefits Committee DWP Retired Employees' Association. Foley is an ethical and trusted former manager at DWP. It is good to see he remains outspoken and an advocate of prudent fiscal policy and common sense. He is sorely missed at DWP. Vince Foley’s letter follows.

March 29, 2005
Dear DWP Retiree,

I watched the L.A. mayoral debate last night between Mayor Jim Hahn and Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa. I don't live in the City of L.A., but we are all interested in the future of the DWP, and specifically our Retirement Plan and our health plan coverage. The Mayor can certainly have an effect on our financial security.

In that light, a statement made by Villaraigosa last night scared
the bejeebers out of me. When discussing his plans if he is elected mayor, he included "...using pension funds to invest in housing initiatives in the City". Luckily I have TiVo, so when I heard that statement, I was able to "rewind" and listen to it three times so I wouldn't misquote him.

That scheme first raised its ugly head many years ago when then-Governor, Jerry Brown, sponsored legislation requiring all public pension plans in California to invest 25% of their portfolios in low-income housing. We were able to dodge that bullet because the State Legislature had no control over chartered-city pension plans. The next time we heard that scheme was just a few years ago when DWP General Manager, David Freeman, invited State Treasurer, Phil Angelides, to a DWP Retirement Board meeting to discuss his similar proposal to invest in low-income and affordable housing. Fortunately, the Retirement Board listened politely, then went about its business and ignored the proposal. Those were State officials trying to raid our Retirement Plan. Now we have someone a heck of a lot closer trying the same thing.

Low-income and affordable housing are noble pursuits, but should not be funded on the backs of retirees.

Even though you may not live in the City of L.A., you might have friends and relatives that can vote; make them aware that Villaraigosa wants to mess with our future!

Vince Foley, Chair
Retirees' Health
Care and Benefits Committee
DWP Retired Employees' Association

Civil Action Press thanks you, Mr. Foley.

Let's see, leverage the City's pensions to fund more union construction... Of course, with Mayor James Hahn's record of cookie jar raiding, union bias, and condoning management-orchestrated employee retaliation at DWP, no one is saying Hahn won't do the same thing.

DWP Employee exercises two minutes of free speech at the Commerce, Energy and Natural Resources Committee

2005-03-31T22:01:00.000-08:00

A part time management professor and DWP employee spoke to the Commerce, Energy, and Natural Resources Committee today. Subsequently, Councilwoman Janice Hahn and Committee Chair Tony Cardenas made no comment and took no action other than to adjourn the meeting.

“My name is Daniel N. Shrader, I am an employee of the Department of Water and Power.

I can see the motivation for allowing the Empire contract and more importantly employee retaliation issues to slip under the rug. I am here to ask you to keep them on the agenda and to expand the scope of the motion.

With the exception of one manager, Mahmud Chaudhry, the management of Department of Water and Power has two policies: One, to do nothing and to hold on until their retirement. And two, to actively support Union interests at employee and citizen expense.

If you will notice, employees that speak out against mis-management and conflicts of interest are subject to management-orchestrated retaliation. I have submitted reports reflecting my findings to the Board of Water and Power Commissioners. Assistant General Manager, Henry Martinez, told the Board that he would conduct an investigation and provide his findings in November of 2004. There was no legitimate investigation. Not one person other than the perpetrators cited in the report was contacted. The findings were swept under the rug and the perpetrators were promoted.

On November 9, 2004, I submitted the report and these issues to this committee. Your review of the Empire contract revealed that the Department did not tell you the truth about the matter. You admonished Henry Martinez on integrity. Your talk to Henry Martinez has had no noticeable effect to improve the situation at DWP. Employees are being retaliated against. The public is not best served by these conflicted interests.

You place considerable faith in General Manager, Ronald Deaton. He has been at the DWP for five months – One month less than James Hahn claims to have given Bernard Parks to clean up the LAPD before firing him. In that time, Mr. Deaton has not spoken to the employees, not presented a vision, not stopped management-orchestrated retaliation, nor directed employees in a new direction.

I will tell you that it takes considerable wherewithal to speak up about the problems at DWP. I would think that you would at least pursue the matter fully. The problem is so bad at DWP that only one single Assistant General Manager has shown the backbone to speak to the Mayor. His letter to the Mayor was reported in LA Weekly. It is no surprise that even he is met with silence from the Mayor and the City Council. Your silence and willingness to ignore what is happening at DWP speaks volumes about the conflicts of interest you too suffer.

The management, the Board of Water and Power Commissioners, the City Council, the Mayor, and this committee are the persons charged with steering the events unraveling before us. The main topic of the Mayoral debate was integrity and trust. You found them lacking in Henry Martinez. I find that, too.

Managing a company is a lot like driving a car. You have to look out the windshield and adjust for what you see ahead, and here is the key, you need to take appropriate action to avoid the obstacles or suffer the inevitable collision. The DWP is definitely in trouble. Outside of Mahmud Chaudhry, I don’t see the management, the Board at DWP, the City Council or the Mayor taking appropriate action to address what we all see when we look out the windshield. Los Angeles cannot afford more corruption, mismanagement, and ineffectiveness.

Please do not shelve the motion to investigate the DWP conflict of interests, contract issues, and management-orchestrated
retaliation against employees.”

Serving two masters at DWP

2005-03-31T21:55:00.000-08:00

Causes and effects of a manipulated and degraded merit system

A steadily growing number of employees are speaking up about the management of the Department of Water and Power (DWP). If this growing employee concern does not seem particularly strange to you, you should consider the following.

DWP is a municipal utility operating in a monopoly outside the rigors of competitive market forces that require at minimum customer-focused and cost-effective performance to survive. DWP is in an industry rife with scandal, bankruptcy, and lost employee pensions (ENRON, SCE, PG&E). DWP is at the center of a City environment stained with allegations of corruption (James K. Hahn administration). DWP employees and management are subject to a working and political atmosphere controlled by a union commonly referred to as one of the most powerful and top organizational political donors. Many senior employees perceive DWP management as IBEW cronies exercising a bureaucratic patronage system, manipulating behind-the-scenes loopholes, political payoffs, and the using economic and physical intimidation against employees to gain power and influence and expand control over the entire organization.

Concerned citizens and civil servants should pull their heads out of the sand and demand a full accounting. What the hell is going on at the DWP? DWP contributes to the underlying cost of every single home and business in Los Angeles. Why aren’t politicians and citizens paying more attention to the DWP?

Notwithstanding the efforts of a few journalists, we can expect the Los Angeles Times to demonstrate its historical bias, understate advances, and allow short-term union gains to outweigh responsibility for prudent responsible personnel and infrastructure management contributing to a healthy environment and a cost-competitive infrastructure which can support long-term city prosperity.

Consider the mistakes citizens have made in the not-too-distant past. We stood by while politicians permitted the ripping out of Los Angeles’ transportation system – the historical red cars (street cars) – creating the modern noxious bus fumes and gridlock we have today. Think how much further ahead we would be if we had been more active and aware. Or perhaps, consider the political turmoil, graft, and corruption which led to the movie Chinatown. The saying, “history repeats itself,” is no less true today. Consider those civil servants who have been drawn under by personal greed, mob mentality, or group think and have lost track of their internal ethical compass and their obligation to the public. Consider those who tacitly supported the degradation of position requirements, supported questionable objectives, undermined the merit and personnel management systems, and ruined the careers of employees who properly executed their obligation to act in the public’s best interest and reported managerial malfeasance. It is just a matter of time, injustice, and neglect that is contributing to the systemic meltdown at DWP. Silence is probably the worst course of action to stem the demise of this 100 year old institution.

There is no question that it is every union’s objective to control the terms and conditions of labor. However, it should be with consent of the membership. The union’s rapid advancement into personnel and contract management through its influence over management ranks ensures conflicts of interest and opens the door to the lucrative but destructive business practice of corporate, municipal, and employee skimming. The practice is sometimes referred to as “public fraud,” “controlled extortion.” The potential for these crimes should be especially troubling to the citizens and to most of the workers at DWP in this environment. Unlike corporate officials who are bound to serve in the best interest of the public and (supposedly) held accountable to public scrutiny and recourse, unions do not have fiduciary obligations to the same extent. Unions are only accountable to their membership. Union membership input is subjugated to the will of union management. Employees should be highly concerned when their representatives institute new cascading monopolies that replace or overshadow existing institutional services such as administering medical insurance, dismantling corporate safety and training to establish their own union centers, directing employee pension plans, promoting disability rather than worker’s compensation, or using management influence to replace the 20 year employee assistance center with a union sponsored provider. These activities are dilutive and inherently in conflict with membership and employee interests.

If legal action is required to secure the third party services provided through the union, how do you go about suing your representative? The Union as an administrator of those services has considerable influence on service providers, you might think. But, in reality, the administrator is usually more interested in maintaining and maximizing the residual cash flows derived from the arrangement. Consider these two scenarios: If the union fails to deliver on its promises to you, you can’t go after the employer to defend your union-provided interests, can you? When, and if, you make it to court, you can be assured your union will not be providing for your legal fees. However, if you were suing your employer and your representative did not have a conflicting interest in the outcome, you could reasonably expect the union would act in accordance with its responsibility to represent you or provide for legal representation.

You should also consider the matter of prevailing cultural and societal bias in matters of juris prudence. When your union administers these programs the jury does not maintain the same bias toward you that it would have if it was your employer who failed to properly administer or provide the service. Effectively, by putting all your eggs in one basket, you are in a substantially less desirable position and have increased your level risk for relatively the same benefit. The same argument applies to union-controlled employee retirements, corporate contract awards and administration, rewriting of job qualifications and specifications, and the selection of incumbents through union third party ambassadors. The ideal situation is to separate providers, payers, administrators, and benefactors, ensuring against the almost unavoidable conflict of interest and monopoly situation.

In any case, management and employee apparent lack of concern, both at a corporate and personal level, is especially troubling. How do employees hold their representatives accountable in this circuitous and unscrupulous culture?

Essentially DWP is suffering from a failed deregulation. DWP missed the market forces that would have ensured cost-effective performance and purging of incompetent unresponsive leadership. Consequently, within the environment described in the second paragraph of this expose, Mayoral appointments to the Board and DWP management do not reflect a concern for market-driven performance. They provide inferior corporate leadership because they reflect the Mayor’s need to support his union affiliation. And these appointments have in turn led to the expansion of new high-level positions, job titles, job descriptions, with reduced qualifications and the appointment of 2nd and 3rd rate managers, further degrading the utility. Over the course of the Mayor’s term, management has not been held to account. Over a very short period of time, employees and management have become subject to the whims of the union representatives who have found it more lucrative to secure positions in management by manipulating meritocracy. And for those employees who have expectations of promotional opportunities based on an equal opportunity, good faith, and fair evaluation of individual qualifications, performance, and merit, it is the ultimate morale buster and conflict of interest because it undermines the individual, the organization, the core tenets of the merit system, as well as the institution and its value to society.

Enough already

2005-03-30T22:04:00.000-08:00

LA Observed covered the Mayoral Debate

2005-03-29T05:05:00.000-08:00

LA Observed covered the Mayoral Debate in “Who do you trust?”

Regarding Monday night's political theater-slash-debate at CSUN, the print reporters pretty much agreed:

Times: "Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn and his challenger, Antonio Villaraigosa, tangled over trust and leadership Monday night in a scrappy debate dominated by the question of which candidate has the integrity to run City Hall."

Daily News: "Focusing the Los Angeles mayoral election on the issue of public trust, Mayor James Hahn and Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa accused each other Monday of failing to take responsibility and for breaking promises to the public."

Associated Press: "The two candidates for mayor relentlessly attacked each other Monday in their first televised debate, wrangling over issues from trust to traffic in caustic, sometimes personal terms."

Business Journal: "Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn and challenger Antonio Villaraigosa came out swinging in their first mayoral debate, each saying the other couldn’t be trusted to run Los Angeles."

Daily Breeze: "The two candidates for Los Angeles mayor moved the issue of trust center-stage at their first one-on-one debate Monday, with each saying that voters cannot rely on the other to follow through on their public promises and policy commitments."

More at “Who do you trust?”

A Wash of Weasel Words

2005-03-28T22:56:00.000-08:00

Weasel Words

Anyone acknowledge, comment on, or deny Chaudhry's letter? Strange (or should we say "normal") not a word about it from Mayor Hahn, City Council, or Villaraigosa, huh?

Did you notice the Villaraigosa weasel words when asked if Villaraigosa thought corruption existed in the Hahn administration? Tough question. Hard to say yes when you are part of the problem. If Villaraigosa said yes, then we would have had to ask: Why didn't you do anything about it?

Instead Villaraigosa stated the problem wasn't the corruption. The problem was the "corruption investigation." Here we go again... Blame the messenger. Actually the real problem is the Los Angeles Times has never been very good at covering politics -- too biased. How about a story on City mis-management?

The debate was a battle of words. No honorable deeds, actions, or legitimate efforts during either of their terms. Just empty meaningless words that stand in contradiction to both of their terms in office -- words like: "building trust," "honesty," "integrity," "working for the citizens."

The truth only came out when they spoke about the other. Is this the best we can offer Los Angeles?

Sound all too familiar?

2005-03-28T21:34:00.000-08:00

Shut up and get to work!

This article from Pepperdine just rings too true for many employees caught in the middle of the political turmoil raging at Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

Has Deaton done anything to bring reform to the DWP? Absolutely not! Deaton has had the same six months James Hahn gave Bernanrd Parks to clean up the Los Angeles Police Department before he was sacked. Since Deaton, the most powerful man in LA politics has done nothing except bolster the status quo, we must assume we have it all wrong. Like all Hahn's prior appointments, we must assume actions speak louder than words. Deaton was put there to protect the status quo. Promote those bullies! The management mantra has become, "The Union is running the show. Don't make any waves. Two more years and I am outta here."

Are Workplace Bullies Sabotaging Your Ability to Compete?
Learn to identify and extinguish problem behavior
Linnea B. McCord, J.D., M.B.A
John Richardson, D.Min, M.B.A.

Application: innovation, performance, and healthy communication flourish in a "bully-free" environment.

To succeed in this economic environment, organizations must be able to inspire all levels of employees to be innovative or risk being overtaken by more nimble and creative competitors. In a hyper-competitive global economy, where competition is no longer limited by geography or industry, new formidable competitors can arise seemingly overnight.1 In such an environment, one of the surest ways for an organization to fail is to tolerate workplace bullying. Bullies not only stifle productivity and innovation throughout the organization, they most often target an organization's best employees, because it is precisely those employees who are the most threatening to bullies. As a result, enterprises are robbed of their most important asset in today's competitive economic environment - precious human capital.

The problem with workplace bullying is that many bullies are hard to identify because they operate surreptitiously under the guise of being civil and cooperative. Although workplace bullying is being discussed more than ever before, and there may eventually be specific legislation outlawing such behavior, organizations cannot afford to wait for new laws to eradicate the bullies in their midst. In order to survive, organizations must root out workplace bullying before it squelches their employees' creativity and productivity, or even drives out their best employees, thus fatally impacting an organization's ability to compete in this new era. The purpose of this article is to review current research on workplace bullying, to help organizations learn how to identify bullies, and to suggest ways that an organization can eliminate this workplace toxin.

How to Identify Bullying Behavior

Recent commentators have used different ways to describe bullying behavior, but they agree that a bully is only interested in maintaining his or her power and control.2 Because bullies are cowards and are driven by deep-seated insecurities and fears of inadequacy, they intentionally wage a covert war against an organization's best employees - those who are highly-skilled, intelligent, creative, ethical, able to work well with others, and independent (who refuse to be subservient or controlled by others).3 Bullies can act alone or in groups.4 Bullying behavior can exist at any level of an organization. Bullies can be superiors, subordinates, co-workers and colleagues.5

Some bullies are obvious - they throw things, slam doors, engage in angry tirades, and are insulting and rude. Others, however, are much more subtle. While appearing to be acting reasonably and courteously on the surface, in reality they are engaging in vicious and fabricated character assassination, petty humiliations and small interferences, any one of which might be insignificant in itself, but taken together over a period of time, poison the working environment for the targeted individuals.6

Bullying is not about being "tough" or insisting on high standards.7 It is "abusive disrespect."8 In Dr. Hornstein's view bullies fall into 3 character types:

Conquerors:
Only interested in power and control and protecting their turf. They try to make others feel less powerful. Can act DIRECTLY (e.g. insulting and/or rude words or gestures, [or tones] or INDIRECTLY ( e.g. orchestrating battles and watching others disembowel each other).

Performers:
Suffer from low self-esteem so belittle targeted persons (can be obvious or subtle put-downs).

Manipulators:
Interested only in themselves. Easily threatened and vindictive. Experts at lying, deceiving and betraying. Take credit for the work of others. Never take responsibility for their own "errors."

Source: Dr. Harvey Hornstein; Brutal Bosses and Their Prey: How to Identify and Overcome Abuse in the Workplace.9

Bullying is not about a "clash of personalities," a "misunderstanding," or "miscommunication."10 According to two psychologists who have conducted surveys on bullying, (1) bullies use surprise and secrecy to gain leverage over those targeted,11 (2) they are never interested in meeting someone else halfway so trying to negotiate with a bully is useless,12 (3) they routinely practice psychological violence against specific individuals whom they intentionally try to harm which is devastating to the targeted person's emotional stability "and can last a long time."13 According to the Namies, this psychological violence can take many characteristic forms:

The Constant Critic:
"[P]ut-downs, insults, belittling comments, name-calling." Constantly criticizes the targeted person's competence. Glares at the targeted person or deliberately avoids eye contact when the targeted person speaks. "[N]egatively reacts to the targeted person's contributions with sighs, frowns or the "just sucked a lemon look." "[B]lames the targeted person for fabricated errors." "Makes unreasonable demands for work with impossible deadlines."

The Two-Headed Snake:
Pretends to be nice while sabotaging the targeted person - one minute vicious, the next minute supportive and encouraging. Ensures that the targeted person doesn't have the necessary resources to do the work. Makes nasty, rude or hostile remarks to the targeted person privately; puts on friendly face in public. Steals credit for work done by the targeted person.Says one thing to the targeted person and something completely different behind the targeted person's back. Will "kiss up the ladder and attack those below."

The Gatekeeper:
Purposefully cuts the targeted person out of the communication loop. Ignores the targeted individual or gives that person the "silent treatment." Models isolation or exclusion of the targeted person for others.

The Screaming Mimi:
Poisons the workplace with angry outbursts. Intimidates through gestures.Purposefully interrupts the targeted person during meetings and conversations. Discounts/denies the targeted person's thoughts or feelings.

Source: Gary and Ruth Namie; The Bully at Work: What You Can Do to Stop the Hurt and Reclaim Your Dignity on the Job.14

According to the Namie's research: (1) "Bullies are inadequate, defective and poorly developed people. Targets are empathetic, just and fair people,"15 (2) "Bullies start all conflict and trouble. Targets react."16 (3) "Targets don't deserve or want what they get. Bullies are liars and cowards,"17 and (4) "Good employers purge bullies. Bad ones promote them."18

Identifying "Group Bullying" Behavior: "Mobbing"

Mobbing19 (group bullying) occurs where one bully, "[t]hrough innuendo, rumors, and public discrediting"…, creates a hostile environment for the targeted person and, "gathers others to willingly, or unwillingly, participate in continuous malevolent actions to force a person out of [a job or] the workplace."20 When the mobbing behavior finally does result in resignation, termination, or early retirement from a job or the workplace, the targeted person is portrayed as being at fault and "voluntarily" leaving.21 Mobbing in an organization is like cancer in that, "beginning with one malignant cell, it can spread quickly, destroying vital elements of the organization."22

Bullying Results in Real Physical and Emotional Injury

All of the authors agree that bullying behavior leads to real and serious physical and emotional problems for the individuals they target, including but not limited to damage to their self-esteem and confidence, anxiety, depression, gastrointestinal disorders, headaches, insomnia, exhaustion, poor concentration, and substance abuse.23

How to Eliminate Bullies From Your Organization

Since bullies are often skilled at hiding their actions behind a veil of overt friendliness, helpfulness and cooperation, organizations must establish processes and procedures to uncover their actions. An accidental bully, when confronted with his or her behavior, will quickly apologize and the behavior never happens again.24 An intentional bully denies that the behavior is occurring and continues to repeat it.25

Bullies are driven by their own fears and insecurities, therefore they rarely can be cured, but their behavior can be controlled or eradicated. Eradicating bullying behavior from an organization starts at the top because it is the head of any organization that sets the tone for whether bullying behavior will be accepted.26 An organization reflects the values, attitudes, and actions of its leadership. Leaders who ignore, or otherwise allow, these destructive behavior patterns to occur, are eroding the health of their organizations and opening the door for some of their best talent to escape from this upsetting and counterproductive environment.

