Would resigning improve CD7's chances to improve?

1. 1
PACOIMATODAY
Volume 4, Issue 1
February
February2015
Election Year 2016 1
CD7 1 Term Forensics 2
1 Term Forensics (Continue) 3
1 Term Forensics (Continue) 4
Something to Think About 4
Once again, we the American people are having an election to determine
who will govern our community as a representative of the people. In a representa-
tive type government, as exist in this jurisdiction, the citizens are expected to cast
votes for the candidate of their choice to occupy a position of responsibility for gov-
erning our communities.
We on Election Day, are asked to vote for the person or persons who we ex-
pect to promote the general public interest for ourselves and our fellow citizens. It is
expected that all citizens over 18 years of age register and vote for the candidate of
his/her choice. When the citizens fail to vote, they allow other citizens who may not
share the same political ideas, to think for them.
The level of voter turnout in the Northeast San Fernando Valley, has been
dismal in recent elections. Two years ago the voter turnout was only 8% of the eligi-
ble voters. Anyone in the Northeast San Fernando Valley with an ability to read or
watch the TV news cast must be aware of the current situations where half of the
elected officials are under investigation by the Federal Government.
A neighbor recently stated that he felt no responsibility for the current situa-
tions of the Valley politicians, “…because I didn’t vote…” If we expect more efficient
government it is important that each citizen participate. A Democracy cannot func-
tion well when the majority of the people don’t actively participate.
The Northeast Valley has an opportunity to vote for a Presidential Candidate,
a Federal Senator, a State Assemblyperson, City Councilperson and several State
Propositions, in June and November 2016. The decisions made by these individuals
on the ballot will affect the lives of you and your children and grandchildren.
The individuals we elect to positions of power not only take control of the
various issues we face today and in the near future, they also take control of our tax
dollars and increase fees for necessities like water, electricity and use for various
community benefits. In many instances our tax dollars are spent not for the benefit
of the voting citizens, but the benefit of large campaign contributors. In any other
arena, campaign donation would be viewed as a bribe, but in America we have cho-
sen to define them as “donations.” What a nice word!
There are four months before the next election on June 7, 2016, everyone
should take the time to evaluate the candidates. Discuss the candidates with family
members, friends and neighbors. Pay close attention to the various news cast,
attend a local political discussion group. Go to your local library and read the local
newspapers, dailies and weekly.
Ask questions of those you respect, and don’t just vote for an individual be-
cause you heard his name. If you are not satisfies with the current office holder who
has been eating at the public trough for years or engaging in the game of political
musical chairs, vote for the individuals who have worked within the community, as
volunteers.
Be cautious of voting advice from Television Commercials and the rich and
famous. Be Leery of city employees (Firemen & Police) offering voting advice. Very
few of them can vote in the LA City election, because they don’t live in the City, they
just work here. Rolling residents, those candidates who change addresses to accom-
modate every election. A well-known saying by Erasmus (of Rotterdam) from about
1510: “In the land of the blind, the one eye man is king.” The one eye people run to
Pacoima for every election. They believe in Erasmus and believe Pacoima to be the
land of the blind.
2016 is an Election Year
Co-Editors & Publishers:
Morris Pichon
moepichon@aol.com
Edwin Ramirez
ramediv@yahoo.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS

