A recent News Press headline:
Regardless of who you think “won” tonight’s debate, we all know who the real losers are. It’s the American public, which as always is being led down that dark alleyway of ignorance and despair by a terrifically venal and almost criminally stupid corporate news media.
Tonight its paid hacks are clucking about Trump’s use of the colorful old term “bad hombres.” High and mighty as they think they are, and always looking for some phony moral outrage to make them feel like worthy human beings, none of them — especially the younger ones — seem to know that this expression has nothing to do with Mexicans or Mexican name-calling.
It’s a Spanish word that entered the language mostly through cowboy movies and early 20th-century pulp western novels. If anything, it was the Mexican natives describing some of the gringos.
Of course not.
Why? It would be so unfair to our landlords to have their dirty laundry aired like that! Doncha’ think?
And just consider the confidentiality rights of the tenants! Imagine how invasive and humiliating it would be for them to have their shady landlords exposed to public scrutiny on TV. What kind of aggrieved complainant would want such a thing?
Approve the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Burbank and KeyCode Media, Inc. for the installation of a television broadcasting system in Community Services Building Room 104 (Exhibit A).
The City of Burbank operates a government information TV station, The Burbank Channel (TBC), which broadcasts on Charter Communications Cable Channel 6, AT&T U-verse Channel 99, and streams live on the City’s website (Burbankca.gov). The Public Information Office (PIO) currently utilizes broadcast equipment in the City Hall Council Chamber to televise live government meetings from Burbank City Hall at 275 E. Olive Avenue. This is currently the only City location with permanently installed equipment that allows City meetings to be broadcast live on TBC.
In 2009, construction was completed on the Community Services Building (CSB) at 150 N. Third Street. The three-story facility features a large meeting room (CSB 104) on the first floor that is often used for large gatherings (e.g. community meetings, staff presentations, Council workshops, etc.).
The original plan for the Community Services Building included the installation of a video broadcast system to enable the City to televise some of the public meetings, community workshops, and special events that occur in CSB 104. However, broadcast equipment was never installed due to a reduction in funding for the CSB construction project. Instead, crews installed cable conduit and completed the construction of a small adjoining room to CSB 104 that could serve as a production control room if/when funding became available to install a broadcast system.
The LTC meetings used to be held at the city hall chambers on Monday nights. About a dozen years ago there was a repeated request from a number of people to start broadcasting them out to the public, just like every other meeting held in the facility. After all, the TV equipment was already in there.
The city’s response was to move the LTC meetings from city hall to the new Community Services Building so that they couldn’t ever be called upon to broadcast them. There were no cameras there by design. And rarely do they get brought to that site — it’s like pulling teeth to get staff to even tape events at that building just for the record.
True story. That’s why the LTC was moved there. Their meetings had been held at city hall for decades.
And speaking of the Brown Act — which our city attorney does on regular occasions in order to hide council debate from the public — just try and get a hold of the tenant questionnaires that go in front of this deliberative body. That’s where all the juicy info is on the complaints.
Even though state law requires full of public disclosure of all documents that go across a dais at these meetings, you won’t get it.
What you’ll get instead is a redacted complaint statement from the tenants where all of the relevant names and addresses are removed. So you’ll never find out who those bad landlords are, or exactly where their buildings are located.
The City of Burbank isn’t working for you, folks. Just like staff’s planned discussion tonight where they’re trying to push the council into starting something called “flex-zoning” of our neighborhoods, it’s all about accommodating outside interests.
Remember, Burbank regularly gets big awards from this well-heeled crowd for being “Great for Business!” They boast about it. And they are.
When Burbank refused to get rid of any of its RDA employees after the Legislature eliminated it in 2011, we knew this town was going to be defiant. Obviously missing the point of the action (which was long overdue), tomorrow night’s planned council discussion only proves that they still want to act like one:
Golden State Specific Plan – Discussion about Issues and Opportunities – Community Development Department
A discussion with the City Council to consider what is important for the Golden State Specific Plan (GSSP) study. This is an opportunity for the City Council to imagine possible land use scenarios that would promote an economically vibrant area.
When you hear the word “opportunity,” always duck. An opportunity for whom?
The area became an aerospace and manufacturing hub in the 1940s until Lockheed left the area in the 1990s. After Lockheed left, the area saw a gradual change of land uses and the economy shifted from heavy manufacturing uses to post-industrial uses. In 2010 the area had approximately 10,000 jobs with approximately 23% of those was classified as manufacturing. The information sector provided approximately 26% of the employment in the area.
Exhibit B shows the variety of land uses that currently exist in the GSSP area. Uses include a mix of commercial and office uses, retail, three hotels, light industrial clusters, media and technology clusters, light industrial including uses associated with aerospace and machine shops. The area is predominantly a mixture of uses from block to block. The GSSP also includes single and multi-family neighborhoods to the south east.
Multi-family neighborhoods? Oh yeah. In these directly following paragraphs you can tell that staff wants them gone as-is.
The 2035 General Plan calls for the Golden State Commercial/Industrial corridor to support a diverse range of employment opportunities and to continue to play a key role in the City’s economy. The General Plan also calls this area out as a place for further study and the creation of a specific plan. The GSSP is an opportunity for the City Council) to plan for the future of the Golden State area.
Staff has begun the background research for the GSSP and will be building on the work done through the Burbank study. Prior to moving forward with the study, staff and AECOM want to understand what is important to the City Council when imagining possible land use scenarios. For instance, what are some of the opportunities for economic growth in the area? What should a future Golden State neighborhood look like? Will more people live there? Should we plan for additional housing? How will residents and employees get around? How will the neighborhood relate to the rest of the city?