To eradicate bullying, employers should:

Establish an anti-bullying policy27 defining what bullying is and giving some common sense descriptions of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors at work. Included in such a policy should be a statement that the organization supports the right of all employees to work in an environment free from bullying. This will give targeted individuals a context and a constructive way to confront the bullying tactics.
Conduct climate surveys28 to uncover bullying behavior, provided that these surveys are sent to a neutral-third party for review and confidentiality is guaranteed. Unless this is done, respondents will not feel free to express their true feelings.
Establish reporting, investigation and mediation processes, guaranteeing those who avail themselves of these processes that there will be no retaliation against them.29 Because bullying is often duplicitous and slippery to detect, it can be risky for others to complain. This is especially true when bullying has become part of an organizational culture. Rather than fight the "mob," many talented people move on to a healthier workplace. Therefore, a clear statement and enforcement of an anti-retaliation policy is essential.
Train all employees to ensure that everyone is aware of his and her responsibility to conduct themselves in a professional, civil, and businesslike manner.30 Top management reinforcement of the "zero-tolerance for bullying behavior" at new employee orientation sessions can help. Employees should be taught how to recognize the first signs of the bullying/mobbing process.31

Current Legal Protections Against Bullying

The American legal system has been hesitant to legislate manners or civility in the workplace (outside of the civil rights laws) but this attitude might soon change because of the new requirements for success in a hyper-competitive global economy.32 As the problem becomes more recognized and acknowledged, legal remedies will no doubt be found.33 They may take the form of new laws directly addressing the issue, perhaps through the inclusion of those who are bullied as a protected class under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This has been the preferred avenue in the past for workers seeking relief for discrimination-related unfavorable treatment in the workplace. This Act, among other things, permits relief for protected classes based on a "hostile work environment" theory. A "hostile work environment" means the workplace is permeated with "discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult" so severe or pervasive "that it alter(s) the conditions of the victim's employment and create(s) an abusive working environment."34

Even under current law, employers should be especially vigilant to make sure that individuals targeted by the bullies are not members of protected classes who might be able to establish claims against the employer under existing discrimination laws. Federal courts have not yet extended the hostile workplace doctrine to prohibit workplace bullying conduct based on characteristics other than those specifically enumerated in Title VII, but history suggests that there will be an expansion of protection to those who suffer this type of workplace harassment.35

In the meantime, the preferred avenue for workers seeking relief for abusive treatment in the workplace has been the state common law tort claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress. Although currently such workplace-related claims might be difficult to win, those who practice, condone, or accept bullying behavior should not take much comfort in that. After all, the tobacco companies were able to successfully defend themselves against claims for years until the tide recently turned, resulting in numerous and staggering multi-billion dollar verdicts against the tobacco companies.

At a minimum, the bullies themselves could be sued individually for their own intentional tortious conduct. An employer would be liable for the intentional tortious acts of its employees if it knows of the bad acts and takes no action to terminate those acts or discipline the employee who is committing those bad acts. Punitive damages are available for tortious acts committed maliciously or oppressively.

However, the issue of bullying should not be addressed simply as a way to avoid lawsuits or other negative reactions. Creating a "bully-free" environment is a proactive step that should be taken to improve the company's strategic position in today's highly-competitive global economy. By creating a "bully-free" environment, an organization can create a culture of respect in which innovation, performance, and healthy communication can flourish. To become a top performer in any industry, an organization must be able to recognize and rid itself of this performance and talent-robbing behavior or risk losing their single most important competitive asset - their talented employees. Eradicating bullying is not "nice to do,' it's a "must do." The survival of the organization in the 21st century depends on it.

Endnotes:

1. Gary Hamel, Leading the Revolution, Harvard Business School Press, 2000, p. 5-6.
2. See, e.g. Dr. Harvey Hornstein, Brutal Bosses and Their Prey: How to Identify and Overcome Abuse in the Workplace, Riverhead Books, 1996, at 51 ; Gary and Ruth Namie, The Bully at Work , What You Can Do to Stop the Hurt and Reclaim Your Dignity on the Job, Sourcebooks, Inc. 2000, at 13, 69-70.
3. The Bully at Work, 2000, at 14, 38- 46, 82, Noa Davenport, Ruth Distler Schwartz, Gail Pursell Elliott, Mobbing: Emotional Abuse In the Workplace, Civil Society Publishing, 1999, at 58.
4. Mobbing, supra note 3.
5. Id.
6. The Bully at Work, supra note 2, at 3-4. "Unchecked...bullying quickly escalates into a hostile, poisoned workplace where everyone suffers. If ignored long enough, the entire organization is placed at risk, facing preventable trauma or litigation." Id. at 4; Mobbing, supra note 3, at 20.
7. Brutal Bosses, supra note 2, at 10.
8. Id. at 4.
9. Id. at 50-60.
10. The Bully at Work , supra note 2 at p. 73.
11. Id. at xi.
12. Id. If allowed to continue, the targeted person's personality "gets trampled, bent out of recognition even" to the targeted person. Id. at 5.
13. Id. at 5.
14. Id. at 19-33. This is not an exhaustive list - only some examples of bullying behavior. Id.
15. Id. at 14.
16. Id. at 18.
17. Id. at 5.
18. Id. at 33.
19. Id at 20. "….Co-workers, colleagues, superiors and subordinates attack their dignity, integrity and competence, repeatedly, over a number of weeks, months, or years. At the end, they resign, voluntarily or involuntarily, are terminated, or forced into early retirement. This is mobbing- workplace expulsion through emotional abuse." Id. "Because the organization ignores, condones or even instigates the behavior, it can be said that the victim, seemingly helpless against the powerful and many, is indeed "mobbed". The result is always injury - physical and mental distress or illness and social misery and, most often, expulsion from the workplace." Id. at 40.
20. Id. at 33. Mobbing is a household word in some European countries. Laws against mobbing behavior have been enacted in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Germany and have been proposed in the UK and Australia. Id. at 26-27.
21. Mobbing, supra note 3, at 41. The hallmark of mobbing behavior is an initial unresolved conflict that is preventing the targeted person from accomplishing his or her job in the most effective way. The targeted person tries with good intent to resolve the situation in a constructive way, never realizing that the people he or she is dealing with have already decided to get rid of him or her, which is "revealed in attacks of various sorts: humiliation, ridicule, stigmatization, ostracism, exclusion and isolation." Id. at 159. This leads the targeted person to suffer "self-doubt," "…confusion, tension, anger and depression." Id. These unresolved conflicts intensify and are magnified until the targeted person is suffering severe emotional distress. The more the targeted person attempts to find recourse the more those who are doing the mobbing create reasons why the issue cannot be resolved. Id. at 160. Because those doing the mobbing have no intention of resolving the conflict, the conflict escalates until it is virtually unmanageable. The targeted person becomes very ill or depressed, work suffers and it is only a matter of time before the targeted person is terminated, resigns or retires. Id. The expulsion of the targeted person was predetermined by those doing the mobbing from the very start and there was nothing the targeted person could have done to resolve the issue (therein lies the "crazy-making"). Id. at 159.
22. Id. at 34.
23. See, The Bully at Work, pp. 60-61, Mobbing, pp. 90-95, Brutal Bosses and Their Prey, pp. 74- 77, for a more comprehensive list of physical and emotional consequences for the targeted person.
24. Bully at Work, supra note 2, at 17.
25. Mobbing, supra note 3, at 23.
26. Id. at 132.
27. Mobbing, p. 144.
28. Id. at 155.
29. Id. at p. 142.
30. Id. at p. 143.
31. Id.
32. See, e.g., Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 80-81 (1998).
33. See e.g. David C. Yamada, The Phenomenon of "Workplace Bullying" and the Need for Status - Blind Hostile Work Environment Protection," GEORGETOWN LAW J. Mar. 2000.
34. Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. at 22.; see also Rogers v. EEOC, 454 F.2d 234 (5th Circuit 1971).
35. Mobbing, supra note 3, at 21 citing work by Dr. Carroll Brodsky who defined harassment as "behavior that 'involves repeated and persistent attempts by one person to torment, wear down, frustrate, or get a reaction from another. It is behavior that persistently provokes, pressures, frightens, intimidates..." Id. at 22.

The more things change the more they remain the same.

2005-03-28T08:27:00.000-08:00

Here are some reprints for times past. After perusing ask yourself, has anything changed? Without any hesitation the answer is absolutely, positively, resoundingly, "NO! It hasn't changed." As a matter of fact it has gone from bad to worse. And the worst part about it, your choice will make no difference because Hahn or Villaraigosa represent the exact same power base, the same ideologies, and the same oligarchy that has been running Los Angeles.

Daily Trojan - Opinions Issue: 4/21/04
Hahn's naive act wearing thin
By Peter J. Spalding
Mayor James K. Hahn is shocked, shocked to find that there's corruption in this town. In the last few weeks, Hahn's administration has been egged with criminal probes, federal subpoenas and resignations among high-level staff and many other things.
Through it all, the mayor has kept up a steady stream of bureaucratic bluster. "Questions are being raised about how we do business at City Hall," he said Monday during his annual State of the City speech. "To me, ethics isn't optional, and I won't tolerate unethical behavior in my office or anywhere in City Hall." Of course, that sort of rhetoric is par for the course.
Hahn is up for re-election next year, and his rivals have already started their campaigns, so naturally, he has to say things like that. But frankly, if he was surprised about all these shakedowns, then he must not have been paying attention. Los Angeles government is not known for its ethics, and over the years, we've had more scandals than we can count. Some of these stories are actually entertaining. For example, back in the day, there was a lot of scuttlebutt over some shady deals during the construction of the Owens Valley aqueduct. Hollywood decided to make a movie based on the issue, and it became the film noir classic "Chinatown." Audiences were delighted when Jack Nicholson got his nose sliced open, Faye Dunaway seduced him, and Dunaway's husband mysteriously drowned in the middle of the night.
Unfortunately, the current controversy isn't nearly so diverting. City commissioners have allegedly told contractors to make campaign contributions, or else the contractors will lose airport and harbor work. Alas, there are no private eyes prowling around dark alleys, and there aren't even any shootings.
This scandal is about bureaucrats who shuffle paperwork and write checks. As a result, it hasn't captured the public's attention, at least not in a big way. It's just business as usual. Anyone who deals with City Hall on a regular basis - myself included - has known for a long time that we have the best government that money can buy.
If you want to get something done, all you've got to do is slip a bigwig some dough, and voila! Your problem is solved. It's not like Chicago, where you have to be a Democrat in order to buy clout. And it's not like New York, where you have to be Irish, Italian, Jewish or some combination of the three. Here in Los Angeles, we practice equal-opportunity corruption, without regard to party lines or ethnicity. It's the American way.
Of course, we've set up ethics rules, but they only exist for decoration because nobody pays much attention to them. Every few months, the city ethics commission wags its finger at some high-power figure. The accused official promptly apologizes and says it was an honest mistake, and he promises to never ever do it again, cross his heart and hope to die. Then he gets a slap on the wrist and goes on his merry way. By the time the next election rolls around, the voters have forgotten that it ever happened. Hahn knows this as well as anyone - or rather, he should. He has spent his career working in our local government; in that time, he has served as city attorney and several other posts. What's more, his father was the late Kenneth Hahn, who was a legendary figure on the local political scene. And to top it all off, his sister Janice is a city councilwoman. In other words, our mayor knows this town like the back of his hand. He knows where the skeletons are buried, and he knows how to sidestep the landmines. There is no way that he could have been blissfully unaware of corruption, either in his own administration or anywhere else.
Then again, it could be that his administration is on autopilot. Hahn is rarely in the limelight, and he hasn't spearheaded any major initiatives. Ironically, in the three years he's been in office, his biggest victory came when he upheld the status quo. The San Fernando Valley wanted to secede from the city, and Hahn helped defeat the measure. In that case, he did the right thing, but that was two years ago, and he hasn't shown any leadership since. At the moment, he is trying to push through an airport renovation plan that nobody seems to like. In all likelihood, the plan probably won't pass, or if it does pass, it will be changed drastically. By this time next year, the mayoral campaign will be in full swing, and chances are that Hahn will have nothing to show for his time in office. If he does want to get re-elected, he needs to step up and fix things, instead of timidly insisting that he was unaware of any corruption.
Voters won't buy hot air, and City Hall insiders won't buy it either. If Hahn wants to clear his name, he needs to stop talking about it, get off his keister and get to the bottom of this issue."

Peter J. Spalding's column, "Life in L.A.," runs on Wednesday. To comment on this article, call (213) 740-5665 or e-mail dtrojan@usc.edu.

The status quo is a testament to the efforts of both Hahn and Villaraigosa. Two peas in the same pod. During this month, we can expect a lot of finger pointing from two of the highest caliber scoundrels and ne'er-do-wells. Both of them have established a long tradition of high-times, bad politics, and mismanagement for Los Angeles.

This election, like all the other Hahn appointments, is like getting a new sewer pipe, "New pipe. Same crap." To wit, after The Lid Comes Off and all the alleged corruption and scandelous contract mismanagement at Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), Hahn appointed "the most powerful man in Los Angeles politics," Ronald Deaton, to clean things up and loosen Brian D'Arcy's grip on the city's utility. It has been five months since his appointment. Be patient, he's working on it, they say. What Hahn has really done and done well is protect the status quo. And he put his best man to keep it that way. Except for Assistant General Manager Mahmud Chaudhry who is trying to protect the public's interests in a clearly articulated letter to the mayor, the incumbants are doing nothing. Deaton is singing the same tune like all the other managers at DWP, "Stay quiet a couple more years and I can get my retirement." The union has its next legion of cronies already in line to take their place. It is a disgusting example of malfeasance. Deaton hasn't even cleared his throat to whisper, "Shape up."

We would have thought Chaudhry’s letter to Mayor Hahn would have brought the house down. But it didn't. The Los Angeles Times was quiet, consistent with their same abject reporting of city mismanagement. Of course, no one expected any objection out of the Mayor or the City Council. Los Angeles is turning out to be the the movie set for "High Plains Drifter." However, there are no drifters coming to town. Most of them with any wherewithal are leaving.

This election is a choice between two mischievious brothers. Their claim to the throne: countless instances of city mismanagement, scandels, cronyism, and corruption that essentially degrade the city and all its departments and rob the public of their potential. They know each other so well, don't they? Most of it is very well deserved.

If we re-elect Hahn, it will mean status quo by "popular demand." Never mind that it has been the lowest election turnout in history. If we elect Villaraigosa, it will mean the staus quo with a new name plate, but without the "popular demand" endorsement. Consequently, here is the endorsement we've all been waiting for... Buy new name plates.

Re-inked jimmy-rigged ballots

2005-03-17T20:36:00.000-08:00

Jimmy-rigged

Anybody with a third grade education ought to know you don’t mess with someone’s ballot. It’s up there with cutting school and forging an absence slip.

It is hard to believe that these Mayor James Hahn appointed officials do the things they do. I guess the question is, why not? Other than being appalled, we don’t do anything about it anyway. Regularly, under Mayor James Hahn, officials take the benefit of the doubt before we have a chance to give it to them. In practice, it has become cliché: Officials commit the ethical violation. Play dumb. Make light of the violation – No big deal. Make up a completely lame excuse. The newspapers report it. We don’t do anything about it. And they continue to reap the benefits. They don’t seem the least embarrassed, ashamed, or frustrated.

If you were pulled over for speeding, do you think the cop would stop writing because you said your foot slipped and you didn’t think it was a big deal. Do you think the officer would entertain a blue ribbon committee of your appointed associates? Do you think the officer would like to listen to your attorney? Absolutely not! So why aren’t we doing anything about this? It seems we are purposefully not policing this stuff. It seems no one cares.

Should we take a lesson and accept this is the way it going to be in Los Angeles? The message we are clearly sending is get the goods while the getting is good. The citizens really made a mistake in allowing the mayor to reform the Los Angeles City Charter. It is obvious the Charter has given the Mayor too much power. It gives new meaning to the saying, "Power corrupts and, absolute power corrupts absolutely." It seems Charter reform has fostered a new white collar gang in town that we should really be more concerned about.

It appalls me to read articles like “L.A. re-inked votes City clerk ordered election workers to fill in faintly marked ballots” by Troy Anderson and Rick Orlov in Saturday’s, March 12, 2005, Daily News.

“Without informing mayoral challengers or anybody else, Los Angeles City Clerk Frank Martinez ordered election workers Tuesday [election] night to use blue highlighter pens to re-ink thousands of voters' ballots that had "bubbles" partially or faintly filled in,” the Daily News reported.

Frank Martinez is another in a long list of questionable Hahn appointees that seem to all come up severely short in the integrity department. Mayor James Hahn appointed Martinez last September. Martinez defended what he did, saying he was following secretary of state-approved procedures to mark over incompletely filled out bubbles to make sure the InkaVote machines counted them. Malarkey! Any moron with an ounce of concern for public opinion would have let the machine kick them out, set them aside and identify them for the public before tampering with the evidence.

I am sure Martinez saw the Florida recount fiasco and knows that recounting requires a number of officials from both sides of the aisle. So the effort to quickly “fix” the ballots is reason enough to demand a complete recount. Not to mention, I see no noticeable ideology difference between Hahn and Villaraigosa so the marking and the focus had to be directed against Hertzberg. By eliminating Hertzberg, the unions in this town are assuring themselves of a “no lose” election.

How many experts do we need to scratch and sniff? The Daily News quoted expert Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, "I've never heard of anything like this before. It's unprecedented. You don't tamper with the ballots. You want to have the ballots in the same condition when they were deposited into the ballot box and you never want to touch ballots in terms of putting a mark on them. It's shocking."

Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder, Conny McCormack, can't understand why Martinez decided to delay the count for hours and direct more than 200 election [City] workers to examine each ballot individually to make sure the ink mark was highly visible. McCormack said, "We have counted more than 5 million ballots on the InkaVote system since 2003-04 and we have shared our experience with them and everything has been fine. The machines read even the smallest amount of ink. So we are puzzled and frankly surprised at their decision to hand-count every ballot. It's certainly not our procedure and there was no need to do it. We had no pre-knowledge that they were going to do this."

County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich criticized Martinez's actions, suggesting that "questionable activities such as this undermine the integrity of the process and voter confidence."

Then true to form, the Hahn appointee flawlessly executes the hokey lame excuse which has brought fame and fortune to the Hahn administration and disgust to the rest of us…

Martinez defended his decision, claiming it was legal [It really irks me when they use the word “legal” like it is a high standard. Any less, it would be criminal, wouldn’t it?] and he wanted to ensure every ballot was counted. "It might have been out of an overabundance of caution on our part since it was our first time using the InkaVote system," Martinez said. "Just like with pulling chads, we have guidelines for what we do to overmark ballots. "It was done in a public process and the ballots are available for review. We are confident that process was accurate and ensured every proper vote was counted."

Add a little plausible deniability and some condescending innocence… Hahn indicated he was unaware of Martinez's action but noted he took extra precautions on his own ballot. "I held it up and it didn't look like it had marked the spots well enough, so I put the ballot back in the machine and really pushed it in to make the marks." Hahn added that the county used InkaVote in November and "there didn't seem to be a problem."

Then there is the emphatically couched rhetoric which in effect begrudgingly condones the unacceptable behavior.
We didn’t know…
We are definitely concerned…
They shouldn’t have done that…
Everything is okay… We’ll accept the “jimmy-rigged” results…
Next time we’ll add some assurances so we slip public scrutiny.”

Parke Skelton, Villaraigosa's campaign consultant, said he was not aware of the use of the blue highlighters and would have insisted that all the campaigns have observers present if he had known.

"If I was Bob Hertzberg, I'd want to go in and look at those ballots," Skelton said. "A decision like this should be made in broad daylight. It seems unusual to me they would make a unilateral decision to re-ink ballots before a problem has been demonstrated.

"I think it's rather unusual that they would go in and do that without there being any indication that there is a problem and without it being done in an extremely public way."

Then the problem is sent to the City Attorney’s Office for laundering…
Send it to the City Attorney’s Office for a review. Are you kidding? Rocky Delgadillo spends over a million to run unapposed. Why? Because he is part of the oligarchy running this town and he is feather bedding for bigger things.

It should be clear from Laura Chick's firing of Dan Carver, a former Federal investigator who got too close to a hot trail leading to the City Attorney’s Office. Let’s get something straight, lawyers can’t distinguish right from wrong, they get big bucks just to defend their position. The City’s position is Hahn’s position. Honor among thieves, so to speak.

The Secretary of State's Office said inquiries should be directed to the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office because laws governing Los Angeles city elections are enforced at the local level. This is one of the big problems with a City Charter is that we exempt ourselves from much needed State regulatory scrutiny. Our governing boards are jimmy-rigged and locally greased. It is a shame that we have to go outside the City to get a feeling of legitimacy.

