Walter Moore Mailer -- December 21, 2007

Did Villaraigosa just offer to pay 22,000 people to vote for Prop. S?

By Walter Moore, Candidate for Mayor of Los Angeles, www.WalterMooreForMayor.com

December 21, 2007

Let's play "Law School." You be the student. I'll be Kingsford. We're studying California's Elections Code. Here's your first hypothetical question:

Suppose the Mayor of Los Angeles offered 22,000 City employees a raise of $2,300 per year, for five years, to vote for Proposition S.

Would that be legal or illegal?

The Elections Code forbids a person to "offer. . . to pay . . . any money . . . to or for any voter to . . . reward any voter for having voted for any particular . . . measure." [Section 18522(b)(3).]

The penalty for violating the statute is a three-year, all-expense paid stay at the Graybar Hotel. Also, a "public official who knowingly violates" the law "shall be forever disqualified from holding office in this state . . . ." [Sections 18501, 18522.]

So what do you think? Would it be legal or illegal for the Mayor to offer employees a $2,300 per year raise to vote for Prop S?

Here's why I ask:

On Wednesday, Mayor Villaraigosa approved a contract giving 22,000 City employees a raise of about $2,318 per worker per year, for the next five years.

However, according to the Daily News, however, "city officials said the deals include unique terms that direct the city and union leaders to return to the bargaining table if the ballot measure fails . . . ."

Let's re-cap. The employees get a $2,318 per year raise if Prop S passes, but if it fails, they (supposedly) have to "return to the bargaining table."

Does that sound legal to you? If so, does it at least smell funny? (That's what we in the law trade call the "smell test" or, when you feel fancy, "the appearance of impropriety.")

It smells rotten to me.

It also smells like PR schtick. The "unique terms" supposedly requiring the parties to "return to the bargaining table" are toothless: the union sent its members a memo assuring them that, according to the article, "the city can't change the contracts."

Hence, City Hall's song-and-dance about the "unique terms" was apparently just another PR charade to dupe you into thinking the City is strapped for cash. In fact, however, the City is drowning in your tax dollars, and is hiring people, not firing them.

Case in point: on Wednesday, Ed Boks, the Director of Animal Services, posted an item on his blog stating, "The Department is now seeking a Public Relations Specialist to help us spread the word about the services and resources we offer to the people of Los Angeles."

The flyer for the PR job states that the salary runs from $51,000 to $64,000 per year, "plus excellent benefits." The flyer does not state the salary or benefits depend on the passage of Prop S. Oh, and get this: the flyer says "This is an emergency appointment." An "emergency" PR job?

Don't trust these people with even more of your hard-earned money. We don't need more taxes, and we sure as heck don't need more PR people at City Hall. We just need a better Mayor. Vote "no" on Prop S, and contribute to the Committee to Elect Walter Moore at www.WalterMooreForMayor.com.

Class dismissed.