2. 2
Pacoima Today February 2016
Volume 4 Issue 1
CD7 1 Term Forensics
Our City Council Member announced that he will not be seeking re-election but, he will continue his effort
to improve CD7 until the end of his term. What has actually improved during his time in office? Pacoima
Today is more concern with the condition the district will be in, at the end of his term.
We know there has been many changes, the 4 of July celebration was moved from Hansen Dam to San
Fernando High School; the Pacoima Youth and Family center is now run by "El Nido" organization; Pacoima
Beautiful, LAPD's cadet program and a coffee shop have moved into Pacoima City Hall; Sunland/Tujunga NC
was evicted from a municipal building; the Pacoima holiday Parade became a fund raiser for Pacoima Beau-
tiful (previously reported). We were informed that Pacoima Beautiful was simply charged with administer-
ing those funds. Administering those funds for whom?
The Pacoima Chamber of Commerce has hosted, collected and administered those funds for many of the
previous 46 years and always with the help, collaboration and participation of the Council's office, the
Mayor's office and City departments . We spoke with some of the previous presidents of the chamber who
commented that, "That is not the case with the current Council Member". On July 17, 2014, contract #
C124267 for the amount of $5,704 (seed money) was issued to the Pacoima Chamber of Commerce so that
they may provide/present one annual festival or parade in CD7 between 07-01-2014 and 06-30-2015; that
contract needed to be approved by City Council. If presented and supported by our council member.
A proposed hotel on Van Nuys Blvd. was not approved because it did not fit the culture of Pacoima and it
could foster prostitution and/or other illicit businesses in the area but, aren't we getting just that with the
probation department at the former Skills Center's site? We understand that the council member is current-
ly working with a developer and the City to allow the building of well over 100 homes in an area zoned for a
maximum of 22 homes. Why the need to consider? Perhaps that developer invested a great deal in his
campaign! What is wrong with saying NO?
Of course, not all has been bad, people has been well entertained by the fire works, the holiday parade,
the movie nights and the "Dia de los muertos" celebrations at City Hall; There have been community clean-
up days, National nights out and other events but, has the parking enforcement been able or been expected
to enforce the municipal code that prohibits the parking of large vehicles (motorhomes) in residential are-
as? They are a 24/7 city service that in Pacoima is virtually nonexistence. If the county has the probation
department on Van Nuys Blvd; why not request a health department office to addressed the street food
vending problem? We know City council is considering permits for street vending; our guess is that it will be
easier to provide permits than to generate good paying jobs (or jobs for that matter).
The City constantly reminds us of their limited resources and their constant need to increase the cost of ser-
vices in order to address the needs of our communities; we are all aware of the needs being greater than
the means! At the same time, why should we allow the City council members and the Mayor's office to con-
tinue the inadequate use of the limited resources they do have?
A good example in CD7 is the contract #C-122488 adopted by City Council on 02-20-13 under file #12-
1642 that would have allowed "El Nido" organization (a nonprofit) to occupied the bottom floor at Pacoima
City Hall for a term of 60 Months (07-01-13 to 05-31-18) for the cost of $1 per year. This did not happened,
our council member decided (preferred) to provide the space to Pacoima Beautiful (PB, also a nonprofit) un-
der contract #C125253 adopted on 06/27/14 under file #14-0291; Pacoima Today, previously reported
about Pacoima Beautiful getting the free space at City Hall; we now know that under their agreement with
the City (2 leases) they get an office space on the second floor for a modest $1,104 per Month and they
(continue page 3)

3. 3
Pacoima Today February 2015
Volume 4 Issue 1
also get just over 2,300 Sq/ft bottom floor for $2 per Year; but that is not all that they get! Can you be-
lieve? They also get the opportunity to sub-lease part of the bottom floor (about 500 Sq/ft) to a retail
business (Cafecito Organico) for a whopping $3,863 per month payable to Pacoima Beautiful; imagine
that! $3,863 collected less $1,104 paid out, leaves a gain of $2,759; how is this "not" free space?
We are sure that many will see this agreement as not only free space but also free revenue! but, when
the Executive Director is a City Planning Commissioner, the assistant Director is a Los Angeles Zoning Ad-
visor and the President of the Board is a former Assembly Member and also former chief of staff of his
years in the Assembly (CD7 council member) our guess is, they (PB) deserve the help, support and fund-
ing! or is this a form of NEPOTISM? For sure it is highly questionable! Wouldn't the City benefit if they
collected the $4,967 per Month to use for community improvements projects in Pacoima? or simply add
to the Pacoima NC funding, they are a legal extension of City Government with a 37K yearly budget and
no council member's support for office space at City Hall or at the community center; yet they do go to
them for help in funding their movie nights, dia de los muertos, holiday parade and even the Bradley Pla-
za.
Pacoima Beautiful reported in their 990 form filed with the IRS (open to public inspection) for the peri-
od beginning 07-01-13 and ending 06-30-14 a total revenue of $542,094 we now have an idea of where
the help, to generate the revenue, comes from but have no information (yet) about who is helping in the
process of spending the money (getting paid); they do report on the same form under salaries, other
compensation and employee benefits a total of $400,255 for the same period. Is it only the Executive
director drawing a salary? Or, are the Board Members also helping? You might want to consider asking
them for a financial report! Keep in mind that if they get City dollars, they are getting your tax dollars
and you are entitle to know why, how and where they are spent.
Now, about El Nido organization (nonprofit) not getting the space at City Hall for $1 per year, well,
they did not complaint or mind because they were very well compensated! they were awarded a City
contract # C122402 adopted by City council on 03-04-13 under file #12-1607 for the period between 04-
01-13 and 03-31-14 for the amount of $738,335 for "El Nido" to provide a range of core services to assist
low income families to become self sufficient by increasing family income and academic achievement.
Then a second contract #C-124028 adopted 04-08-14 under file # 13-1395 for the period between 04-01-
14 and 03-31-15 and the amount of $700,000 to provide comprehensive services to assist low income
families to become self sufficient. Also under file # 12-0923, contract #C121078 was adopted on
06/29/12 for the period between 07-01-12 and 06-30-13 for the amount of $873,000 and awarded to El
Nido; then adopted on 06-28-13 under file #13-0723 contract #C-121078-1 was modified to add
$800,000 and the period modified from 07-01-12 to 06-30-14 to provide gang prevention services to 150
students ages 10-15 years old and their families (in Pacoima) but that was not enough! adopted on 06-
20-14 under file # 13-0723-S2 contract #C-121078-2 was extended again from 07-01-12 to 06-30-15 and
adding $636,554 and $163,446 to the contract for a grand total of 2.473 Millions over a 3 years period.
As you can see, they not only get the entire community center in Pacoima for $1 per year; they
also get very well paid to run the center and very well funded to provide the sevices! According to the
990 form filed with the IRS (open to public inspection) for the period between 07-01-13 and ending 06-
30-14 El Nido reported a total revenue of $9,034,955 and a total in salaries, other compensation and
employee benefits of $6,842,643 our questions are the same, who gets paid? How they get paid? And
why they get paid?
(continue page 4)