City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's office had yet to receive a complaint but is prepared to look at any improprieties, a spokesman said. [Like the City Attorney’s Office is going to do any good. Recall the City Attorney’s Office represents the City’s scoundrels.]

"Our understanding is that election supervisors oversaw all aspects of it to make sure that the voters' intent was carried out," Frank Mateljan said. "We have not received any formal complaints and would act immediately [to sanction the results] if there is a problem."

Apparently citizens do have a choice. They can fight this corruption or leave. It seems they are taking flight. Josh Grossberg of the Daily Breeze reports that a third of the residents in Los Angeles surveyed by the Public Policy Institute of California say they want to move out of Los Angeles, up more than 20 percent from 2003. The survey reveals the county's 10 million residents are "stunningly unhappy with some key indicators of quality of life and paints a picture of growing concern for any chance of long-term recovery."

The number of residents who plan to leave the county almost doubled in two years. A similar survey in 2003 found that 17 percent of residents did not see themselves staying in the county. The number is now 33 percent.

In fact, more people in the city of Los Angeles say they plan to leave than the 26 percent who voted in the recent mayoral election, said Mark Baldassare, the survey's director.

"It seems they plan to vote with their feet," he said.

And until we clean up the mess we have watched Hahn and his bureaucrats create, we can watch increasing numbers of our better-healed employers leave Los Angeles. And with them, they take our jobs and futures.

Social Security Bait and Switch Shuffle

2005-03-15T22:12:00.000-08:00

Fixed Straight Percentage Fair Contribution

Not so fast with the bait and switch Social Security Shuffle. Let’s look at Social Security again a little more carefully.

Employers withhold about 7 percent of wages on those employees that earn less than $90,000.00 a year. Employers then match that withholding with 7 percent and send it off to the Feds in Washington to pay for social security.

Now before we run off half cocked and trash Social Security, let’s look see what the problems with the current system might be.

One easily identifiable problem is that the system is not structured to help those Social Security is purported to help. The system was designed to help citizens beyond employable age. When politicians tell us that 10 workers used to pay for each person on Social Security the red light should have come on. Anytime you structure a system that takes advantage of others, it is exploitation and sooner or later it is doomed to fail. Think about it. Do we really want to design a retirement system that must encumber 10 other citizens to pay for each retiree?

In actuality the system is even more exploitive than that. Although the Social Security System is purported to be a graduated system, meaning that the wealthy pay more than the poor, it really is just the opposite. The 7 percent paid by you and your employer caps out at $90,000. What that means in real terms is that a citizen that earns $90,000 or less, pays 7 percent. A citizen earning$90,000 a year pays $6,300, into Social Security. It also means a citizen earning $1 million a year also pays $6,300.

In essence what that means is every year:
Each citizen earning $10,000.00 pays $700 into Social Security.
Each citizen earning $50,000.00 pays $3,500 into Social Security.
Each citizen earning $90,000.00 pays $6,300 into Social Security.
Each citizen earning $1,000,000.00 pays $6,300 into Social Security.
Each citizen earning $10,000,000.00 pays $6,300 into Social Security.

It becomes very clear that those in power structured a system that has the relatively poor burdened with paying the majority of the Social Security. While those most able to pay for Social Security and earning more than $90,000.00 have their contribution capped at $6,300. A citizen making $1 million a year pays less than 1 percent into Social Security. It makes me angry when our representatives, which incidentally most all make over a $1 million a year, want to toss the system into the dust bin because they might have to pay their full 7 percent share to keep the system going.

Supposedly, these representatives or at least their forefathers were purportedly looking out for our best interests. They designed a system that limited their liability and had the young poor fund the old poor. Well, we have a suggestion to fix the part of the Social Security system that is broken.

According to the 2003 U.S. Census data and some simple extrapolation, approximately 216 million citizens that earn less than $90,000 make some $3.2 trillion and contribute 7 percent of their income, $225 million, into Social Security. Correspondingly, each employer contributes a matching 7 percent for a total of $450 million. Now to that figure, imagine a straight 7 percent applied across the board, rich and poor alike, and add the amount not being paid by those earning over $90,000. That and the corresponding employer contribution would add $373 million a year to Social Security, almost doubling the existing Social Security bank roll.

See table above then check it out for yourself at:
Contribution and Benefit Base
Contribution and Benefit Base Calculation

President Bush is having a difficult time selling his new Social Security plan for a reason. James Madison really identified the problem when he said, "All men having power ought to be mistrusted."

The Social Security System that we have had is a sad example of the exemptions the powerful make for themselves. We figured out why the plan isn’t working. Those that earn between $90,000 and $4.5 billion are not paying 7 percent. They pay $6,300. Percent is a relative tax. 7 percent is relatively as painful to the poor as it is to the rich. The benefit of Social Security may be inconsequential to the rich. However, Social Security received by the poor can make a difference in obtaining food or shelter. Why don’t we just fix the part of the system that is broke? Here is the fix: Everyone pay their fair share, 7 percent, and let’s move on to something else.

Use of city employment and facilities for private gain

2005-03-14T04:24:00.000-08:00

“Persons in the public service shall not use, for private gain or advantage, their city time or the city’s facilities, equipment or supplies, nor shall they use or attempt to use their position to secure unwarranted privileges or exemptions for themselves or others.”
~ Adopted by City Council Resolution, August 23, 1979

Thank you Jeffrey Anderson of LA Weekly for saying the things that must be said about the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) and by placing Assistant General Manager Mahmud Chaudhry’s letter into the hands of the public.

On one hand, you may think that the situation of which Chaudhry speaks is mere folly. On the other hand, you may want to look a little more closely to the goings on at the Department of Water and Power (DWP).

The public should be aware the extent of IBEW influence on the DWP, its revenue streams and the employees we entrust to protect this resource. It used to be that the extent of union influence was limited to a management permitted bulletin board on which to post union business, employees which elected to belong to a union, and there was no question that employees considered their public service a priority in decision making and in seeking advancement within the company. How things have changed.

IBEW influence in company decisions since deregulation is everywhere. IBEW membership is not mandatory but the dues now are. Dues for all but about 4 percent of DWP employees are collected automatically for IBEW. In rough numbers, estimate that the average employee pays $80 per two-week pay period or about $2,080 per year to IBEW. With 8,000 employees, membership dues amount to about $16 million.

In most companies management is responsible for the training of its employees. Not so at the DWP. DWP has transferred about $6 million to IBEW for development of the Joint Training Institute (JTI).

In most companies management is responsible for employee safety, too. Again, DWP management has entered into an agreement with IBEW to provide safety training the arrangement is obfuscated in legal and political terms. Essentially, the arrangement is DWP puts lots of money under the control of IBEW. The training facility is provided by DWP. Food is provided by DWP. Employees are provided by DWP. Training is contracted out. And DWP employees generally find that being involved and supporting the JSI is a career engendering move.

In general, the JSI is a marketing dream. It is not so much for safety since the accident and injury rate has not changed. The accident and injury rate is still double the national average for multiple utilities. But, consider that the benefit (the money and access to employees) far outweighs the risk which the DWP still owns. Like other companies, DWP, not the union, is responsible for on-the-job accidents and injuries. If an employee is hurt on the job, a worker’s compensation claim is levied against the firm not the union. Consequently DWP management has given the union a risk free benefit and touted it as a good deal. The conflict does not stop there however. If the training received is substandard or insufficient, does the union honor its fiduciary duty to represent its membership or does it stand with management and blame the employee? Considering the closed shop environment, dues are not an issue. Management does not want to admit it entered into a conflicted arrangement. The union does not want to jeopardize control of substantial flows of DWP funds, employee access, and another promotional path into management. The union sides with management against the employee to protect the arrangement. Consequently, the safety lesson subject matter, that accidents are a result of the underlying procedures and practices which management controls, must be overlooked to protect the labor-management arrangement.

These things are the tip of the iceberg and quite the dilemma at DWP. To improve the numbers, training classes now emphasize injury and illness recording techniques. Instructors teach supervisors how to record accidents so they reflect “better” numbers. The same DWP management in charge of the Worker’s Compensation office is also in charge of Corporate Safety and a partner at JSI. Consequently, the Worker’s Compensation arm of DWP is litigating the majority of cases through its offices and the City Attorney. This reduces the number of employees making worker’s compensation claims but it increases the number of disability claims against the employee’s retirement plan. The number of claims remains constant but the significant difference here is that disability claims do not reflect management performance as do increases in worker’s compensation claims.

Now that this discussion of union influence has led to the door step of the $6 billion employee retirement plan, consider that the retirement board members used to be comprised of accountants and financial who-saids of the greatest magnitude who actually knew what they were doing. Now, after using their access to DWP employees and mail and call campaigns, union stalwarts now sit on the board in control of employee funds. This is maybe in conflict with the number one rule of financial strategists and long-term investors – never put all of your eggs in one basket.

Now these influences may cause you some stress but not to worry. DWP management has opened the Employee Assistance Program up for competitive bid. The major contender against the existing EAP provider is none other than, you guessed it, a subsidiary of the IBEW medical plan. Do you suppose that all these claims have become a liability? One way that DWP management has found to make them go away is to contract away from the only establishment that really has an understanding of the true psychological toll on DWP employees.

Now, if you don’t mind, review the first paragraph out of the DWP Code of Ethics and tell me – Is DWP management in violation?

Treetop Yodeler has his say

2005-03-10T22:16:00.000-08:00

Obviously there is much more that can be said and done by voters in response to the LA Weekly story, “The Lid Comes Off” by Jeffrey Anderson. It is revealing of the ugly environment that has become the signature of this city’s administration. We are inclined to post the feedback received from whistleblowers as it describes the passion burning in the trenches. And it provides incite into the wasteful manipulation and mismanagement of relatively helpless human capital.

Treetop Yodeler, you have been posted per your request. Your post follows.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Please post on Civil Action Press.

Flipping DWP's Lid? Is Mo Chaudhry out of the closet and into the dog house? Is arfing in the offing? A golden handshake? Or brass boot?

A recent article in the LA Weekly may put a smile on some faces, and serve as a laxative to others. Rumor suggests it has propagated internally, from one DWP computer to another. And what buzz? Although costing more than a Martin Luther King holiday in lost productivity, and terabytes of server storage, does it really engender hope for change?

The Lid Comes Off and Jeffrey Anderson keeps probing. Is there a mini Pulitzer Prize in his future? Does he have connections to DWP insiders? To City Hall insiders? Do you have info, and feel compelled to call him privately to share or fax the goods? Would he say no to more good stuff?

The actual memo, a pdf copy, is of special interest. A gold mine for some, a manure pit for others?

"The DWP has become a fox-run henhouse of epic proportion," Chaudhry writes. "The union now runs the department. They blur the line between bargaining and criminal extortion."

Imagine sending such a memo to the "Honorable James Kenneth Hahn." (Does that title make sense?) A memo citing serious, endemic, egregious, regenerative, criminal problems.

Sending an appeal for remedy and change? Sending it directly to the perpetrator, the "Honorable James Kenneth Hahn?"

Rocket science here? Unless one is out of touch, of low IQ, a union stalwart, a denier of truth, making a pact with the devil, or perhaps listening to yet more lies, spin, half truths and clichés from IBEW leadership, does anyone think Mo's memo contains any real "news"? How long have DWP employees privately discussed the evil empire, relentless Taliban style management, and reveled in the occasional firing off an RPG-like memo aimed toward City Hall/DWP?

Are there better places to send such a memo, Mo? Like to the FBI? Regarding racketeering, controlled extortion, interfering with/sabotaging a pubic utility, bribery and payoffs? Illegal contracting with public funds across state lines (Joint Safety Institute/Joint Training Institute)? Unreported income. Kickbacks from JSI trainers to union stalwarts, to habitués, and to sons of habitués?

Send memos to the Los Angeles County Grand Jury? Misfeasance, Malfeasance?

Bottom line, nice try Mo. Love you for it. Know you must sleep better at night. But hope you sent the letter, and hard evidence elsewhere too, wear a wire, and honestly testify for the rest of you life on every deposition and trial, civil or criminal, until justice is truly served. And watch your back, and get a remote starter for your car.

And who else will be either brave enough or foolish enough to follow your example Mo. Do the others really have a conscience? How well do they sleep at night? Can they just go to hell?

But really, in two weeks, will the bathroom gossip disappear, and nothing really change? Unless someone goes to jail, will anyone really be motivated to change their henhouse ways?

Treetop Yodeler

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Your comments?

Civil Action Press Endorsement

2005-03-08T01:57:00.000-08:00

PARKS, MOORE, OR HERTZBERG!

LAs Cannery Row

2005-03-07T22:08:00.000-08:00

John Steinbeck has some words of wisdom for this election.

"It has always seemed strange to me that the things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding, and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits which we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meaness, egotism, and self interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first, they love the produce of the second."

-- John Steinbeck, Cannery Row

This time, in this election, let us not reward the traits we detest! Vote for the things we admire. At least settle for nothing less than integrity, honesty, and openness in our new mayor.

May LA be blessed with a new direction.

Wanted Mayor. Must have spine. Inquire within.

2005-03-03T22:23:00.000-08:00

Core job duties: Must demonstrate signs of spine

The news article (<http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/15/news-anderson.php>) in LA Weekly about the letter Assistant General Manager Mohamud Chaudhry wrote to Mayor James Hahn identifying Local 18 corrupted management, is a breath of fresh air.

Please know that many employees have had their careers ruined dealing with this problem on a daily basis. The problem is not isolated or confined to the upper levels of management. It is throughout the organization. It is reflected in the many confidential settlements and cases quickly moving around the union and DWP managers and toward the courts.

The City's attorneys say under their breath that they know it is happening, but that they are helpless to change it. It has become an endless queue of cases straight from hell to maintain the status quo. They say it goes with the territory, sometimes it becomes a very ugly job. All are suffering as a result. It gives reason for City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's $1 million dollar unopposed campaign for re-election.

Many employees have spoken to the Board, to city officials, and to General Managers about these problems only to be ignored and set aside. The actions of officials seem to favor advancing union corruption.

Chaudhry’s letter is an indication that employees actions have not been in vain. DWP will continue to falter until the problem is resolved. Employees are tired of the bullying and are demonstrating very clearly that they are willing to stand up and be counted. For that we are thankful for Chaudhry’s letter and demonstration of leadership.

What we hope is that the citizens of Los Angeles recognize that Mayor James Hahn and Antonio Villaraigosa have failed to provide good leadership and to defend the public trust by their lack of action and willingness to turn a blind eye toward subversive union activities.

As a performance benchmark recall that Mayor Richard Riordan and DWP General Manager William McCarley reduced DWP staff by some 4 thousand employees in approximately 1 year to meet deregulation. And during that 1 year period there was an orderly exodus plan with no disruptions in service. Under General Manager S. David Freeman, DWP downsizing paid off a $ 7 billion debt.

Compare the same circumstances under James Hahn. DWP has been relieved of deregulation but has had an endless parade of General Managers, a hand-picked Board, an increasing managerial staff, a mire of corruption, increasing overtime and decreasing productivity, contracts gone wild, disruptions in service, Federal investigations, and personnel issues being shunned by management and union officials and overflowing into City Council meetings. DWP is now demanding rate increases by some 18 percent!

Civil Action Press has concluded that James Hahn and Antonio Villaraigosa have demonstrated that they are ineffective and are part if not all of the problem. So we ask the remaining candidates what will they commit to do to rid the DWP of this dysfunctional union and crony tyranny.

Your comments are welcome.

Excuse me, your cover is blown

2005-03-02T22:29:00.000-08:00

Excuse me, your cover is blown.

Managers leaving the DWP during the buyout said this would happen...

Still, DWP employees are suffering retaliation at the hands of illegitimate managers and Union bosses. We thank Jeffrey Anderson for his article “The Lid Comes Off: Secret memo to Mayor Hahn lays blame for DWP’s woes on union control.”

Civil Action Press salutes the growing number of brave individuals stepping forward to voice their concerns against this overwhelming dysfunctional management regime at DWP. Hopefully readers realize that for Hahn to allow this entrenchment he has had to have condoned it from the start. Further, citizens should be asking why Hahn has sat on Assistant General Manager Chaudhry's memo since September.

Villaraigosa is no new Union player here either. He sat in the Council Chambers and listened to lines of DWP employees complain. It does not look good for the council members not to have taken action. In fairness to Councilmen Bernard Parks and Tony Cardenas, they both have acted to bring about a motion to investigate allegations of employee retaliation in the Commerce, Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Albeit, their actions seem like token gestures in the grand scheme of things.

Bob Hertzberg has made a good start asking for Board resignations. But let’s face it. It is only a start. And it might be just campaign rhetoric. The reports from the troops are that D'Arcy and company are well entrenched and even better fortified. The organization is riddled with cronies.

Walter Moore has been hollering corruption from the start. Maybe a hokey Republican is what we need.

Alarcon (accented o) ... Should we join the employees and sue?

The scores of ill-gotten appointments and promotions for cronies need to be undone and set right. The administrative manual of the DWP sets forth the appropriate corrective action. The fact that Rock Delgadillo has spent over a $1 million to run unopposed seems more of an effort to distance himself from the City Attorney's Office involvement in defending corrupt managers and these retaliatory personnel actions than a run for mayor. It should be fairly obvious by now that the City Attorney's Office and the attorneys in DWP management can't distinguish right from wrong.

So which mayoral candidate has the backbone and the wherewithal to issue the pink slips?

Please, your comments are encouraged.

When employees and managers stand up to be counted, there is no reason to keep the status quo

2005-03-02T04:15:00.000-08:00

The sink holes are not confined to the streets. Sink holes are appearing throughout the city organization. They represent the rift between Civil Servants on one side and Union stalwarts and the Mayor’s cronies on the other. The morass has risen to the level of brinkmanship under the Hahn administration. What is good for Hahn is not in the best interests of the citizens of Los Angeles, DWP "rate payers," or in the best interest of the employees at DWP. Review the following posts:

http://civilactionpress.blogspot.com/2005/01/employees-letter-to-deaton.html

http://civilactionpress.blogspot.com/2005/01/key-to-corruption-is-mayor-and-his.html

What is Good for Gander is not Good for the Goose

2005-03-01T05:14:00.000-08:00

Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Los Angeles faces legal bills in grand jury probe of city hall
Some city officials begin the reimbursement process for attorney fees they were charged for being witnesses in a corruption case.
By David Zahniser

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1318422.html

When lowly City employees are subject to investigation and personnel actions as a consequence of their actions, the City Attorney’s Office does not provide legal representation. They pay for their own representation. However, when managers go awry it seems they have access to not only City attorneys but contracted $500 an hour attorneys. Is there something wrong with that?

If the City Attorney’s office can see the conflict of interest in representing them themselves, why can’t they see the conflict in providing the offenders with representation? It seems clear in each of the city’s confidential settlement that City employees obtained and paid for their own attorneys.

So why is the city footing the bill for Board members and city managers that are involved in alleged scandalous behavior? It is not good for the city. And the practice works to encourage conflicting interests and behavior and actions which are contrary to the city’s best interest.

Accountability goes a long way with Civil Action Press

2005-02-28T05:01:00.000-08:00

LA Observed reports Into the bell lap

“Bob Hertzberg holds a 1 p.m. press conference in Eagle Rock to call for the resignation of ‘multiple Hahn administration officials.’”

At last a candidate is recognizing the problem goes much deeper than Hahn. When it gets to citing individuals and their performance, the chances for reform become meaningful.

Not this time

2005-02-15T22:01:00.000-08:00

Reform!

This time Jim Hahn can't point blame to anyone but himself. If he plants another crack pipe in his opponent’s pocket, we will know better. Hahn’s big goals were public safety, education, and police reform. What is the score?

Here is an old article that might help recall what Mayor Hahn set out to accomplish.

June 7, 2001
Hahn Puts Focus on Safety
Election: After a bitter campaign, mayor-elect also speaks of need to 'build bridges.'
The Los Angeles Times

Striving to be heard

2005-02-15T05:00:00.000-08:00

Dear Treetop Yodeler,

Your letter reflects the quiet disdain many employees feel when leadership goes awry. Those that are aware have strong feelings. Many years ago, many of us set our career sails in search of public service. We navigated by the stars and adjusted our sails to mitigate the political winds to serve in the best interests of the public.

One day, it seemed, we no longer knew our captains. Cronies told us they no longer required our skills or opinions. We were freed from our sails and directed to stop looking to the stars for direction. Now, it seems we are shamed and sent below deck for asking, “Where are we are going?” We spend the remainder of our days mindlessly stoking a fire and hoping for true leadership and a return to glory.

