Dear "anyone is a citizen" Friends:

 .

In 1998, the citizens of Los Angeles were told when the new city charter was up for a vote, that the purpose of NCs (Neighborhood Councils) as described in the charter was to promote "...more citizen participation in government and make government more responsive to local needs..." The preceding is a direct quote from Article IX of the city charter "SEC. 900. PURPOSE" (Neighborhood Councils). The word "citizen" was used. To any reasonable thinking voter, citizen means "American Citizen." There was no label attached in the sample ballot that said "by citizen, we mean that absolutely anyone living in the community is a citizen."

.

I believe it was no coincidence that after the voters voted for the new charter in 1998, that the city attorney (then James Hahn) used nearly the exact wording from Article IX of the charter to draft Sec. 22.800 of the new city ordinance, except the word citizen was changed behind the voters backs to "public." The voters didn't get what they voted for.

When I asked Deputy City Attorney Darrel Martinez for the justification for changing "Citizens" to "Public, he said this.

Article IX of the city charter says that anyone who, lives, works, or owns property in the neighborhood is a stakeholder, and may vote in the NC elections and even run for a seat on the NC Board of Directors if they live in the zone.

DONE (Department of Neighborhood Empowerment) oversees the NCs, and BONC (Board Of Neighborhood Commissioners) whose responsibility it is to certify the NC's legitimacy. Both DONE and BONC have abandoned the original objective of "Citizen participation in government," and replaced it with the objective of diversity and inclusiveness as a primary objective based on ethnicity and race, regardles of citizenship or character. The community is being told by these city idealogues that the NCs must include absolutely anyone as long as they live, work, or own property in the neighborhood to accomplish their objective of "diversity" and "inclusiveness."

.

While the charter says that NCs "shall include representatives of the many diverse interests in communities," it does not mean to any reasonable thinking voter that diversity means "anybody" even if that "anybody" is a non-citizen, an illegal alien, felon, fugitive, or registered sex offender on probation. In disbelief that city's interpretation of the charter actually held that "anyone" could be a stakeholder or a board member, I asked the city attorney and here's what I was told:

http://keepstuff.homestead.com/LetterFromCityAttorney3o14.html

.

There is absolutely nothing in the charter that says anything about "inclusiveness." The city's obsession with inclusiveness probably stems from their ideological desire (against the will of the people) to include illegal aliens in the voting and governmental process. The broad "inclusion" requirement was made up after the fact, by the city's idealogues and is sanctioned by BONC, who will not certify NCs unless they agree to their interpretation of who is a stakeholder.

.

To any reasonable thinking voter being sold on voting for the then new charter proposition, knowing little about law like myself, the exclusion in the charter of who cannot vote in neighborhood council elections does not automatically mean that someone who is in violation of the law (for example, a fugitive wanted for murder) can vote or run for NC office. But the city attorney's interpretation that there are absolutely no restrictions as to who can be a stakeholder as long as the stakeholder lives, works, or owns property in the neighborhood, guarantees for example, that it is possible for fugitives wanted for murder to vote as a stakeholders and run for office.

See again http://keepstuff.homestead.com/LetterFromCityAttorney3o14.html

.

The charter appears to have certain restrictions on who qualifies as a voter or candidate, but the city attorney explains in his legaleze that they don't apply to NCs. SEC. 901, even though Article IX says that "the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment shall have the duties and responsibilities set forth in this article and elsewhere in the Charter to implement and oversee the ordinances and regulations creating the system of neighborhood councils enacted pursuant to Section 905. Again I believe that any reasonable thinking voter deciding on whether to vote on the charter, would believe that elsewhere in the Charter meant elsewhere! But Deputy City Attorney Darren Martinez says that elsewhere in the charter means only elsewhere in Article IX. Were we voters missing something?

.

The city attorney says there is nothing anyone can do about who can vote or run for office, but says that the charter can be changed. To change it, it would take a referendum of Los Angeles citizens (American).

.

When I ran for the NC in February of 2003, there was a slate of unknown candidates which appeared on the ballot on the morning of election day, of a group or mystery candidates that no one knew anything about. This happened because the elections rules allowed for candidates to file without anyone knowing it just days before the election and there was no sample ballot. It was later discovered that a conspiracy between a DONE Project Coordinator by the name of Herman_Barahona and the mystery candidates was engineered to place Latino candidates on to the Board of Directors in the name of diversity -- never mind that there was not one Asian-American or Black American as a candidate for the board.

.

Giving their pitch on election day to Latino passers-by with promises of how good things would be if Latinos were on the Board of Directors, to people who woke up that election day never dreaming that they would be voting in a Van Nuys election -- coupled with their pre-approved voters brought to the poll in several carloads to vote for them, all the mystery candidates were elected (the church rep and the youth rep dropped out before the election). I lost to one of the mystery candidates and launched a protest on the grounds that there was illegal electioneering by the slate candidates. The matter was reviewed by the liberal League of Women Voters, and to my surprise, wrote a report recommending a new election.

But DONE didn't like the League of Women Voters' recommendation, so they got Frank Martinez, the city clerk to decide on an outcome that DONE liked -- and so the all of the slate candidates were elected (one was later booted for electioneering).

.

But BONC and DONE think that working, living, or owning property in the Van Nuys is too restrictive and wouldn't approve re-certification to the VNNC (Van Nuys Neighborhood Council) unless the stakeholder requirements were loosened up a bit. So the interim Council went to work to loosen the stakeholder requirements.

.

-- If you attend church in Van Nuys, you are a stakeholder even if you live in another city.

-- If your kids attend school in Van Nuys, you are a stakeholder even if you live in another city.

-- If you have a business in Van Nuys, you are a stakeholder even if you live in another city.

-- If you work in Van Nuys, you are a stakeholder even if you live in another city.

-- If you own or work in a porno shop or you own or work as a stripper in a gentlemen's club in Van Nuys, you are a stakeholder even if you live in another city.

-- If you are working on a job in Van Nuys for a contractor who is based in Orange County, you are a stakeholder even if you live in another city or another state.

-- If you are part of an organization which is based in Van Nuys, you are a Van Nuys stakeholder even if you live in another

city or another state.

.

It's clear that the city "leaders" have seen to it that the NC election and candidate system be tailor made for illegal aliens, fugitives, felons, and all law breakers. 

.

Hal Netkin