4. 4
Pacoima Today February 2016
Volume 4 Issue 1
Pacoima Today reported in previous issues that many none profits in Pacoima are working eve-
ry year in securing their revenues for the next year rather then doing the work they were set out to do;
we mentioned how at the end of the day they all rely on the same line of not having enough resources,
having a process for doing anything and relying on donations and volunteers for actually accomplishing
any project. We now know that the City is very generous in providing nonprofits groups, most of which
are mostly use as "community organizers" not service providers, with our tax dollars while denying the
LA residents the public services we deserve.
Our council member evicted the Sunland-Tujunga NC from the municipal building in Tujunga and plans
to get two (2) nonprofits to occupy the building! Our questions to him are: how much is the City (we)
paying them to move in? And how much is the City (we) paying them for their services? Valid questions
if you consider the conditions in which the Pacoima City Hall and the Pacoima community center are oc-
cupied (given away). We respect his decision not to seek re-election but are seriously concern with the
condition the district will be at the end of the term and the total amount of funding that will be provided
or wasted among his allies nonprofits. We would strongly recommend that all neighborhood councils
start evaluating the performances of nonprofits within their geographical boundaries and asking them for
financial and activities report, after all, they are there to provide a community service and sadly report to
no one (except the IRS when filing).
Something to Think About
In 2014 a well established, well funded and experienced incumbent lost his Assembly seat to an opponent that was
unknown, underfunded and with no political experience, support or even credibility.
In 2016 we have an experienced and well funded opponent that has the political support of many elected officials,
some of which are under investigation for various reasons.
In 2014 Everyone knew who the Assembly Member was but, nobody paid attention to his actions or lack of action
for that matter; but we can all remember fighting off the solar panels farms in Shadow Hills, La Tuna Canyon and
Sylmar; he went around promoting the High Speed Rail as a good thing and never talking about the displacement of
business and residents or even the possibility of dividing the communities in its path. During his time in office the
State adopted the "Common Core" system and under the State's local control funding formula, LAUSD cut 80% of
the, so much needed in AD39, adult education; while he claims to have allocated millions for education every
school in AD39 suffered budget cuts. He did provided millions in tax credit to the film industry, but how many
communities in AD39 (or families) actually benefited from it?
In 2016 The incumbent is widely known in the district, thanks in part to all the personal attacks she was subjected
to, after being declared a winner and before taking office. People paid more attention to her comings, goings and
doings because she was branded incompetent, inexperience and unqualified to serve. While some may still feel the
same way, she did managed to get some of her bills passed and signed by the governor. This might not be a great
deal in the opponent's eyes or the eyes of his supporters, but, what about the eyes of those in AD39 that benefited
by having their child care provider trained in identifying child abuse? Or those who benefited by being able to hang
dry their clothes without being hustled by neighbors? Our guess is that in their eyes the incumbent has simply
shown that things can be accomplished even when branded incompetent and unfit to serve!
Sacramento did not welcome or want the incumbent back, she would not sell her district! But they are supporting
the opponent! Experience?????

5. 5