It is my pleasure to meet your request.
The Gadfly
------------------------------------------------
Please post on your blog site http://civilactionpress.blogspot.com/
The following information is based on one of my e-mails circa 11/28/2004:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

DWP Ideas for improvement

Fundamentally, DWP has lost vision, lost supporting core values, is apparently bogged down in political expediency, and corruption. Seems to have virtually no independence to be run as a business. In house promotions to General Manager are long since history, to DWP's detriment.

DWP is being drained dry by direct and indirect transfers to City Hall. The Bank of DWP makes grants and loans that will never be repaid. No one will help DWP when it nears bankruptcy in the next three to five years. Except maybe fire sale deals to So Calif. Edison. Critical infrastructure goes unrepaired/unimproved. Employee positions in some areas are barely enough to cover needs on a good day. No depth. Just wait until retirements hit.

And DWP gets charged wherever possible for real and imagined services as well. And unfunded social programs. And contracting policies that cost DWP perhaps $200M/year in extra costs, in the name of "good faith efforts." Really a shakedown of ratepayers? Who really benefits from all the carefully contrived contracting bureaucracy?? Campaign contributions anyone? Have you read a simple recent DWP bid notice? Maybe 30 pages or more. The legal mumbo jumbo and minority hiring, child care, living wage ordinance, etc., is enough to give any bidder a headache. Need a lawyer just to figure it out. And maybe just have to hire an insider consultant (minority/female) to do the paper work, just like on formal contracts (PMI anyone?).

Promotions of loyalists, cronies, union buddies and shop stewards. Political decisions more important than fundamental business decisions. Seemingly global lack of integrity, in legal, in labor relations, in management, in Management Employee Association and IBEW union. Hide, cover up, stall, delay harass, retaliate. IBEW has black listed at least 10 former EAA employees, and denied them membership, while taking their dues.

And a fair and objective hiring and promotional process? DWP seems to take things to lower and lower lows. Pretense seems now almost unnecessary. Hiring and promoting less than qualified has real bottom line costs, beyond damage to loyal, qualified employees, minorities, females, or otherwise. DWP is the controlling authority. Whoose to say otherwise?

Historically, DWP was run by engineers. (currently a four letter word in many circles).

Engineers tend to take a conservative approach. To overbuild. To overdesign. Maybe less "cooperative." Maybe not as good at BS. And not as good at snow jobs while being publicly "beat up" at city hall public meetings. Engineers have been the key to DWP success. Vision, planning, objectivity, drive to fulfill core business. They are now history, as far as managing DWP.

Non engineers/attorneys/administratative types/bureaucrats seem to be willing to bend the rules, to rationalize, to push the envelope. To give away the store. DWP is a monopoly after all, and rate payers are always on the hook. Take a risk on reliable water and power? Nonsense?

Eliminate all DWP Exempt manager positions. No rocket science needed to figure out who the first to go should be. Some female exempt heads may roll as well. Politically dynamite. But do they, or others, add value? Base positions on business necessity, not political necessity. Way too many Assistant General Managers. And a biased selection process here as well? Exclude any former Southern California Edison employee from management positions. SCE culture is very different, and SCE, after all, is a competitor.

Require the DWP General Manager, and top managers, to have an engineering degree, as it once was. Not a political degree. Not a law degree.

Neutralize/isolate problem civil service managers who cannot otherwise be encouraged to leave (for example, retire, transfer, quit).

Get rid of long term consultants. Do work in house.

Unscramble civil service classifications. New classifications and class consolidations have done great damage, especially Electrical Services Manager. Electrical Services Managers are not Equivalent to Power Engineering Managers.

Promote carefully employees based on dedication to DWP, ability to do the job. Especially emphasize integrity.

Eliminate, or transfer to City Hall, any DWP function not a core business, or business that generates actual revenue. Keep fiber optics, cell site rentals, or anything else generating revenue. Eliminate any group or individual giving away money, goods, or services. Like business development. If it is really important, let City hall do the work, do the social programs, and pay for it, outside of DWP.

Improve the job City Personnel does. More funding. Get rid of all exempt positions in City Personnel. Need honesty, integrity, and independence of City Personnel from City Hall and from DWP manipulation.

Put IBEW's feet to the fire. Audit the Trust Funds. Make sure all Trust Fund meetings are publicized public meetings. Audit the Joint Safety Institute, Joint Training Institute, IBEW health plans, and anything else taking DWP money. (Hello, Ms. Chick). See where the money goes, and who benefits. Federal audit of IBEW management income tax returns?? Investigation of bank accounts? Audit of IBEW financial records? Audit of all contracts IBEW has, paid for using DWP moneys? IBEW campaign contributions audit? RICO anyone?

Review and revise the process for election of employee representatives to the DWP Retirement Board of Administration. IBEW currently backs "favorite" candidates. Such as shop stewards, and other loyalists. This allows them better control of DWP, DWP management, $6B retirement fund, pursuit of political and social agendas using retirement fund clout, risks lower return on investment (at great cost to ratepayers?), and potential for questionable, if not unlawful actions. http://retirement.ladwp.com/

Try employee focus groups/lunches. The truth will out very quickly.

Replace the Director of Corporate Health and Safety with a real Safety person (not a high paid IBEW "favorite"). Recommend a Safety Administrator (civil service classification)

Stop giveaway's to the Bureau of Street Lighting, Street Maintenance, Department of Transportation, and Recreation and Parks, including free power. Change the Electric Rate Ordinance so everyone who gets power pays fairly. No more free lunches.

Audit all confidential contracts with large power users. Great potential for funny business, kickbacks, and campaign donations at the expense of DWP.

Get ALL exempt managers and consultants out of Finance and Accounting. Too easy to cook the books, or "spin" the facts.

Customers with special discounts/benefits/rebates must be verified US Citizens.

Only hire new employees, including exempt employees, and contractors, who are verified US Citizens (DWP is a national security issue).

Serious background checks for all new DWP employees.

Stop giveaways to the public, and private, via council influence.

Audit and annually track all moneys provided to other city departments. Free services, fees, fines, street resurfacing fees, pressure vessel fees, lot cleanup fees, lighting in city parks, streetlight installations, Christmas lights, etc. DWP is not Santa Claus, or the tooth fairy.

Audit all sales of DWP real estate since 1997. Prosecute any funny business, no matter where the cards fall, even councilpersons, commissioners, their spouses, friends, and campaign donors or fundraisers. (Giveaway of the "surplus" DWP Canoga Park Service Headquarters to a favored women's group at the second lowest bid??? Hello Ms. Miscowski? How about diverted DWP (and police??) resources for The Grove. Hello Mr. Caruso? And funny business at the Bureau of Street Lighting? And funny business contracts at General Services? When will we see that audit, Ms. Chick? Bad for your reelection campaign?)

Restart on-campus recruiting for engineers. Start hiring engineers to get them up to speed before existing engineers retire. Feb 1, 2006 may be a popular retirement date. The exodus is beginning.

Reduce annual transfers to city hall to 5 percent. NO supplemental one time only transfers.

Lay down criteria that DWP is a business, and is to be operated as a business. Have a hot line to someone with clout for anonymous watchdog reporting, faxing, e-mailing.

Create an authority that can respond to claims of violations of civil service rules. Things seem to be out of control at present. No rules. No accountability. No rocket science here either. Five minutes of asking questions anywhere will yield answers. Tape record and preserve tape recording of all new hire, transfer, and promotional interviews held at DWP. May need to hold interviews at City Personnel Dept. Maybe include an exempt "Interview Specialist" in such interviews? Cannot trust DWP on this.

Without a fair and objective hiring, promotion, and transfer process, DWP will continue to be doomed. Simply a despised puppet, to be alternately robbed and cursed, to serve at the whim of the mayor and council, to be beat up publicly for "evil" deeds, to further political ambitions. Bad, bad puppet.

Prosecute criminally and civilly any manager who behaves inappropriately, unlawfully, or unethically. Send a clear message to everyone that there are rules, and no one is exempt. That DWP is to be run as a business.

Revise the selection process for DWP commissioners. Seek a balance of left wing and right wing. Maybe have them selected by neighborhood councils?? Or by city council (instead of the Mayor?) Or by election? How about one member being a retired DWP manager, selected by DWP retirees? With a defined term?

Reinstate rules that all managers over technical areas must have a current, valid, engineering license.

Reinstate selecting General Managers from ENGINEERS within DWP. Choose long term civil service employees with proven integrity and performance. Can also cut the pay of General Manager. Civil service employees will work for less as General Manager, and may be expected to perform better in improving the bottom line.

Make DWP far more independent of City Hall and the Mayor, and all the political micromanaging, such as green power taking priority over cheap, clean reliable coal power from Intermountain Power Plant. Get realistic. Get pragmatic. Need to be run as a business, not as a political campaign. Stop the spin. And hope for a miracle or two.

Treetop Yodeler

Who are we kidding?

2005-02-14T04:25:00.000-08:00

Who are we kidding?
Thanks to The Economist for the unmodified portion of this cartoon.

It did not go unnoticed that it was the Unions, not the Democratic party, that endorsed incumbent Mayor, Jim Hahn. Democratic ideals have not been served under the last four years of this administration. No, the big advances of this administration have been made in union influence and control within the city.

In the January 2005 edition of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Surge Brian D’Arcy, IBEW Local 18 Business Manager, acknowledges Mayor Hahn for appointing a number of union officers to key city boards and commissions. Mayor Hahn has definitely been an ally of working people – that’s “polit-burro” speak for union stalwarts.

We know our city interests are not being served here. It makes us wince to pay higher taxes for hot air, waste, purposeful redirection and degradation of government services at citizen’s expense.

There is a very big investment being made by a relatively small but extremely powerful union oligarchy. Why you ask? The legitimate function of the union is to control the terms and conditions of employment through labor. In the old days, unions used to accomplish that task through old-fashioned hard bargaining, negotiation, and representation of their membership. But the newest innovation is to entrench union influence directly into politics the old-fashioned way – through the spoils system.

Union successes have been behind the scenes, but they are becoming quite apparent. They account for many of the illogical political decisions that work against the citizenry and result in higher overall costs and degraded services.

Take for instance Mayor James Hahn’s three-day work week policy for police officers in Los Angeles. How does a three-day work week for police officers benefit the citizens of Los Angeles?

Over the Labor Day weekend (2004), there were at least four murders in the city, one each in the Valley communities of North Hills and Winnetka, the East L.A. community of Boyle Heights and in South Los Angeles. Hahn Administration admitted that their promise of cutting homicides by 20% had been abandoned and that the homicide rate is up by 5%. In a press release on September 8, 2004, in response to the growing homicide rate in the City of Los Angeles, Councilman Bernard Parks said that on his first day as mayor, he would make the city safer by ending the three day work week for cops and put them back on the beat five days a week. Ex-Police Chief Bernard Parks recognizes the system problem. It has nothing to do with personnel and everything to do with mismanagement. “The rank and file who make up the LAPD are some of the best officers in the country and the vast majority joined the force for the same reason I did—because of a commitment to public service. They put themselves on the line everyday, standing in harm’s way and dealing with the toughest customers in society,” Parks said.

From a union-worker standpoint, the consolidation of 36 hours into three days is the ultimate in maximizing “quality of life” for police officers. What other citizens can claim a three-day work-week? And if the City needs more help, it’s overtime, baby. Yes!

So what is the benefit to the citizens of Los Angeles? And herein lies the rub. It is not a balanced win-win. Police work costs more because a substantial portion of the work must be covered at an overtime rate and/or more officers need to be added.

Whether it’s two 12 hour shifts or three eight hour shifts it is still a 24 hour, 7 day a week operation. From a performance stand point though, it is the same problem that truck drivers face when they drive too many hours. They get tired. They make mistakes, they lose their tempers. Some call it “road rage.” Transfer that emotion to police work. Add a gun, a badge, substantial back up, and a flashlight. Dealing with people is no easy task – especially after eight hours. In those last four hours of a twelve-hour shift, restraint might be the most difficult part of the job.

Do you think management should have considered a correlating increase in the deployment of unnecessary force, citizen complaints, or maybe the number of police related vehicular accidents before asking us for more money to support a twelve hour deployment schedule?

We all want the best for the LAPD. But logically we expect responsible city managers should have thoroughly considered these risks. If they didn’t, one should question leadership competency.

The same mismanagement problems exist at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. Many DWP employees enjoy an alternate Monday or Friday off. On one hand they deserve it. One the other, management does not seem concerned with the costs. They simply raise the rates and blame it on the Mayor. Of course, the Mayor “legally” transferred DWP money to city coffers. Since the citizens pay both the taxes and the DWP bill, are we to think it balances?

In practice, it doesn’t stop there. Follow the alternate workday scenario to the citizens of Los Angeles. Some of the employees are off on Mondays and some are off on Fridays. Since so-and-so is missing there isn’t a supervisor or a complete crew on Mondays and Fridays so work doesn’t happen on those days. On Tuesday everybody is at work so they can decide what to do and order the equipment and materials for Wednesday. On Wednesday some of the equipment and materials doesn’t show up on the jobsite. Contracts are based upon a level five-day work-week and vendors can’t meet artificial Wednesday and Thursday peaks. Friday, half as many are waiting to go home. At 52 weeks a year, that amounts to 104 workdays at full capacity, less every conceivable holiday and the remaining days short some aspect of labor, equipment, or materials.

Again, it seems city management is so compromised by this joint union – city [mis]management connection that they completely disregard their duty to us, the citizens of Los Angeles. In a deregulated environment these high-level antics would have spawned a CEO firing and a corporate death spiral into bankruptcy.

Consequently, the mayor has advanced the cause of a few very powerful unions leaders at our expense. It becomes clear why unions have given up representing their constituency and entered politics. And it is perfectly clear why the Democratic Party did not endorse incumbent city management.

Tony Cardenas hammers DWP on integrity

2005-02-11T05:04:00.000-08:00

CouncilmemberTony Cardenas

On November 9, 2004 , Tony Cardenas , Councilmember and the chair of the Commerce, Energy, and Natural Resources Committee (CENR), expressed his dissatisfaction with Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP) management. By its actions, management clearly states to employees, "No good deed will go unpunished."

Successful management knows the importance of integrity. It is the willingness to do what is right even when no one is looking. Integrity is the core of our society’s foundation of trust and our “moral compass.”
Cardenas had a reasonable expectation that DWP management would conduct a diligent good faith investigation into his inquiries about a custodial services contract with Empire and the treatment of DWP employees – whistleblowers – that reported contract problems. The response that Cardenas, Cindy Miscikowski , and Janice Hahn received fell far short of expectations.

Cardenas hammered Henry Martinez, acting DWP General Manager on integrity. “The integrity of the Department is priceless.” Cardenas said to Martinez , “It is an extension of the integrity of the City.”

These integrity violations and incidents of retaliation against employees who come forward are not isolated. This is another one of many incidents that comprise a pattern and practice of City management which seeks to degrade, intimidate, and retaliate against employees who exercise their rights as citizens and who fulfill their moral and condition of employment obligations to report malfeasance as required by DWP Administrative Manual code.

In response to an August 2004 article entitled “Out of the Darkness” written by Jeffrey Anderson of LA Weekly, Tony Cardenas hit the nail on the head. Cardenas was quoted to say, “We can’t use settlements as Band-Aids for systemic problems in any department. We need to get these claims on the record in the City Council in full purview of the public. It’s time we expand the scope so taxpayers know how their money is being spent.”

The problem is systemic. The DWP has had a steady stream of general managers, rotating assistant general managers, and Board members and not only has the culture not changed, the dysfunctional behavior seems to have metastasized through the ranks of the organization. A DWP facilities maintenance technician put it simply, “You can change all the pipes you like. It flows downstream and it makes DWP reek of cronyism.”

W. Edwards Deming, an American systems guru responsible for a successful Japanese business culture transformation, taught that management, and management alone, is responsible for system problems. The biggest mistake managers can make is to blame individuals for system problems. Consistently, DWP management is sending a very fearful message to employees by example. Employees who exhibit integrity and strength of character to come forward should expect to have their careers ruined and character besmirched.

Responsible city managers don’t treat employees like that! Good managers praise and reward employees that find problems and then they focus others on supporting, sharing and using the information to improve processes and ultimately reduce cost and improve effectiveness. Jeffrey Pfeffer, professor of Organizational Behavior at Stanford University Graduate School of Business, claims that organizational learning requires a clear understanding of recurring problems, the willingness to address root causes, and cultural values which encourages workers to find, fix and report recurring failures.

The Los Angeles Times and the Daily News recently reported that a DWP audit concluded that the Department had lax controls over contracts and spending. The Daily News reported that the audit found improperly authorized contracts, contracts approved without authority, split contracts circumventing Board approval, inadequate credit card use procedures, and contracting that was not at the lowest ultimate cost or in the best interest of the DWP.

These administrative and operational problems, because of their established, pervasive, and unresolved “systemic” nature, must be considered fostered by high-level management. Custodians, storekeepers, supervisors, and mid-level managers do not make policy. They merely reflect the processes and standards of performance which management controls.

Deputy Mayor Doane Liu’s response to the audit inappropriately redirects blame to employees. Liu said it was too early to discuss whether employees involved in the problems should be subject to disciplinary action. Mayor Hahn has had a blue-ribbon commission studying contracting for some time. Responsible ethical managers should have taken ownership of the known contract administration problems, but they did not. Deputy Mayor Liu reflects the pin-the-blame on the subordinate culture that has become an ugly and festering cancer at DWP.

This audit was a small almost insignificant sample of the $3 billion in contracts that the DWP maintains – But the auditors found considerable problems. Statistically, it means processes are out of control. The finding should warrant serious investigation into the administration of other contracts at DWP.

Lax controls and inconsistent processes are a reflection of management performance not individual employees. Enduring systemic problems are evidence of what management allows. A quote from Michael Josephson, founder of the Josephson Institute of Ethics, may be appropriate here, “What management allows, it condones.”

With a predominance of inconsistent practices, it becomes illogical to blame the workforce or lower-level management. It comes to mind that DWP management maintains a lax inconsistent system for another purpose – illicit control in support of pay to play. In this system, individual employees who speak of foul play become subject to intimidation, retaliation, and constructive discipline. They are held to a standard of performance that in practice does not exist at DWP. In this environment, management can neutralize individual employees like Sandra Miranda , a custodial services supervisor, and intimidate co-workers who brought the Empire contract to light, and put fear into other employees who do no more than question management authority. This environment is oppressive and intimidating and, of course, it reflects poorly upon City management.

In response to many employee claims of retaliation, DWP management created the Equal Employment Opportunity Section (EEOS) to deal with personnel issues. The EEOS is subordinate to DWP management. All employee promotions into and out of the organization are made by DWP Management. Consequently, it can not be independent of management. It functions to support the system. Inquiries are inconsistent and incomplete. Pertinent witnesses are not examined. It is no surprise that the findings rendered by this pseudo-regulatory office consistently support management behavior and serve to redirect blame to lower levels.

Next, consider the City network in support of the major DWP management players. Systemic contracting problems and personnel issues seem to form a nexus at Assistant General Managers. DWP Assistant General Manager and former City Attorney's Office Chief, Thomas Hokinson, has been one consistent policy maker behind the scenes in Hahn’s bigger organization. He seems to have considerable influence marshaling findings, decisions, and actions through the City Attorney’s Office, the Personnel Department, as well as, the Board of Water and Power Commissioners. Hokinson sets purchasing policy, directs personnel actions and confidential agreements, and encourages subordinate managers and administrative staff to ruin employee careers.

Lastly, consider DWP management’s solution to correct the problems. They have decided to retrain managers on EEO policies. The personnel problems are orchestrated by high-level managers who are predominately accomplished attorneys. They know the laws, the boundaries, and are most savvy in the manipulation of perception. Training is another effort to reframe the problem. The Problem is not a lower-level supervisory or mid-level management problem which can be corrected by training. Rather it is an effort to redirect and enable the culture to continue.

The General Manager(s) and the Board of Water and Power Commissioners serve at the pleasure of the Mayor. S. David Freeman, former General Manager of DWP reported that Mayor Hahn has the power to set their agenda, influence Board members, and if needed replace them. Consequently, if DWP did not reflect the culture the Mayor desired, he has the power to pursue immediate corrective action to change the culture at DWP. Therefore, it seems until we get a new mayor or Mayor Hahn decides otherwise, employees who report malfeasance, business vendors who don’t support the current status quo, and a public institution which has been politically-undermined, will continue to suffer.

Los Angeles leader earns an “F” for integrity and ethical values

2005-02-10T04:30:00.000-08:00

Integrity smarts

By definition, the effectiveness of internal controls cannot rise above the integrity and ethical values of the City managers who create, administer, and monitor them.

Integrity and ethical values of the city are communicated to city employees and citizens in the actions and practices of City leaders and high level city managers. Too many examples of questionable behavior in the news degrades confidence in city leadership. Citizens know the difference between squeaking by minimal legal standards and the high standards of integrity and ethical behavior expected from city leaders.

City employees see first hand countless examples of failed city leadership and disregard for integrity and ethical behavior and it lowers confidence, self esteem and performance. Citizens see it in the media and their confidence wanes, too.

City leadership of late can’t even muster setting a good example. Mayor Hahn’s efforts to verbally defend his actions and claims that his appointments have met city values and ethical behavioral standards to the citizens has become a sorry spectacle.

Mayor Hahn’s Boards and blue ribbon committees might act to remove incentives and temptations that prompt personnel to engage in fraudulent, questionable or unethical behavior. But the fact remains that high integrity individuals and ethical leadership would not have required the additional levels of blue ribbon bureaucratic review. If citizens knew ahead of time that their mayoral candidate would need to appoint committees to assure ethical behavior they would not have given Hahn their vote in the first place.

Start at the top. The reason Los Angeles city leaders warrant an “F” for commitment to integrity and ethical values is because Hahn has set the example and his organization has fallen in line. He has created an atmosphere full of temptations for City employees to engage in improper acts. He has the power to appoint and remove commissioners. The Mayor used his considerable influence over the Commissioners to select and use Fleishman-Hillard for his personal gain. Do you think the Mayor should have been cognizant of the questionable propriety of these dealings? Hahn’s acts and the city administration’s support of them demonstrate that the checks and balances are nonexistent or ineffective. It also demonstrates a top management that is unaware or unconcerned with integrity and who most likely are unaware of actions taken at lower organizational levels. Further, it demonstrates an ineffective Board unable to exercise independent judgment within DWP, the enabling organization. And lastly, swapping general managers and rotating assistants demonstrates that Hahn has given tacit approval and insignificant penalties for improper behavior.

Integrity means benchmarking services with the best rather than the worst. How does Los Angeles Police compare with, say, Chicago rather than New York. Chicago had a significant decrease in the number of homicides. What caused it?

Chicago Police Superintendent Philip Cline said the key was changing the way officers police the city. http://www.macon.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/10803418.htm

"We're trying to prevent crime rather than just reacting to it," said Cline, who was appointed to the top job in 2003. "We're combining street intelligence with technology and flooding the neighborhoods - and at the same time, we're attacking the biggest cause for our violence, which is gangs, guns and drugs."

With a fixed budget, Chicago police officials had to work with what they had to attack the problem. Cline ordered administrative officers to leave their desks one day each week and to hit the streets, particularly open-air drug markets. The department created a deployment operations center - known as the DOC - where officers analyze crime trends and monitor inter-gang rivalries. The DOC then deploys a targeted response unit - three platoons of about 80 officers each - to areas where violence might occur.

The costs for those changes have been negligible, said David Bayless, a Chicago Police Department spokesman.

Chicago accomplishments reflect good leadership and resource management not less workdays for more money.

Los Angeles gets black eye and bloody nose, still no clue about ethics

2005-02-09T00:01:00.000-08:00

Warning: Internal Control Breach

Once, Oops. Twice, Maybe. Three times! GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

Internal controls are essential to managing any reputable organizational entity. Everyone from the Mayor, the Board of Water and Power Commissioners, the auditors, to the citizens of Los Angeles (Alias DWP shareholders) should be concerned with internal controls. If they aren’t, they had better get concerned quick. There is no question DWP rates are going up – way Up! And, Airports and Harbor fees are not far behind.

According to the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (http://www.coso.org/index.htm), an authority on such matters, internal control is a process conducted by directors and managers to provide reasonable assurance that an operation is performing effectively, efficiently, reliably, in compliance with laws and regulations, and is safeguarding assets against unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition. Internal control must be inherent in the way management runs the business and permeate the entire organization and all of its actions.

Thanks to California State University Professor Rick Hayes, here is a short list of features that usually contribute to a successful control environment:

Commitment to integrity and ethical values
Commitment to competence and quality
Independence, integrity, and openness at the Board level
Leadership in control by example (management philosophy and operating style)
An appropriate organizational structure
Appropriate delegation of authority with accountability
Appropriate human resource policies and practices

Any of them sound even vaguely familiar? If not, count on rates going UP.

During the next couple of posts, plan on discussing City management. You are invited to share your views.

Connect the dots: A series of musings and commentaries on local politics and management

2005-02-06T21:34:00.000-08:00

Universal Performance Factors for General managers

Some of the business strategies of late at Department of Water and Power are difficult to understand. To understand them, one needs to look at change over a period of time – Where were we (then) and where are we (now). Of course, this type of analysis lends itself particularly well in evaluating leadership, organizational culture, and a concept commonly referred to as “continuous improvement” or lack there of, as the case may be.

There is circular axiom in management. It goes something like this,

“Without standards, there is no measurement. Without measurement, there is no direction. And, without direction, there is no leadership. Leadership therefore begins with an articulated vision, enumerated goals and objectives, and a measurement of ones accomplishments with respect to those goals and objectives.”

During Richard Riordan’s term as Mayor of Los Angeles, Riordan accepted a dollar a year for his public service. He demonstrated integrity. He established standards of performance, and held City managers accountable. One of Riordan’s first executive directives was Executive Directive No. 2000-2 entitled Universal Performance Factors for General Managers. It first established his responsibility to evaluate the performance of his managers. Further, it set forth goals on which City managers were going to be evaluated, namely vision, leadership, and accountability.

James K. Hahn term as Mayor of Los Angeles has been quite a change from the former mayor. Notwithstanding a significant increase in compensation, Hahn’s public service has been marked by public scandal and Federal investigation. Probably the most relevant management change that Hahn has made during his term as mayor is that the standards of performance are gone. It is as though the performance factors never existed and remain just outside the reach of public consciousness.

The most significant difference between these two administrations is the interpretation of Charter Section 508(d), with regards to Mayoral responsibilities to evaluate the performance of chief administrative officers [general managers]. Former Mayor Riordan saw these as personal responsibilities. Hahn has transferred these responsibilities to others in the form of mayoral appointments, blame, and blue-ribbon review committees.

Mayor Hahn has chosen not to establish standards of performance for his appointments, per se. Lately, responsible citizens have had to fill that void, by making judgments based upon what they perceive first hand, see in the media, or read in print and editorials. Responsible citizens are smart enough to look at the facts. Of course, the facts include an overwhelming number of negative reports on Hahn’s administration and a degraded City government.

The elevation of law in Hahn’s administration to a standard of performance is another curious development. Most curious because, law, one would think, should be a rudiment rather than the pinnacle of rational government.

Civil Action worth mention

2005-02-02T05:11:00.000-08:00

Secret Summits! -- Laura Chick summons Hahn’s challengers to her home for scandal talk by JEFFREY ANDERSON

Laura Chick dons spurs and takes CIVIL ACTION worth the PRESS.

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/11/news-anderson.php

Beyond the potholes

2005-01-26T05:00:00.000-08:00

When the rain clears the air and washes away dust and debris, it seems you can see for miles. Not long after what seems a fleeting glimpse of clarity, must we return to the haze, the crud, and our own Hahn-enabling myopia?

The potholes didn’t just appear overnight because of the rain. The cracks and the rubble have been there under the debris, waiting to be noticed, for quite some time. This concept of “waiting to be noticed” is better referred to as “lying in wait.” It is the stuff that underwrites Murphy’s Law and apparently the current Los Angeles city management.

In any stretch of the imagination, if you were to characterize good city management, would it be covered with pockmarks and potholes? I am of the opinion that people, organizations, and companies don’t spontaneously go bad, as if out of the blue, and experience problems. They are ignored, degraded, or mismanaged over time. These problems have been festering on the horizon long before they obstructed our paths or manifested themselves in the morning post.

A system-wide spontaneous degradation of roads indicates that there is no effectively managed preventive maintenance program (PMP). A PMP can be as simple as: schedule, direct, and or contract the replacement of X square units of road such that the entire quantity of roads is replaced within its average usable life. If this were the case, only a small percentage of the city roadway would have fallen into disrepair.

The city-wide occurrence of potholes is an indicator that the Bureau of Street Maintenance may be suffering from system problems. Further, the Mayor’s “You call, we’ll repair” response to the citizens side-steps the system problems and subordinates the entire Bureau to inefficient placating and willy-nilly patch jobs. Again, we need to ask, what kind of outfit are we running here?

The rain taxed the system. The lights went out. Sewers backed up. Hillsides and homes washed away. Silt filled the waterways. Roofs leaked and the potholes appeared. When 17 inches of rain pours out of the sky into the LA basin — lucky to see that much water in a year — we can easily assign blame to natural causes. This mumbo jumbo, of course, is a ploy for circumstance. We might as well be contented with a roof that leaks only when it rains. In the same vein and closer to home, the City Hall roof is fine. The leak is just another rain-associated anomaly.

We spent lots of money building roofs, clearing spillways, paving streets, and paying high city salaries to prevent these anomalies, with a minimum expectation that they function reasonably as intended. They didn’t. The rain cleared away some of the debris, making another area of city oversight very apparent.

Look out! Look out! Pink elephants on parade

2005-01-24T05:19:00.000-08:00

Pink elephants?

It seems not a day goes by without at least one truckload of steamy pink pachyderm poop spattering the Daily News with city administration annals. Mayor James Hahn will be the first to tell you, “There is absolutely nothing wrong with City Hall.” Hahn assures us, "They know me. They know what I stand for, that what I do is in the best interest of the city. Anyone who alleges otherwise has to prove that and I don't think they can." Now everybody knows there is no such thing as pink elephants. Surely, anybody seeing them scurrying about City Hall is surely suffering from some serious delusional malady. Hahn concludes "I think people are smart enough to look at the facts."

Well, the truth of the matter is I think we are smart enough to look at the facts. The fact is with so much pachyderm poop coming out of City Hall, there has got to be an undermined system of checks and balances ignoring a very quiet, but nonetheless conspicuous, pachyderm conducting his business at public expense.

With all the PR spin and purposeful political redirection, it is difficult for us to determine what makes this political pink elephant so terribly vexing.

The first and overwhelming problem is that we refuse to see the pink elephant because the two commonly held notions about business and government are no longer applicable in our society. One is that big business is motivated by greed and self-interest. And the other is that government is our friend because it forces businesses to be accountable to society.

Business is motivated by greed and self-interest. No problem there. We trust that the financial and legal constraints will eventually catch exploiters and keep them in check. In order to prosper legally, businesses are motivated to:

secure and keep the best, most qualified employees,
pay and promote in accordance with performance and merit,
provide better products and services than their competitors, and
provide returns to their ownership.

Businesses have even tried to align themselves with community service. In effect, to do well, businesses need to be fair and ethical.

Now let’s look at government in Los Angeles. This is where our notions just fall apart. First, the Hahn administration is in conflict with its government function — forcing businesses to be accountable to society. Hahn has his trunk in deep pink yogurt running, not regulating, the DWP, Airports, and Harbor Departments. Now that would not be such a bad thing if Hahn had the same constraints as managers running legitimate businesses in private enterprise. But Hahn does not.

Besides being just an ordinary citizen of Los Angeles, pretend you are a DWP owner. This should not be difficult because in reality citizens are the owners. Now pretend you have a Mayor who up and decided he was going to hand pick his friends and cohorts to:

Sit on your Board of Directors.
Run your company.
Reward your managers for incompetence or wrongdoing.
Transfer your profits to another company — general city fund.
Allow employee representatives to make policy decisions
Award contracts and contractors not based on quality, performance, and price.
Use your company's resources (legal, public relations, purchasing departments) for personal gain or advantage.

Absolutely without question, all of these things are unethical and a very bad way to run a business, but apparently to Hahn’s credit, not illegal.

Hahn’s administration is responsible for public policy. Public policy is what holds managers accountable to the regulators and the citizens of Los Angeles. In the absence of anything resembling a coherent policy or requirement supporting efficiency, cost effectiveness, profit, or performance from any of “our” proprietary departments, Hahn has clearly demonstrated that he has absolutely no place for accountability in his administration. Although we can all see this city is mired in elephant dung, we can’t prove these pink pachyderms exist because we are looking for laws instead of prudent, ethical, fair-dealing public policy. Frankly, these pink pachyderms are the public policy and accountability we just don’t see.

We citizens expect much more from our mayor. The mayor has to serve us all — businesses, citizens, workers, commuters, Republicans, Green Party, etc. Hahn’s across-the-board capture of the big city unions but dismal failure to capture the Democratic Party endorsement mirrors the way he has run this city. In effect it says, “It is wrong to run a city in the interests of a few big union supporters while ignoring the legitimate interests of others."

Not to beat a pink elephant to death, but it has to be said apparently over and over. It is not just a matter of taking into account the interests of citizens, suppliers, vendors, and employees. It is a matter of being accountable to them.

Mismanagement of Torrance. Sound Familiar?

2005-01-18T04:49:00.000-08:00

The Committee to Recall Torrance Mayor Dan Walker is launching a recall petition at http://www.recalldanwalker.com. Their reasons for the recall include:
Neglecting the concept of a balanced community by supporting and encouraging inappropriate housing development by consistently voting to approve projects rejected by the planning commission, the community development department, the residents, and the business community. Further, they cite Walker's leadership of the City Council in voting to approve zoning changes and building variances and failure to listen to residents’ concerns. The community concerns are about projects which are too large, too dense, create too much traffic, and over burden the infrastructure (water, sewer, streets), and have seriously endangered the quality of life for Torrance. Torrance should not be known as the city with too many people, traffic jams, crowded schools, and the place where developers take priority over Torrance residents.

"We have made an impact, whether we make (the deadline) or not," said David Henseler, who helped lead the recall effort. "I certainly made a point, and I think the City Council is hearing that point."

"We also have a voice," he said. "And our voice is saying there are enough people that are so upset that we're willing to take an extreme measure. That's a very loud voice."
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1359516.html

Note too, that the news was not announced by the Daily breeze until the attempt is sure of failure. Gosh that sounds familiar. One thing for sure Los Angeles is much much more tolerant and accepting of mismanagement. Dan Walker isn't even being investigated by the Feds!

Exclusionary "non-partisan" politics

2005-01-17T22:12:00.000-08:00

The mayor’s position in Los Angeles is “non-partisan.” Essentially, that means if you ain’t a part of the status quo, you ain’t a participatin’! Did anybody check out the party affiliations of the debate sponsors? The debates thus far have been exclusionary for a reason claims Walter Moore.

Robert Gelfand, American Reporter Correspondent from Hahn’s strong hold in San Pedro, California reports more of the exclusionary tactics in his expose, “THE NEXT MAYORAL DEBATE SCAM.” The article can be found at http://www.american-reporter.com/2,561W/1.html.

“The L.A. mayoral debates continue and once again, reform loses. This time it is the misleadingly named Citywide Alliance of Neighborhood Councils that intends to restrict participation in its debates. Only the big fundraisers get to play. “However you want to put it, it is clear that the Alliance does not speak for neighborhood councils. Nevertheless, the upcoming mayoral candidate debates are being peddled to the public as being sponsored by the Citywide Alliance of Neighborhood Councils, under the carefully unstated implication that the Alliance is somehow representative. This is thoroughly misleading. It's like the old joke about the Holy Roman Empire, which was neither holy, nor Roman nor an empire. Or the old Cold War line that any country calling itself a Peoples' Democratic Republic is neither the peoples' nor democratic nor a republic. The Citywide Alliance of Neighborhood Councils is neither citywide nor an alliance nor made up of neighborhood councils.”

Spinnin’ wheel got to go ‘round. Is it going to happen again? This is getting to look a lot like prohibition. If you exclude it, everybody will want it. People eventually will get to the truth. The high cost of television argument does not hold water. If your already set up to do the filming, what is the cost to capture a few more candidates in the picture?

Exclusion does not work in trade and it doesn’t work in media. It look like bloggers and web media with its low cost of entry, free speech, convenience, and rapid transmission rate may very well put the big wealthy exclusionary players out of business.

Gold medal winner for incompetence has to be awarded to the Los Angeles city managers

2005-01-17T15:13:00.000-08:00

I just can not help linking the following two articles in the Los Angeles Daily News together and asking: Why wouldn’t we look at city managers any differently than the management of any other big organization?

In the first article, “No one has any time for queries,” found at: http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20950~2656993,00.html or http://www.dailynews.com/cda/article/print/0,1674,200~20950~2656993,00.html, Ken Lloyd, an Encino-based management consultant and author of "Be the Boss Your Employees Deserve," describes a closed-company-environment that keeps employees in the dark. As a result of this environment, employees consider themselves ineffective and incompetent. In this “company” situation, Lloyd does not waste any time awarding the gold medal for the “no-win” environment to management concluding, “This type of treatment puts a real dent in employee attitudes, commitment and performance.” Lloyd nails the more forward-thinking question, the question I believe we should all be asking about our present leadership in Los Angeles …

“There is, however, a larger question to ask yourself: as you look down the road, what kind of a future can you envision in a company [L.A. City government] that treats people [citizens] like this?”

Lloyd’s insight and direction seem so simple and clear. Naively, I think everybody would agree this is a no-win situation for Los Angeles and we should waste no time in taking action to change it. Of course political decisions are not that easy, especially under a leadership environment steeped in denial and accustomed to using PR firms adept at spinning the situation. If it were a marketing environment, we would say “perception is everything.” It would be as simple as: We don’t like it. We don't buy it.

However, we have somehow allowed Hahn and his surrogates to replace a simple matter of choice with a legal deliberative process. Case in point, the second Daily News article is “Hahn's outrage, Mayor's denial strategy on his scandal fails truth test," found at: http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20951~2656997,00.html or http://www.dailynews.com/cda/article/print/0,1674,200~20951~2656997,00.html. Albeit cleverly spun, Hahn has us all twisted up with a purposefully misplaced legal standard. If we get caught up in it, we are at a real disadvantage. The Mayor does not have to be proven guilty in a court of law beyond a shadow of a doubt to be voted out of office. That high-level legal-standard is only used when a society considers taking away a citizen's rights. Nobody has to "prove" a thing. It does not apply to a widely-held notion that the mayor has become a liability to his office and a handicap to the City of Los Angeles.

There are several eligible mayoral candidates on display and a choice has to be made in March. Pretend these mayoral candidates are bottles of headache pain relievers for a moment. One has a very tarnished wrapper, it looks like it has been tampered with, and the manufacturer is currently under investigation by the Feds. Are you having any trouble setting this bottle aside? No! It was easy to set this one aside, wasn’t it? You didn’t feel you had to prove to the manufacturer that product was defective, did you? No. Absolutely not!

Let us not, as a society, give more credit to denial than fact or perception. The facts are what they are. We make decisions based on perception for a reason. Perception includes cognitive comparisons, situational analysis, and judgment. We are taught from a early age to be cautious, alert, and aware of the warning signs for a reason – to pre-empt calamity.

We choose to be victimized

2005-01-16T17:15:00.000-08:00

When your community suffers from a consistent pattern and practice of inattention to public needs and concerns on the part of community representatives, take a broader look. We, in surrounding communities, also suffer the same ailment.

The mayoral machine in Los Angeles supports, condones, and gives merit to projects, individuals, and special interests, that are tangent to long-term civil and community wants and needs. As a result of self-interest, mismanagement, and alleged corruption, each of our L.A. communities suffer from lack of concern, ineffectiveness, and diverted resources.

Your City Council Member’s ineffectiveness and inability to address community concerns are a result of this mayoral administration. Just as a strong hand is unable to tend to its own wounds, Council Members are unable to resolve community issues under this administration.

“The quality of any leader is shaped by the quality of their actions and the integrity of their intent.” We in communities outside Hahn’s big-labor, big-money, “pay-to-play,” special-interest machine are neglected. Hahn’s big promises for all of Los Angeles are severely constrained by deliberate self-and-constituent-serving actions over his entire term – San Pedro revitalization, LAX/Harbor expansion, and real estate development. The funding raids on DWP, Airports, and Harbor departments, as well as crony appointments, preferential treatment, and pay-to-play politics have led to scandalous City mismanagement and an indelible mark on this administration’s intent and integrity.

The Hahn political machine has become a liability. The noxious exhaust from Hahn’s machine has polluted our government. Council members working within this closed administration behave as if they have been asphyxiated at the wheel.

For that reason I recommend we take action and VOTE!

It does not matter how much money is raised by individual candidates. You won’t see any of it. It does not matter what the pundits say. It’s their opinion, not yours. It doesn’t matter that the unions have endorsed Hahn. Unions as a rule are not employers. Businesses are employers, and if you have not noticed, they are leaving Los Angeles. What it boils down to is the choice you make on your ballot. Choose what is best for “you” and it will be the best for the City of Los Angeles. Make a difference where it counts – on your ballot. Register now and VOTE!

This time, choose not to be victimized. Collectively send a clear, personal, and decisive message right to the top – to the Mayor, his constituents, and to the media. We don’t like this noxious self-serving political machine and we are marking our ballots accordingly.

Turn out en masse and choose a brand new leader that is not a party to self-centered special interests, affiliated with the status quo, or spewing pie-in-the-sky rhetoric.

Consider Walter Moore. Moore is leader who has articulated a clean, forward-looking, realistic plan for Los Angeles. Our collective votes for Walter Moore will definitely result in a political course correction for Los Angeles.

Make a statement. Walter Moore will make a significant improvement for the rest Los Angeles by ending the practices of a dysfunctional administration which patronizes a few at the expense of many.

Sincerely,

An unusually verbose member of the silent majority

The mayoral blogathon begins at Civil Action Press

2005-01-15T19:13:00.000-08:00

For those mayoral candidates who wish to opine their virtues and for those named and unnamed pundits who are so inclined to expouse the virtues of their chosen candidate(s), http://civilactionpress.blogspot.com is for you. Please blog away...

Community Service vs. Self-Preservation

2005-01-13T22:34:00.000-08:00

COMMERCE, ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2005
ROOM 1060, CITY HALL - 8:30 AM
200 NORTH SPRING STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA 90012
MEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBER TONY CARDENAS, CHAIR
COUNCILMEMBER JANICE HAHN
COUNCILMEMBER CINDY MISCIKOWSK

Item 5
04-2317
Motion (Cárdenas - Parks) relative to requesting that the DWP respond to accusations made in relation to alleged improper procurement and purchasing practices of its Corporate Purchasing Services Department including acts of harassment and retaliation against vendors and staff.
Fiscal Impact Statement Submitted: No

DISPOSITION
Many DWP employees and vendors turned out in numbers to complain about DWP handling of the Empire contract and employee abuses. The meeting spilled over into the general City Council meeting which was taped and will air on City View channel 35. At the conclusion of a long list of complaining vendors, Cindy Miscikowski announced that Item 5 had been postponed until Tuesday, January 25, 2005 to allow more time for addressing issues.

Thomas Hokinson, Assistant General Manager of DWP, was alleged to have called for labor relations re-enforcements to deal with two complaining civil servants: Sandra Miranda, a petite custodial supervisor and Daniel Shrader, a bespectacled fleet supervisor and CSULA professor of management who both made allegations of management-orchestrated retaliation and intimidation by Hokinson.

Hokinson seemed to prove their point by directing heavy hitters, Peter Lakatos, Director of Labor Relations, Mark Howard and Demarlo Simms, Sr. Labor Relations Representatives, and Thomas Patzlaff, Fleet Services Manager to attend the meeting and keep an intimidating eye on the two public speakers.

Many officials questioned the Assistant General Manager’s priorities and judgment to have directed four high level ($100K per year) city officials to watch the two civil servants exercising their free speech rights on their own personal time. Not to mention all of the other more important business functions going on at DWP, like the lights, rain, floods, and power outages. And of course, Councilman LaBonge was concerned about the DWP handling of Palm fronds.

If anything, seeing the four DWP disciplinarians sitting in the background gave legitimacy to DWP employee complaints of management-orchestrated retaliation at the utility. What makes an Assistant General Manager choose to infringe on personal rights rather than deal with a public emergency, anyway? Empire maybe?

The key to corruption is the mayor and his cronies

2005-01-13T20:51:00.000-08:00

Wednesday, January 12, 2005 Los Angeles Daily News
Pay-to-play makes current city system a washout
By S. David Freeman Guest Columnist

I worked inside city government as the general manager of the Department of Water and Power from 1997 to 2001, when Dick Riordan was mayor. Because of this, I think I can shed some light on what has happened on Mayor James Hahn's watch.

During the current pay-to-play scandals and corruption probes at City Hall, I don't think there has been enough focus on the crucial role the mayor plays in selecting commissioners, general managers and even the deputy mayor, who acts as a liaison to each agency.

Make no mistake about it - the mayor is responsible for what goes on in city departments and commissions. He names the key people who run the departments and he appoints the commissioners. He must be held responsible for their actions.

Unfortunately, corruption at the DWP is not limited to pay-to-play. It is also pay-to-keep-playing. On the one hand, contractors want extensions without competition, lenient enforcement of contract provisions and cost overruns rubber-stamped. On the other, they also know that there will be consequences if they do not give campaign contributions. With a wink and a nod, the contributions flow to Hahn's campaign.

None of these contractors will speak up in public because they know that if they do, they will be punished. The consequence for not playing ball is to be shut out of the game.

Another feature of the corruption that has gone largely unnoticed is that most of the decisions are made in secret. This is contrary to the intent, if not the letter, of California's open meeting law, the Ralph M. Brown Act.

The mayor's liaison person - for years it was Troy Edwards, his campaign fund-raiser - meets with DWP staff before each commission meeting and decides what goes on the agenda. If the mayor, through his designated representative, doesn't agree with an item, it doesn't go on the agenda.

To be sure, the mayor is entitled to voice an opinion (even on specific contracts if he wishes), but this should be done in public - not in secret. The approach used by Hahn allows the mayor to issue a veto in secret. And it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out that under this system, political favoritism and pay-to-play will creep in. It hasn't always been like this.

There was a world of difference between Kelly Martin, who was Riordan's liaison with the DWP when I was general manager, and Hahn's liaison, Troy Edwards. And that's reflected in their current situations: Martin is being considered for a top job at City Hall, and Edwards has been a target for law enforcement agencies now investigating corruption allegations at City Hall.

The key to cleaning house at City Hall is held by the mayor. No new laws are needed. The mayor just needs to keep political cronies with no knowledge of the subject matter out of city government. Would it really be all that hard to select commissioners, especially commission chairpersons, on the basis of professional knowledge, honesty and integrity and not by how much money they raised for the mayor? Would it really be all that hard to leave commissioners alone to do their jobs once the mayor makes his general policy objectives known?

We don't need new laws to cure the corruption. Just a responsible and honest mayor who won't allow it in the first place.

S. David Freeman is a partner in the Renewable Resources Group in Los Angeles. He is the former general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

Employee's letter to Deaton

2005-01-12T18:10:00.000-08:00

Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 4:28 PM
Subject: Intimidation, Harassment, & Stalking

Dear General Manager Ron Deaton,

I asked for and received authorization from my supervisor for time off from work today to express my opinions at a public City Council meeting about the current state of affairs here at Department of Water and Power and on a motion (Item 5) introduced by Tony Cardenas and Bernard Parks.

Some 20 years ago, new civil servants had to take an oath to serve the city in the public's best interest. Namely, "To fulfill their own moral obligations to the City by disclosing to the extent prohibited by law improper governmental activities. Sandra Miranda, a custodial supervisor, and a number of other Department employees, myself included, where there to fulfill our obligations.

Department of Water and Power management has found it difficult to retaliate against Ms. Miranda directly. As in my case, Thomas Hokinson and his agents are orchestrating an old drill sergeant's tactic - disciplining the group and encouraging subordinates and co-workers to exert pressure on the offending employees. Portraying them as outcasts and disgruntled workers.

The retaliation cases and the confidential settlements at DWP have existed for a reason. This administration has used them successfully to the detriment of employees and the institution of public service. And, as you can see by the complaints from the employees, businesspersons, and vendors we purport to serve and represent, we are mismanaging this situation.

I have spoken before the Board of Water and Power and the City Council and what I see in response is silence and a resolve to maintain the status quo from a body of leaders that I think should be outwardly appalled, disgusted, and called to action.

I wrote an email to you on December 9, 2004. For whatever reason, you did not respond. I see that the quagmire remains and it has become an ugly display of mismanagement we endure. It serves no good purpose to allow this situation to exist, much less to allow it to escalate. It speaks volumes that the Union is not acting on the employees' behalf, too.

If you look further into management decisions and reorganizations, I think you will see directions that are not prudent management nor in the public's best interest.

For one, the issue before the committee has two facets: Purchasing administration and personnel management. Ernie Netka is responsible for purchasing. He has no direct authority over custodial personnel. Therefore Netka is not a root problem. The root problem exists at the nexus where purchasing administration and personnel management meet. That nexus is with Assistant General Manager Thomas Hokinson.

System problems are management's responsibility and management needs to address them. It is frightening but logical to me that the issue has become managerial self-preservation and, as such, management is unable to resolve the problem.

We cannot continue to destroy employees' careers to protect management. For it is civil servant's who are our cities first responders and notification system against corruption and crimes against the public.

I have personal experience with retaliation by, and the ruinous nature of, Assistant General Manager Thomas Hokinson and subordinate employees empowered to act on his behalf. It is no coincidence that Mr. Thomas Anderbery hired three Fleet Services Managers instead of one. It was no coincidence that Thomas Patzlaff, my new supervisor, Mark Howard and DeMarlo Simms, Senior Labor Relations Representatives, and Peter Lakatos, Labor Relations Manager were sent to the City Council meeting to observe us today. It is my belief that there was nothing on the agenda requiring their attendance. Nothing that they could not have observed later. The meeting was televised. In my opinion, it was an act of intimidation, harassment, and stalking. The same pattern and practice that has been reported in my case and in the cases of the custodians.

This is management-orchestrated systemic psychological abuse of employees who are exercising their right to free speech. I want this intimidation harassment stopped!

I hope that the Council Members appointed you to see that the management culture at DWP is reformed. I look forward to helping you in any way I can to improve this terrible waste of resources and talent. Please help us.

Where there is smoke, sure enough, there is fire.

2005-01-09T13:56:00.000-08:00

Laura Chick’s new tone and break from rank does not bode well for the City’s claim that the fault lies with Fleishman-Hillard, does it? If vendors and officials are getting stung, don’t you start looking for a source or a root problem? Is the stinging localized? Is Glendale, Pasadena, or Torrance experiencing the same problems?

Is Fleishman-Hillard having billing problems with other clients? Is Fleishman-Hillard’s gouging localized to Los Angeles’ cash cows – DWP, Airports, and Harbor Departments? How about vendors in general, are they complaining and bringing litigation against Los Angeles more than other cities?

Does your city suffer from one or more of the following symptoms?

Re-organizations and restructuring without legitimate accounting, establishing base numbers for comparison, or conducting performance tracking
Higher than normal turnover especially at the chief officer or general manager ranks
Contract awards to insiders or former insiders
Dodging, rotating, and manipulation of, official appointments
Vendors claiming foul play
Civil servants complaining of stress and management-orchestrated retaliation
Claims of rising worker’s compensation, stress, and conflicts of interest
Federal, State or local regulatory investigations
Increasing city litigation and use of confidential settlements
Stymied by ad hoc mayor appointed investigative and review committees
Taxation and rapid movement of money from one account to the other without representation
Citizens suing to stop city and union projects
Too much finger pointing and no accountability
Ineffective unfocused costly city services
Unflattering articles and editorials
Congestion, itchy, watery eyes, inflamed constituency, and/or
Too many pot holes
No corrective or recall actions

If your town suffers from one or more of the above, it is not just blatant incompetence. By definition incompetents can’t achieve this level of collusion. Your town may be suffering from one of these uncommonly deeply-rooted city ailments and systemic dysfunctional leadership and organizational behavior leading, but not limited, to:

Cronyism and spoils system appointments
Controlled fraud
Graft,
Corruption,
Wanton mismanagement,
Collusion
Gross negligence, and,
Dereliction of duty.

These symptoms are brought on by repeated terms of voter apathy. Draw your own conclusions. The facts are:

We voted the incumbents into office.
The incumbents used their power and authority to govern the city
The incumbents control the city's endeavors
The incumbents are responsible for the situation we are in.

On March 8, 2005 VOTE!!!
--------------------------------------------------------

Los Angeles Daily News

City Hall cleanup
Rooting out fraud in Los
Angeles is full-time job

Sunday, January 09, 2005 - If City Controller Laura Chick gets her way and starts up a special fraud-busting unit to find and destroy corruption, theft and even waste in City Hall, it's sure to be the
busiest department in the city.

There's plenty of suspicious activity and outright fraud to keep the investigators working 24-7 at the Department of Water and Power alone. The idea for the unit stemmed from Chick's audit of
billings to the DWP from a private public relations firm which sparked allegations that about $4 million of the $24 million contracts could not be accounted for.

And that's just one city department, admittedly one that has done whatever it pleases for most of a century.

Not surprisingly, the idea was at first opposed by Mayor James Hahn, saying it was redundant to the Controller's Office -- but since everyone is lining up for it, the mayor has chosen once again not to fight, at least out in the open.

Even with added powers, Chick faces an awesome task in trying to clean up City Hall.

Print version:
http://www.dailynews.com/cda/article/print/0,1674,200~20951~2642438,00.html
Article version:
http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20951~2642438,00.html

Mayoral candidates agree Hahn must go

2005-01-08T13:38:00.000-08:00

The five mayoral candidates went vocal at the college. It was telling. Four were Alarcon, Hertzberg, Parks, and Villaraigosa. These four were “non-partisan” Democrats and by-products of the system who tried to distance themselves from Los Angeles administration status quo. The fifth was Moore – a real outsider, a partisan Republican, Yale-educated-attorney, and animal rights’ activist. Moore distanced himself not only from LA politics, but from everybody there.

You can watch and judge for yourself at http://www.mayorno.com/Debates.html.

My impression was the debate went to Moore followed by Parks. Moore led because his message is simple, straight forward, refreshingly devoid of rhetoric and circular logic. Most importantly, he doesn’t have, as far as we know, any ties with existing scandalous, corruptive, dysfunctional, retaliatory, and anti-business behavior allegedly fostered by this city’s existing oligarchy.

Parks is next because he is articulate, a demonstrated leader, able to survive and strike back from a Hahn hit, and he has demonstrated his efforts to differentiate himself as an insider and a change agent.

Consistent with news of Council members reporting tardy, Villaraigosa gets a demerit. Villaraigosa was late and spilled his drink.

To Alarcon, Hertzberg, and Villaraigosa, give us something more than being born here or being a resident of LA. It adds nothing. We all live here. The crooks, cons, druggies, murderers, politicians, and pundits live here, too. With all your hands-on leadership, experience, high-dollar endeavors, and time in Los Angeles politics, how did we get to be the pinnacle of “pay to play”?

School is a non-mayoral issue – it is not actionable. First because City Hall can’t keep itself out of hot water. As the adage goes, those that live in glass houses should not throw stones. And secondly, because adding government mismanagement to school district mismanagement rings like “two wrongs don’t make a right.” Although the focus on administration rather than educators is logical, making all schools private is not a reality. Breaking up the school district means the creation of a bunch of little fiefdoms, more administrations, more chaos, disorder, and dysfunction... Sound familiar?

Public schools are not even part of the Mayor’s jurisdiction, as far as I know. Recall Ma Bell. Where we used to get one phone bill, then we got three: local, long distance, and cell phones with contracts to manage. Each taxed separately, of course. Now some of are back to one, but three times as much.

Pollution, traffic, airports, harbor all took second place to the first priority question, “How are you going to fix City Hall?” All the candidates had one over-riding answer, Hahn and his tip jar are a problem. It’s undisputed. They must know. They are the experts.

Walter Moore reports his accomplishments as follows in his newsletter:

GOOD NEWS! You can see yours truly, Walter Moore, go head-to-head against Alarcon, Hertzberg, Parks and Villaraigosa in the first real mayoral debate by visiting http://www.mayorno.com/Debates.html. Hey, with all this rain, I'm thinking you can have lunch at your computer and enjoy the show.

Thanks to Hal Netkin, and independent supporter who has
his own website regarding the election http://www.blogger.com/app/www.MayorNo.com),
those of you who weren't able to attend in person can see it on your computer. Hal, the Paul Revere of our century, took a camcorder to the debate, taped the whole thing, and then posted it at his website. The picture quality isn't what you'd call HDTV, but you can hear for yourself who said what. And while you're at it, think how amazing this is. Thanks to the internet, technology, and especially to Hal Netkin, we can enable any voter in this city -- or anywhere in the world, for that matter -- to see this debate for free, WITHOUT having to convince NBC Channel 4 or any other station to broadcast it. That is history in
the making, friends. Internet video isn't just for porn anymore.

And, FYI, I'm now over 70% in KABC 790's poll. We have the winning message, people; we just have to spread the word and show up.

Thanks again for all your support and encouragement. It means a lot to me, and we ARE going to win this and fix our city.

Cordially,
Walter Moore
L.A.'s Next Mayor
http://www.blogger.com/app/www.Mayor4U.com
Mayor4U Committee, P.O. Box 45705, L.A. CA 90045

For those of you so inclined, candidates too, your comments are welcome.

Mayor Sam does the numbers

2005-01-07T04:50:00.000-08:00

Moore Leads In Mayoral PollBy Mayor Sam
http://mayorsam.blogspot.com
Hang on. We're talking about an online poll on KABC talkradio's site . Given the stations rightward tilt, its not surprising. As well, web polls are not scientific and usually the most pissed off are the ones who bother to vote. Moore is well ahead of the pack, with Bitter Bernie coming in second, Huggy in third place and Hahn besting only Alarcon (who has no votes) and Villaraigosa. The stations morning man, Doug McIntyre , has offered praise for Moore and given McIntyre's solid anti-immigration stance, its no wonder Moore is doing as well.

Nonetheless, this can't be bad news for Walter!

Current results:
Moore - 40%
Parks - 21%
Hertzberg - 16%
Hahn - 13%
Villaraigosa - 9%
Alarcon - 0%

Kick their butts and save our mutts!

2005-01-07T04:43:00.000-08:00

Forty percent of the vote for yours truly [you], the people!

Did you know that KABC 790 is conducting a poll at its website, http://www.kabc.com/home.asp ? To take the poll and see the results, you go to that page and scroll down the right side. One of my supporters forwarded me the story below from a blogger. I was leading the poll with 40%! Woo hoo! As my supporter said, "Moore kicks butts and save mutts." I like it.

Now, the guys with the giant budgets will probably try to skew the poll by having programmers develop algorithms to vote for them over and over. So would you do me a favor and take a minute to vote?

In other news, last night's debate was fantastic. Voters finally got to see me in action, and see that they have a REAL alternative to the five career politicians running. Many, many people came up to me afterwards to shake my hand, get a "Moore is Better" bumper sticker, and ask how they can help. It was very gratifying.

Alas, the print media again showed its bias this morning. The L.A. Times didn't even bother to report that a debate took place, despite the fact that the paper sent a reporter to cover the debate -- a nice young man who introduced himself and asked about my campaign. And the Daily News made only perfunctory mention of my attendance. The good news is that those who attended will definitely be spreading the word.

Thanks again for your support and encouragement. We WILL fix this city. Remember: the election is not determined by the number of news stories or endorsements, nor by the number of dollars in a bank account, but instead by the number of votes. All we have to do is spread the word, and show up.

Walter Moore

Never mistake motion for action

2005-01-05T20:47:00.000-08:00

Deaton has been at the helm for a month now still no reduction in the number of employee retaliation claims at the Department of Water and Power.

Custodial employees that blew the whistle on contracts and gouging contractors have reported they are being constructively disciplined and terminated.

No evidence of Ron Deaton taking any interest in personnel claims or allegations of mismanagement. If Deaton did ask any questions, they have not in anyway impeded the stream of management-orchestrated personnel actions.

Hahn-appointed bureaucrats are giving these 20-year career employees turned whistleblowers a very hard time. There must be something malicious going on. Anybody feel intimidated or coerced?

Massacre at Fleishman-Hillard

2005-01-05T20:31:00.000-08:00

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/002909.html

LA Observed reported:

"Staffers at Fleishman-Hillard offices around California were told this afternoon that Doug Dowie, who had been on paid leave, is "no longer with the firm." If you've been paying attention to L.A. politics for the past year, you know that Dowie is the ex-managing editor of the Daily News who had headed Fleishman's Los Angeles office. Today's house-cleaning also swept up John Stodder and Steve Getzug, former Fleishman vice presidents who worked closely on the agency's controversial contract with the Department of Water and Power. Stodder reportedly was escorted from Fleishman's high-rise suite downtown (* actually he apparently left unescorted except for ex-colleagues sending him off with good wishes.)"

It takes two to tango. No pink slips at Water and Power. Just a revolving door of retirement packages and cursory bout of musical chairs. If tax payors insisted DWP managers and mayoral cronies had to pay their own legal fees, things might be a whole lot different.

Ron Deaton... Any changes yet?

2004-12-07T20:15:00.000-08:00

Well, it has been a week with Deaton at the helm. Anything new?

Root Cause Analysis?

2004-11-28T19:19:00.000-08:00

Audits and Governmental Efficiency Committee

COUNCILMEMBER WENDY GREUEL, CHAIR (greuel@council.lacity.org)
COUNCILMEMBER JACK WEISS (weiss@council.lacity.org)
COUNCILMEMBER JANICE HAHN (hahn@council.lacity.org)
LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT ILENE SHAPIRO (ishapiro@clerk.lacity.org)
Room 1060, City Hall
200 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
November 27, 2004

Re: AUDITS AND GOVERNMENTAL EFFICIENCY COMMITTEE
Special Meeting, 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, December 1, 2004

Honorable Council Members:

No amount of rules and enforcement can be as effective in changing a culture as having leadership that is relentless in its pursuit of the greater long-term public good. The methods used by the DWP, Airports, and Harbor departments should be as straight-forward as the services themselves. The methods should be simple, consistent, predictable, and easily understood throughout the organization. They are not. This is a management problem and should not be blamed on individuals. These systemic problems are management's responsibility. Without doubt, the duplicitous nature of management’s influence on the methods of doing business has degraded the products and services provided, as well as creating personnel issues within these departments.

My letter published in the August 13, 2004 issue of LA Weekly entitled "Whistleblowing," continues to express my concerns:

"Without exposure and widespread public support, the culture at the LADWP will not change. Sure, laws protect individual employees, but individuals do not stand a chance against the juggernaut of attorney-trained bureaucrats, unlimited time and access to the City Attorney’s Office, PR spin masters, contracted legal services, fact-finding committees, and union stalwarts — all accomplished defenders of the status quo. Consequently, employees are highly motivated to compromise their responsibility to act in the public’s best interest to avoid repercussion and loss of promotional opportunity."

Addressing waste, fraud, and abuse looks like a good start. But these are merely symptoms and do not address the fundamental issue, which is mismanagement. The mismanagement is due to the influence of outside interests and secret agendas which overshadows delivering the services in a manner consistent with the public’s best interests.

Bogus internal investigations and the use of rubber-stamp committees to reframe the spin on management’s methods are savvy political tools to maintain the status quo and to protect incumbents steeped in cronyism. The leaders at the DWP are purported experienced professionals; many of them, such as Thomas Hokinson and Hal D. Lindsey, are accomplished attorneys. To suggest retraining as a remedy to mismanagement is a diversion. Management knows the laws, and they know their responsibilities. They have chosen to use their high-level positions, talents and influence to skirt them. Their leadership has reflected negatively in the merit systems established, on the culture within the department, and on the actions of some 8,000 employees preoccupied with intimidation and retaliation for whistle-blowing.

Further, the Commerce, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, made up of Tony Cardenas, Janice Hahn , and Cindy Miscikowski, made it very clear to acting General Manager Henry Martinez that management behavior reflected poorly on and threatened the integrity of the Department, its employees, and the entire city.

These managers need to be held accountable. Not to take definitive action ensnares this committee in the same mire of complacency that surrounds the offices of the City Controller and the City Attorney.

Many employees have found it necessary to bring their first-hand experiences to the attention of boards and committees outside the influence of DWP management. This, too, is symptomatic of the same problem. The fact that the union is not representing these individuals and that employees are not using traditional in-house resolution avenues is alarming. It means that the union has found it can better influence the terms and conditions of labor through appointments and political and managerial maneuvering than through the traditional representation of employees. The employees have realized that in-house resolution processes are no longer effective.

Union influence on boards and in management can be seen in the union's recent entry and control of safety administration, retirement system administration, engineers and architects, exempt employees, and healthcare, etc. In each of these areas, ask, "Can the union be held accountable for a failed or substandard performance?" The resounding answer is "no." Legitimate management should know that accountability for these areas cannot be transferred. Under the current law, if an employee is hurt or killed on the job, management is culpable. Consequently, in each of these instances, management has given the union a risk-free benefit.

Career employees that have voiced their concerns at various city boards and council meetings have found themselves facing the Civil Service Commission and/or the Employee Relations Board. These management-orchestrated personnel actions illustrate dysfunctional management behavior, and intimidation of the workforce and result in degraded services and the waste of city time, resources, and talent.

The nexus of management methods, personnel actions, and union influence falls clearly under management control. Therefore, management is solely responsible and should be held accountable.

I am a 20-year career DWP employee familiar with the culture, politics, and players; a professor of management at CSULA; and a motivated change agent. I have a vested interest in seeking long-lasting reform and improvement. I have plenty to contribute to this committee and to the city of Los Angeles, and I have a vision for a successful reformation plan. If you are interested in system and process improvement, I would welcome the opportunity to participate in your efforts.

I am unable to attend this particular meeting as it is in conflict with a pending case of alleged management-orchestrated retaliation being heard at the Employee Relations Board. However, I would be extremely happy to meet with you at your convenience.

Please let me know how I can best participate. I would like to post your reply at http://www.civilactionpress.blogspot.com/. I hope to hear from you soon.

Sincerely,

Daniel N. Shrader, M.B.A.

Attachment:
Shrader, Daniel N. August 13, 2004. Letters: WHISTLEBLOWING. LA Weekly. http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/38/letters.php.

WHISTLEBLOWING

Jeffrey Anderson’s article "The Black Avenger" [July 23–29] cites the City Attorney’s Office’s use of secret settlements and confidentiality clauses to hide systemic discrimination, harassment and retaliation as an alternative to management reform at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP). LADWP Assistant General Manager Thomas Hokinson was unable to recall burying mismanagement allegations while he was chief assistant city attorney — no surprise considering workplace bullying has gotten sophisticated and management retaliation is the leading claim at the utility.

The LADWP plays musical chairs to mask these increasing claims. Although responsibility over Human Resources and Labor Relations passed from Raman Raj to Thomas Hokinson, and then to Hal D. Lindsey (retired from Edison) — all of whom were eventually promoted to assistant general managers — tactics to thwart employee claims remain paramount.

Without exposure and widespread public support, the culture at the LADWP will not change. Sure, laws protect individual employees, but individuals do not stand a chance against the juggernaut of attorney-trained bureaucrats, unlimited time and access to the City Attorney’s Office, PR spin masters, contracted legal services, fact-finding committees, and union stalwarts — all accomplished defenders of the status quo. Consequently, employees are highly motivated to compromise their responsibility to act in the public’s best interest to avoid repercussion and loss of promotional opportunity.

Since 1981, every grievance, arbitration, lawsuit and contract for legal services, including every one of the high-dollar settlements covered in "The Black Avenger," has crossed the Board of Water and Power Commissioners for approval. The Board, having recently mandated "Mutual Respect" and "Workplace Violence" seminars for each employee, cannot claim to be unaware of the rift between enlisted cronies and career civil servants. The real question is: Did they turn a blind eye to it or did they mandate these seminars in an effort to re-frame executive-orchestrated retaliation and bullying as a supervisory issue?

Charter reform and manipulation of civil-service classification and selection processes have exacerbated the problem by increasing the latitude and number of non-civil-service employees serving at the pleasure of management and beholden to their closely held personal and political agendas.

Is the situation out of control? Civil service is characterized by low turnover designed to prevent spoils-system graft and corruption. A monopoly, too, is characterized by low turnover. The LADWP is both a civil-service organization and a monopoly. But the high turnover at the management level indicates that the organizational focus has shifted from public service to opportunists jockeying for personal power. Strife in the workplace, reduced output and higher costs are a result of a preoccupied, self-serving leadership.

By their rhetoric, city administrators lay blame on contractors and understudies. City leaders and their blindly following minions seem to have forgotten that they are charged with a higher standard of behavior, embodied in the city oath, to provide and ensure continuous, ethical, uncompromised, cost-effective service to the citizens of Los Angeles. For their public service, Angelinos entrust them with uncompromised authority, good salaries, benefits and civic honors.

There is a consequence to violating and spinning away the public trust. Therein lies the crux of the problem. The regulatory agencies of this administration — the Board, Controller’s Office, Ethics Commission, Civil Service Commission, City Attorney’s Office and Mayor’s Office — continue to support the status quo, a derelict and dysfunctional culture. Consequently, these internal policing agencies must be the first priority for reform.

I hope that the recent exposure and awareness of widespread city mismanagement, specifically at the LADWP, will result in a recall of the public’s trust.

DWP Lions, tigers, and bears... Oh my!

2004-11-25T23:01:00.000-08:00

Management claims Dorothy and company are disgruntled

It seems Dorothy and the rest of the employees are getting pretty damned fed up with the smoke, mirrors, intimidation, and bullying at DWP.

Management mis-labels them disgruntled workers and sends them packing. But they’re tenacious and keep coming back. Will Deaton set them free and bestow a heart upon the tin man, a diploma upon the scarecrow, and m-m-mettle upon the lion?

Deaton could throw water on a couple of witches and goblins plaguing high places and set free some brains, heart, and courage to reform and influence the rest. Things just might get a whole lot better.

Unlikely perhaps, but wouldn't that be something?

The Great and Powerful Deaton

2004-11-25T19:17:00.000-08:00

Deaton behind the curtain at the Energy Control Center (ECC).

In response to James Nash’s article in the Daily News, “Power broker Deaton approved as DWP head.” (http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20954~2557009,00.html#)

The great and powerful Deaton behind the curtain at the Energy Control Center (ECC).

I, for one, hope more than anything that Deaton can straighten things out at DWP. However, we know that no amount of marketing perfume can mask the rot that is eating away at the gut of this organization and its employees.

I anticipate that Deaton will have the usual entourage of Deatonites and cronies that GMs bring in. We hope that he will change that ugly minion custom and appoint just a few good-old-fashioned change-agents (like us) to bring about reform from the inside out. It would be like Gadfly maggots on gangrene (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1220130.htm ).

I hope that Deaton with an understanding of civil service and a spirit of getting things done through others will demonstrate to existing ex-Edison and attorney-minded despots, that it is much easier to lead through empowering creative employees rather than to drive them into submission with intimidation and bullying.

It would not take much to bring about reform. We are so sick of being sick. Union-led self-centered management is a bottleneck. DWP culture is so far off course with special interest that 8,000 employees take no chances making decisions. They send everything up the chain of command to make sure they won’t be held responsible. It reduces output of 8,000 employees to the manipulations of a few unscrupulous cronies and their minions preoccupied with spinning tales, personnel issues, legal battles, and stomping out whistlers.

If Deaton is truly a powerful guy, he will waste no time in getting the 8,000 employees back on track and producing again. Maybe that one year golden parachute is the license and freedom to can a few unnecessary General Managers and appoint some real Civil Servants. Now, that wouldn't that be a grand turn of events for us all, wouldn't it?

Maybe Deaton, like the Wizard of OZ, will empower us to use what we already have to get us back where we belong. Don't go getting all blurry-eyed. There is absolutely no precedent for this kind of optimism.

Your thoughts?

Do you doubt Deaton will bring reform?

2004-11-22T22:06:00.000-08:00

Ron Deaton

With few exceptions, the LADWP is packed with cronies and their minions from the Board down through many levels of management. They come and stay and invite their friends in droves.

The ability of leadership to convey a clear, logical, unifying call to action, seems to be a thing of the past. Now they can be heaped into two big piles, those that are featherbedding for themselves and those that are featherbedding for somebody else. It would be no surprise that the city's other two proprietary [non-tax based revenue generating] agencies have been infiltrated in much the same manner.

The epicenter of the political machine in Los Angeles is this administration and organized labor. The decisions and actions only “secondarily” benefit the citizens of Los Angeles. The decisions primarily benefit this administration's biggest supporters: the Longshoremen, Local 18, Local 347, and the construction trades – those that pay – to name a few. The number of self-represented employee claims against the LADWP management demonstrates that the union has found political influence a more effective way to get appointments and to control the terms and conditions of labor. More rewarding than the representation of its own membership.

No one can claim partisan politics for failures in this town. The control of Los Angeles is far and wide and deep. Ever wonder why business friendly leaders are not in the LA Times? As far back as September 1909, the Los Angeles Times had a run in with the union and has never since been the same. The scary part is that with very few exceptions our situation has been the result of almost a century of single party politics and oligarchic control. Remember the old street cars we buried? Did you see the movie Chinatown?

It doesn't matter whether you choose Hahn or Villaraigosa or any of the City Council members, the end result seems to be the same. The examples of cronyism are obvious – quantity not quality. Raman Raj, former AGM at LADWP, is rumored to be Villaraigosa's guy. Thomas Hokinson, present AGM, is rumored to be Hahn's guy. S. David Freeman, David Wiggs and Henry Martinez, former and standing GMs, have demonstrated their allegiance in savvy ways. In the wings -- Ed Miller, Hal Lindsey, and a host of others...

If they would appoint true leaders, they would not need so many consultants or personal services contracts to keep these ex officios on the payroll, now would they? Larry Keller of the Harbor Department and Raman Raj and soon to be David Wiggs at LADWP seem to be indicative of the practice.

Did Hahn finally pick a peach from the lemon tree? Albeit I have never met the man, I have no evidence to support Hahn's latest recommendation of Ron Deaton or the Board's big rubber stamp will mean anything different than maintaining the status quo. We must assume like Laura Chick and the rest, Mr. Deaton, top Chief Legislative Analyst and most powerful official, is aware of the pandering that is going on at citizens expense. In the absence of any obvious action on his part to have stopped the behavior, we have to assume his appointment will not be any different from any other of Hahn's appointments. We don’t see Deaton accepting the position at the pre-Wiggs rate, do we? The Board is already pushing for Wiggs as a consultant. How long has he been out? Change starts at the top. So far all we have seen is musical chairs. Consequently, there is no probity to support legitimate reform. Until these illegitimate bureaucrats are removed, nothing will change.

The city's recent big financially encumbering decisions and transfers into city coffers indicate that the other proprietary organizations have experienced the same debilitating influences.

If this city is not business friendly, efforts to expand the harbor and airport are superfluous. If we make special concessions to the movie industry, without reducing the overall cost of commerce to everyone in this city, it will transfer increased costs to the rest. And then more will leave. It is a death spiral.

This city's renowned committee-sanctioned gerrymandered decision-making process is the reason businesses are leaving. The exodus of the movie industry is just another above the radar. I see more and more vacant buildings and empty store fronts, don't you? The city redevelopment efforts discussed in news articles are attempts to keep abandoned property from being so noticeable.

In the long-term, establishing a business friendly environment for big growth oriented higher-tier employers rather than bringing in residents and lower-tier employers would have been the appropriate revitalizing choice. However, I think the council knew there would be no higher-tier takers. Holding out "undesirable" employers because they are non-union stifles competition. The action sends a clear message to other employers – Los Angeles is not a business friendly place and it does not support an openly competitive marketplace. The actions drive up overall living costs for every single citizen. Supporting residential building, retail, and restaurants without establishing and supporting a strong base of globally-competitive employers is the same as flushing out the last of an empty oil well with salt water. When oil riggers do that, it clearly signals the end of a run.

Compare the economic growth of Los Angeles to our local competitors: San Diego, Ventura, and Orange County. Do you remember when these bedroom communities used to commute to Los Angeles to do business? Look who has the bedroom communities and the lower-tier businesses now. It is obvious our representatives have not been supporting a Los Angeles revival. Then again, if the big three proprietary organizations don't shape up we won't be able to support a revitalization anyway.

Hahn, brinkmanship, and recovery

2004-11-20T21:36:00.000-08:00

Ships in queue

The Mayor is the highest authority. And rightfully so, he is “elected by” and “held accountable to” the citizens. No doubt, the citizens will take care of the Mayor. However, if we fail to hold EVERY city official accountable, we will propagate the same problems again and again.

Recall the new city Charter that expanded mayoral power to make exempt appointments and to transfer loyalists into strategic positions, all of whom serve at the pleasure of their appointee. Each mayoral appointment makes decisions in the Mayor's interest. Of course, there is a Board review and approval process – of more mayoral appointees. It is easy to see this elaborate rubber-stamping process is to obscure what most know as a simple quid pro quo arrangement. In the old days, we found this arrangement led to corruption. We called it the “spoils system” and responsible civic leaders developed the “Civil Service System” to combat it.

Civil Service has been eroding for years. The changes to the Charter made them official. The changes enacted during the previous administration were exploited in this administration. The spoils system was reestablished through minion-minded appointments to the city’s oversight and policy-making bodies. The fruits of this administration in this environment (vesting too much authority in the mayor) have led to a brinkmanship pursuit of special interests – to the point of corruption and chaos.

It would be a mistake for citizens to focus only on the mayor. There is an old axiom in business: “First rate managers, hire first rate managers. Second rate managers hire third rate minions.” The truth of this axiom can be seen throughout the city in ineffective boondoggle political marketing efforts at DWP: Nobody uses the electric vehicle charging stations. Did they finally get Lopez Canyon landfill generation system to work? How about the high-visibility photo-voltaic system that has to be plugged in to line power in order to function? Anthony Office Building condemned for mold and donated to the school district. Pasadena Test Lab project is way over budget. These examples can be seen in airports and harbor, too.

Running electricity to power cargo ships waiting to be unloaded to reduce pollution is not a solution. It merely addresses a symptom of mismanagement and mayoral attempts at diversion. Yes, ships pollute. However, the real problem is the ships are taking too long to unload and their engines plume tons of smoke waiting to be unloaded. We don’t need to pay for high-voltage water-proof extension cords. In case you don’t know, water and electricity are not a good mix.

Notwithstanding mayoral serfs have paid millions to spin-masters and consultants to say otherwise, harbor managers need to eliminate one very big bottleneck. The bottleneck is not technology or infrastructure – we rebuilt the harbor, remember? The real problem is a conflict of interest. And here is how it works: The union objective is to control the terms and conditions of labor. The mayor and his minions are a reflection of that conflicted interest. Artificially constrained labor creates the bottleneck. The bottleneck justifies outrageous wages, benefits, control, and influence for union gate keepers. Mayoral homage justifies efforts to keep it that way – protect the concession. Ultimately, the price of this boondoggle is borne by the consumer and the citizens alike.

The simple solution, of course, would be to employ labor resources required to meet the average harbor demand. Recognize that labor is a market-driven supply-vs.-demand commodity. Hold overall total labor expense constant – no net change. Propose an across the board top-to-bottom percentage-based wage and/or benefit cut to pay for the additional labor necessary to maximize utilization of recent investment in harbor infrastructure and technology. Of course labor is not going to like this proposal at all. In response, focus employees on the solution by inviting them to minimize the cuts through viable innovation and changes in existing policies that accomplish the same end.

Just to give you some idea of how out of whack we are here. The average annual wage in Los Angeles is $44,000 (derived from the 2nd quarter 2004 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports for Los Angeles – http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cewqtr.toc.html). Notwithstanding the wages of harbor supervision and management, an “entry-level” dockworker wage is 33 percent higher than the average wage earner in Los Angeles. August 2004 Iww.org reported that there were over 250,000 applicants for 3,000 casual entry level dockworker jobs paying $28.00 an hour (http://lists.iww.org/pipermail/iww-news/2004-August/006095.html). We could have double the amount of employees at half the wage ($14 per hour) and still have a 40 to 1 applicant to job ratio. It would surely put a dent in unemployment. I’d venture to say it would reduce crime too.

Our present course of idling ships, containers, cranes, railcars and trucks is literally watching our investment and resources go up in smoke. Our port should be a first choice among other developing west coast ports. Ships are already rerouting through other U.S. ports. It is just a matter of time before NAFTA permits viable competitive alternatives around Los Angeles and through U.S. borders. If Mexico can unload a ship in three days and truckers can get those containers to destination in one or two days, no shipper will wait in the harbor for eight. Work transferred to other ports is the same as handing over revenue streams to our competitors forever. If we fail to improve the present situation, our competitors will use the revenues to pay for further development, improvement, and growth. Our services have grown so self-serving, costly, and inefficient that we are fostering our own extinction.

If it were just a matter of clearing the smoke, a viable solution would be to start dismantling the piers and cranes and shipping them to Mexico. At least we will recoup some of our harbor infrastructure development investment. Shippers will find more cost-efficient avenues to unload their ships. Transporters will get goods to market faster. Consumers will pay less. And consequently the ships will not be waiting in the harbor spewing tons of pollutants.

Of course there is a lot of revenue coming through the port, airports and DWP and it is in our best community interest to keep it that way. The longer-sighted solution should focus on keeping the business here through efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and focus on the citizens (the stockholders and customers).

The interim transition is likened to dealing with any infestation of weeds, pests, or vermin, we need to be thorough and resolute else they grow back. Hold officials accountable from the mayor on down through his minions. The results of illegitimate management appointments demonstrates the old union adage “a manger is a manager is a manager” is not true. Hold these illegitimate managers accountable. Remove officials that have mismanaged city resources and have not acted in a manner serving in the public best interest. Re-establish the safeguards in the Charter, and ultimately establish a new cost-effective mutually-beneficial equilibrium for labor, management, and the citizens at large with a focus on the greater public good.

Your thoughts?

At long last - Hahn the nexus

2004-11-18T21:09:00.000-08:00

What crack?
It was just a matter of time...

"All the way to the top"
http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20951~2541662,00.html#

Wrongdoing in DWP's P.R. scandal goes to Mayor's Office and other city officials
The $4.2 million in overbilling that City Controller Laura Chick has found in the Department of Water and Power's contract with the Fleishman-Hillard public relations firm raises serious questions about the leadership of Mayor James Hahn.
The $3 million-a-year contract was initiated in 1998 by then-Mayor Richard Riordan and then-DWP chief David Freeman for advice in deregulating the city's utility and competing for electricity customers in the open market.
It was a waste of money then, and when deregulation was abandoned, it should have been terminated. But that isn't what Hahn and the bosses at the DWP did. They found that $3 million to Fleishman-Hillard and $2 million through it to another friendly firm, the Lee Andrews Group, bought them a lot of favors at taxpayers' expense.
Chick's seven-month, $175,000 audit has cut a trail right to the heart of the scandal that threatens to bring down Hahn. It also offers the chance for real reform of the DWP, which has squandered untold millions of dollars of the public's money in inappropriate if not outright dishonest ways over the years.
In picking up on Chick's audit, county and federal investigators - already hot on the trail of pay-to-play contracting practices in the Hahn administration - need only follow the trail of this betrayal of the public interest to Room 303 in City Hall, the office of the mayor.
Chick called this "the worst tomfoolery I've ever seen," and urged Fleishman-Hillard to pay back the money. The management of this international P.R. giant should waste no time in doing so.
But the audit's real value is that auditors sketched the outline of collusion between the Mayor's Office and top DWP officials to use Fleishman-Hillard's expertise to cover up their own failings, their own misconduct - and stick the public with the bill
There is nothing in the audit or anywhere else in the record that suggests that the P.R. firm was doing anything but the bidding of city officials. Ostensibly, the firm was paid to promote the utility's services and policies. Why a monopoly with its own huge P.R. staff needed such costly advice has never been explained. That's because the explanation would be unacceptable.
The simple truth is that Fleishman-Hillard was there to help the mayor and the DWP look good - even if they were up to no good. Sometimes the advice came as free pro-bono help, such as throwing the mayor's annual media holiday party or sponsoring his "One Book, One City L.A." campaign. Sometimes it was billed at up to $350-an-hour, as when Chick first challenged the contract in 2002 and the firm provided damage control.
This scandal isn't about a greedy contractor bilking the city. DWP officials signed off on every bill. They were getting what they wanted. So was the mayor.
What's so extraordinary about Hahn is that he's so shameless. He actually wanted to share in the limelight of Chick's audit and had the brass to send a letter to the city attorney expressing his outrage over Fleishman-Hillard's billing practices.
"Sorry isn't good enough," the mayor said. No, it isn't, but it would still be nice to hear people say it when they've done wrong.

Why couldn't City officials just say no?

2004-11-17T04:27:00.000-08:00

http://ktla.trb.com/news/local/ktla-111604dwp_lat,0,6860657,print.story?coll=ktla-news-1

Fleishman-Hillard is in business to make money. That's what businesses do, right? City officials are supposed to use the lowest cost responsible bidder. City officials can cancel a contract or award away from the lowest cost responsible bidder.

City officials wrote the contract. City officials administered the contract. City officials used the services for years. City officials approved the purchases. The Controller's Office paid for the services rendered for years.

After six years of abuse, Laura Chick and City officials (contract users) get the idea to blame Fleishman-Hillard for not managing the City's money...

Why aren't the city officials held responsible? Aren't they responsible for prudent use of city resources in the best interests of the citizens?

Do we need a contractor to monitor our City officials? Isn't it supposed to be the other way around?

Should we question the use of the City Attorney's office attempt to tansfer blame to Fleishman-Hillard?

Isn't this like blaming the government for minting the stolen money?

What do you think?

What do you think about LA politics?

2004-11-16T20:18:00.000-08:00

So many articles about corruption and mismanagement... They can't be all wrong. Does it seem strange that it is all about investigations, committees, and appointments and never about holding city managers and officials accountable?

There seems to be one set of priorities for citizens and businesses -- clammering for education, jobs, hospitals, less traffic conjestion, city costs too high, and pot holes too deep.

And a completely different set of priorities from the Mayor and City Council: Build a new harbor! Get more police officers! Build a new airport! Rebuild a new river! Let's put my guy on the Board, and, uh, my guy can replace my former guy, and, uh, my guy can run DWP...

Well, we are not all longshoremen, policemen, pilots, builders, or friends with connections. How are these things going to provide education for our kids, jobs for our citizens, access to hospitals, trauma centers, and transportation?

In their defense, City Council did give Hahn a little static over the additional tax for more police. By golly, it must be election time!

This coming city election, are you seriously considering a total turnover? Walter Moore might be in the right place at the right time. What do you think?

Tapping DWP Retirement Funds

2004-11-11T08:42:00.000-08:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/51/news-anderson.php

LA WEEKLY
NOVEMBER 12 - 18, 2004
Tapping Pension Funds: DWP may end up giving less to workers’ retirement plan
by Jeffrey Anderson

A CRITICAL VOTE next Wednesday by the Department of Water and Power’s Retirement Board could reduce the DWP’s contribution to its pension fund and threaten long-term retirement benefits.

The board’s two elected members were surprised to learn of the proposal last week, and how the DWP is dealing with a drain on resources caused by payouts to management-level employees and financial assistance to Mayor Jim Hahn’s administration to help pay off the city’s debt. ...

The Rise of Empire

2004-11-04T04:37:00.000-08:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/50/features-anderson.php

The DWP has hired private eyes to follow janitors who complain about shoddy cleaning supplies — and a $25 million monopoly contract by Jeffrey Anderson

Sandra Miranda remembers the little warehouse on Lamar Street, near the San Antonio Winery in downtown Los Angeles. Empire Cleaning Supply started there as a mom-and-pop operation that sold floor stripper and mops and the like to the city since the Great Depression. As a custodian at the Department of Water and Power since 1985, Miranda was familiar with Empire. To Miranda, and others who cleaned for a living, Empire products were nothing special and maybe even less than average

Deny, Deny, Deny, ...

2004-11-03T22:50:00.000-08:00

Crack? What crack? Prove it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with City Hall...

"I think people are smart enough to look at the facts," Hahn said. "They know me. They know what I stand for, that what I do is in the best interest of the city. " Anyone who alleges otherwise has to prove that and I don't think they can."

Another Call For Reform

2004-11-03T21:12:00.000-08:00

With few exceptions, the LADWP is packed with cronies and their minions from the Board down through many levels of management. They come and stay and invite their friends in droves. The ability of leadership to convey a clear, logical, unifying call to action, seems to be a thing of the past. Now they can be heaped into two big piles, those that are featherbedding for themselves and those that are featherbedding for somebody else. It would be no surprise that the city's other two proprietary [non-tax based revenue generating] agencies have been infiltrated in much the same manner.

The epicenter of the political machine in Los Angeles is this administration and organized labor. The decisions and actions only “secondarily” benefit the citizens of Los Angeles. The decisions primarily benefit this administration's biggest supporters: the Longshoremen, Local 18, Local 347, and the construction trades – those that pay – to name a few. The number of self-represented employee claims against the LADWP management demonstrates that the union has found political influence a more effective way to get appointments and to control the terms and conditions of labor. More rewarding than the representation of its own membership.

No one can claim partisan politics for failures in this town. The control of Los Angeles is far and wide and deep. Ever wonder why business friendly leaders are not in the LA Times? As far back as September 1909, the Los Angeles Times had a run in with the union and has never since been the same. The scary part is that with very few exceptions our situation has been the result of almost a century of single party politics and oligarchic control. Remember the old street cars we buried? Did you see the movie Chinatown?

It doesn't matter whether you choose Hahn or Villaraigosa or any of the City Council members, the end result seems to be the same. The examples of cronyism are obvious – quantity not quality. Raman Raj, former AGM at LADWP, is rumored to be Villaraigosa's guy. Thomas Hokinson, present AGM, is rumored to be Hahn's guy. S. David Freeman, David Wiggs and Henry Martinez, former and standing GMs, have demonstrated their allegiance in savvy ways. In the wings -- Ed Miller, Hal Lindsey, and a host of others... If they would appoint true leaders, they would not need so many consultants or personal services contracts to keep these ex officios on the payroll, now would they? Larry Keller of the Harbor Department and Raman Raj and soon to be David Wiggs at LADWP seem to be indicative of the practice.

Did Hahn finally pick a peach from the lemon tree? Albeit I have never met the man, I have no evidence to support Hahn's latest recommendation of Ron Deaton or the Board's big rubber stamp will mean anything different than maintaining the status quo. We must assume like Laura Chick and the rest, Mr. Deaton, top Chief Legislative Analyst and most powerful official, is aware of the pandering that is going on at citizens expense. In the absence of any obvious action on his part to have stopped the behavior, we have to assume his appointment will not be any different from any other of Hahn's appointments. We don’t see Deaton accepting the position at the pre-Wiggs rate, do we? The Board is already pushing for Wiggs as a consultant. How long has he been out? Change starts at the top. So far all we have seen is musical chairs. Consequently, there is no probity to support legitimate reform. Until these illegitimate bureaucrats are removed, nothing will change. The city's recent big financially encumbering decisions and transfers into city coffers indicate that the other proprietary organizations have experienced the same debilitating influences.

If this city is not business friendly, efforts to expand the harbor and airport are superfluous. If we make special concessions to the movie industry, without reducing the overall cost of commerce to everyone in this city, it will transfer increased costs to the rest. And then more will leave. It is a death spiral.

This city's renowned committee-sanctioned gerrymandered decision-making process is the reason businesses are leaving. The exodus of the movie industry is just another above the radar. I see more and more vacant buildings and empty store fronts, don't you? The city redevelopment efforts discussed in news articles are attempts to keep abandoned property from being so noticeable. In the long-term, establishing a business friendly environment for big growth oriented higher-tier employers rather than bringing in residents and lower-tier employers would have been the appropriate revitalizing choice. However, I think the council knew there would be no higher-tier takers. Holding out "undesirable" employers because they are non-union stifles competition. The action sends a clear message to other employers – Los Angeles is not a business friendly place and it does not support an openly competitive marketplace. The actions drive up overall living costs for every single citizen. Supporting residential building, retail, and restaurants without establishing and supporting a strong base of globally-competitive employers is the same as flushing out the last of an empty oil well with salt water. When oil riggers do that, it clearly signals the end of a run.

Compare the economic growth of Los Angeles to our local competitors: San Diego, Ventura, and Orange County. Do you remember when these bedroom communities used to commute to Los Angeles to do business? Look who has the bedroom communities and the lower-tier businesses now. It is obvious our representatives have not been supporting a Los Angeles revival. Then again, if the big three proprietary organizations don't shape up we won't be able to support a revitalization anyway.

Hahn's quick fix

2004-10-31T21:06:00.000-08:00

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20951~2504220,00.html?search=filter

Mayor's bureaucratic shuffle poses a challenge for the council
Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn has a problem. Actually, with ongoing criminal investigations of his administration and a grueling re-election campaign in front of him, he has many problems, but the biggest one at the moment is the Department of Water and Power.
For years, city officials have used the DWP as their personal piggy bank, a practice Hahn has made his specialty. But after pushing through an unpopular 11 percent hike in water rates, the DWP is under newfound scrutiny. People are asking questions about the way it spends their money, about the vacuum of leadership at the top, about the politicized commission that oversees it.
Creative as ever, Hahn has found a solution - the city's one and only bureaucratic genius, Ron Deaton.
Deaton, the city's chief legislative analyst, has for more than a decade been the city's most powerful political figure while making the inner workings of City Hall impervious to anyone on the outside.
Now Hahn wants him to work his magic over at the DWP. Deaton's mission would be tricky: Cook the books so that the utility can continue to ratchet up rates and funnel more money into the city's general fund while concealing the waste and bureaucratic decadence that might enrage the public.
Of course, should Deaton head over to the DWP, who would take over his old job of running City Hall?
Hahn seems to have a plan for that one, too. Term-limited City Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski has been campaigning for the job. Having shepherded the mayor's bogus $11 billion LAX "modernization" plan through the council, she's proved herself a loyal soldier - loyal, that is, to Hahn's business-as-usual.
What remains to be seen is whether the City Council plays along and approves his changes. To do so would prove that the council is as much part of the problem as the mayor, Deaton and Miscikowski. All three have spent almost their entire adult lives on the city's payroll protecting and serving the insider culture at the expense of the city itself.
We'll soon will see whether the council stands with these three and the generation of failed leadership they represent, or whether it stands with the people and the hopes for a greater Los Angeles for tomorrow.

City adviser Deaton tapped to lead DWP or else

2004-10-28T20:59:00.000-07:00

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200~20954~2498756,00.html

By Rick Orlov and James Nash Staff Writers

In a major City Hall shake-up, Mayor James Hahn on Thursday nominated one of the most powerful city figures -- Chief Legislative Analyst Ron Deaton -- to take over as head of the Department of Water and Power.
Hahn told the City Council he is nominating Deaton to take over for David Wiggs, who advised the mayor he is resigning from his $311,362-a-year job as the DWP's general manager as he recuperates from cancer. Deaton, who earns $286,724 a year now, has for nearly two decades wielded enormous power over city affairs as the City Council's adviser.

Dirty Laundry

2004-10-01T20:18:00.000-07:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/45/news-anderson.php

DWP’s deep cultural problems get a public airing, but who will fix them?by Jeffrey Anderson

A procession of Department of Water and Power employees seized the floor and railed against harassment and retaliation recently at a Board of Commissioners meeting, causing jaws to drop and commissioners to avert their eyes. Ordinarily the board conducts the DWP’s weighty business in a dispassionate manner, sparing little time for discussion about mistreatment of its workers, but this meeting featured a whiff of the DWP’s dirty laundry being aired out.

Not in My Neighborhood Council

2004-08-25T20:38:00.000-07:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/40/features-greene.php

What can save L.A.’s broken neighborhood councils? by Robert Greene

The question before the house is whether to leave the tables as they are or come up with some new kind of arrangement.
Not the sort of

WHISTLEBLOWING

2004-08-13T20:27:00.000-07:00

Jeffrey Anderson’s article “The Black Avenger” [July 23–29] cites the City Attorney’s Office’s use of secret settlements and confidentiality clauses to hide systemic discrimination, harassment and retaliation as an alternative to management reform at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP). LADWP Assistant General Manager Thomas Hokinson was unable to recall burying mismanagement allegations while he was chief assistant city attorney — no surprise considering workplace bullying has gotten sophisticated and management retaliation is the leading claim at the utility.

The LADWP plays musical chairs to mask these increasing claims. Although responsibility over Human Resources and Labor Relations passed from Raman Raj to Thomas Hokinson, and then to Hal D. Lindsey (retired from Edison) — all of whom were eventually promoted to assistant general managers — tactics to thwart employee claims remain paramount.
Without exposure and widespread public support, the culture at the LADWP will not change. Sure, laws protect individual employees, but individuals do not stand a chance against the juggernaut of attorney-trained bureaucrats, unlimited time and access to the City Attorney’s Office, PR spin masters, contracted legal services, fact-finding committees, and union stalwarts — all accomplished defenders of the status quo. Consequently, employees are highly motivated to compromise their responsibility to act in the public’s best interest to avoid repercussion and loss of promotional opportunity.

Since 1981, every grievance, arbitration, lawsuit and contract for legal services, including every one of the high-dollar settlements covered in “The Black Avenger,” has crossed the Board of Water and Power Commissioners for approval. The Board, having recently mandated “Mutual Respect” and “Workplace Violence” seminars for each employee, cannot claim to be unaware of the rift between enlisted cronies and career civil servants. The real question is: Did they turn a blind eye to it or did they mandate these seminars in an effort to re-frame executive-orchestrated retaliation and bullying as a supervisory issue?

Charter reform and manipulation of civil-service classification and selection processes have exacerbated the problem by increasing the latitude and number of non-civil-service employees serving at the pleasure of management and beholden to their closely held personal and political agendas.

Is the situation out of control? Civil service is characterized by low turnover designed to prevent spoils-system graft and corruption. A monopoly, too, is characterized by low turnover. The LADWP is both a civil-service organization and a monopoly. But the high turnover at the management level indicates that the organizational focus has shifted from public service to opportunists jockeying for personal power. Strife in the workplace, reduced output and higher costs are a result of a preoccupied, self-serving leadership.

By their rhetoric, city administrators lay blame on contractors and understudies. City leaders and their blindly following minions seem to have forgotten that they are charged with a higher standard of behavior, embodied in the city oath, to provide and ensure continuous, ethical, uncompromised, cost-effective service to the citizens of Los Angeles. For their public service, Angelenos entrust them with uncompromised authority, good salaries, benefits and civic honors.

There is a consequence to violating and spinning away the public trust. Therein lies the crux of the problem. The regulatory agencies of this administration — the Board, Controller’s Office, Ethics Commission, Civil Service Commission, City Attorney’s Office and Mayor’s Office — continue to support the status quo, a derelict and dysfunctional culture. Consequently, these internal policing agencies must be the first priority for reform.

I hope that the recent exposure and awareness of widespread city mismanagement, specifically at the LADWP, will result in a recall of the public’s trust.

Out of the Darkness

2004-08-13T20:23:00.000-07:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/38/news-anderson.php

Some city leaders call for DWP to shed light on secret settlements. . . some don’t. by Jeffrey Anderson

Responding to the L.A. Weekly’s recent exposé of rampant discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation against minority and women employees at the Department of Water and Power, City Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski called last week for a review of working conditions at the DWP and an end to secret out-of-court settlements.

Who Will Stop This?

2004-07-23T20:43:00.000-07:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/35/features-pelisek.php

DWP commissioners respond to crisis of mistreated workers by Christine Pelisek

We asked the Board of Commissioners of the Department of Water and Power about discrimination at the DWP and the city attorney’s use of secret settlements in racial- and sexual-harassment lawsuits by employees.

DWP’s Public Relations Boomerang

2004-07-23T20:40:00.000-07:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/35/features-greene.php

The plug is pulled on Fleishman Hillard’s power by Robert Greene

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power was so unpopular, it hired the public-relations firm of Fleishman-Hillard to improve its image. Trying to figure out why is sort of like a metaphysical brainteaser. It was unpopular because it raised water rates while at the same time arrogantly frittering away the money it got from customers on things like a $100,000 bash to celebrate the reopening of Los Angeles City Hall and $75,000 to sponsor the L.A. Memorial Coliseum. And blowing more than $20 million, over six years, to Fleishman-Hillard, to improve its image.

Power Crisis II

2004-07-05T20:34:00.000-07:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/33/news-bradley.php

New problems could short out Dave Freeman and his DWP legacyby Bill Bradley

THE L.A. DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER'S glistening new reputation as a "good guy" Green utility is fading in the summer sun. Despite extremely lofty goals, the DWP's solar-electric program has gone into a sudden and hard-to-pin-down eclipse. It's part of what some environmentalists and informed sources inside the DWP describe as a "Green malaise" afflicting the massive publicly owned utility after the departure of DWP chief and legendary public-power executive David Freeman to serve as Governor Gray Davis' energy czar. And it comes just as a malaise of sorts appears to have afflicted the career of Freeman himself, whose confirmation as chairman of the new California Power Authority is now in jeopardy. Which in turn points up growing questions from state investigators about the practices of the DWP.

Money in the Lake

2004-04-30T20:47:00.000-07:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/23/news-kelly.php

You will end up paying for repairing Owens Valley by William J. Kelly

A chill wind suspended a cloud of dust over the Owens Valley as the sun rose one recent spring day. “You couldn’t see the mountains,” recalled James Warren, who has spent his life below the towering eastern Sierra Nevada. “The entire valley is drying up.”
Now the bill for reversing the destruction of the valley’s watershed is coming due and is a main reason that the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is looking for a large rate increase. The City Council turned down an 18 percent rate hike, and the DWP now proposes a 37 percent increase phased in over five years.

Deluged

2004-04-02T20:50:00.000-08:00

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/19/news-greene.php

The larger lessons of the DWP’s bad day at City Hall by Robert Greene

It was a bucket of cold, chlorinated and slightly off-tasting water right in the faces of three honchos from L.A.’s most arrogant institution, the Department of Water and Power. City Council President Alex Padilla called forward the business-suited men at Tuesday’s council meeting and proceeded to make them just sit there, closed-mouthed, and listen while he and his colleagues put on a display of shock and outrage at the executives’ plan to jack up water rates by 18 percent.
“The Department of Water and Power has existed in its own world for a very long time,” Councilman Greig Smith intoned, before his colleagues approved his motion to delay any increase pending an outside agency’s look at the books.