We love the phony tone of this agenda item. You just know they already have specific things in mind to “explore.” This 2035 Plan — which Gordon knowingly voted against several years ago for this very reason — is being used as a phony template for Big Development.
Should development be clustered around the existing and proposed Metrolink stations? What sorts of businesses should be pursued for the area? Should we consider flexible zoning that would allow different uses such as office, light industrial, commercial, retail, and housing to exist in the same district? These are some the questions we hope to answer through the process of creating a plan for the Golden State area.
Hey, that’s it! Mixed use! Why didn’t we think of that? Just imagine how much more “economic growth” we can get in there near the airport if we just flex around the zoning a bit!
Because economic growth is what it’s all about, people.
The council needs to nix this idea right out the chute. Staff just wants to rezone that area in order to create more profit centers for their out-of-town developer friends, because “economic development” is always code for Big Development in Burbank. There’s no “plan” we need to “create.”
Leave the area alone, council. And leave those neighbors alone. It’s gotten crowded enough over there without putting in more apartment complexes on top of whatever.
Burbank’s developed enough. It’s time to conserve and improve. Let’s get some slow-growth candidates running next year too. Real ones, not frauds.
Blessed are the meek….
…as long as they steer clear of Burbank.
They’re at it again over at the revered “We love Burbank!” Facebook page. This time it concerns the several unfortunates (in BMWs they say) who are often seen begging for cash at one or two of our many shopping centers in town. They’re so annoying!
Here’s a couple of screenshots we took at random from that horrible website. Not ever having been a part of any kind of realistically entitled crowd — the ones with ready guarantors at hand — you can imagine where our sympathies lie.
How come no pictures of the BMW? We want to see it.
This is the same place btw where Rogers chooses to publish his community announcements.
One of the comments up there that handily re-interprets Jesus’ words for us about why you shouldn’t morally “judge” another’s life reminds us of this latest version of The Beatitudes. It comes from the Prosperity Gospel crowd:
It’s apparently for real– no left-wing giveaway Christ for them. “Excuse me Jesus, why are you favoring the poor?”
Anyway, we’ll be the one to judge here and now: what sick fucks these people are, eh?
He talks and acts just like the Burbank kids he grew up with.
Which makes this false crap even more offensive:
The Los Angeles Chamber Orchestra and guest conductor Thomas Dausgaard are looking to start off an upcoming concert on a more eccentric note.
One of Beethoven’s most celebrated works, Symphony No. 3, “Eroica,” will be the headlining piece at the chamber’s concert at the Alex Theatre in Glendale on Oct. 29. However, the night will open with a roughly 10-minute work called “A Freak in Burbank,” a composition making its West Coast debut and dedicated to the legendary and eccentric filmmaker Tim Burton.
Schnelzer said he is a fan of composer Danny Elfman, who is known for scoring many of Burton’s films. However, the Swedish composer’s goal was not to try and copy Elfman’s style, but rather capture who Burton is.
“The biography about Tim Burton’s childhood affected me quite a lot, and the sense of loneliness and sorrow you feel when you grow up if you are not like everyone else is something I think many of us can relate to,” Schnelzer wrote. “Being a ‘freak’ at one time or another is not easy. So, in many ways, this is a piece about you and me as well.”
That phony schtick’s getting pretty old by now. Tim was never any diamond in the rough. So this little recent factoid is more than a bit interesting:
“A Freak in Burbank” premiered in 2008 and has, so far, been performed more than 60 times by symphonies around the world.
Though the piece has been performed many times, Schnelzer said that he has not heard if Burton himself has listened to the composition.
“I know that the [British Broadcasting Corp.] tried to contact him in 2010 when this piece was performed at the BBC Proms in Royal Albert Hall, but I don’t know if he ever got that message and what he thinks of the piece,” Schnelzer wrote. “I sincerely hope he understands that this is my homage to a great artist who has influenced so many people, and that being a freak, whether it’s in Burbank or Stockholm, is actually something to be proud of. We are all different.”
He knows about it. How could he not? He probably doesn’t like the title or idea, because it’s not true. Who’d want to be pegged that way. He’s of his age.
A question that inspired many of us to ask our own between about 1965 and 1980. And try to answer as well.
Nothing that Trump said on that 12-year-old tape on Friday even begins to rise to the level of justifying the blustery sense of outrage that emanates from this woman. And when she talks so righteously of “language” that we need to hide from “our children,” go gag us with a spoon.
Besides, you can blame the media for that particular intrusion on your dignity, and of many. Trump isn’t the one who made the tape public. And like Barack has never talked about “pussy” before, or getting it?
Anyone else think there’s something odd about a woman who allows “Donald Trump” to supposedly kiss them and grope their breasts for an admitted 15-minute time period in the first-class section of an airplane, but then only puts a stop to it when he starts to go below?
Or her story?
There’s a term for what happened that day: it’s called making out. And when it goes on for 15 minutes, you’ve granted consent — at least for the upper half.
Interesting too that none of the reporters sought to push this woman on the point about why it went on for so long, and why she didn’t leave earlier?
Of course they won’t. It would seriously blow the outrage angle and scurrilousness.
We’re also getting a kick tonight about how Democrats and liberals are demanding in outrage that we believe every accusation of assault involving Donald Trump, but then get absolutely defiant when conservatives counter with similar claims made against Bill Clinton.
Here’s from their PR “Vote for US!” webpage:
Less desirable to whom?
Burbank also actually has more local control now the way things stand without a new terminal. We have the Measure B vote — the real Measure B. But if this thing wins in Novٖember the voters will never get another chance to weigh in on anything that comes up the road.
That’s it– there will never be another citizen vote once a “replacement terminal” gets built. And you could easily see a 28-gate terminal there in the future (and will– why do you think they want to relocate to a bigger space, and won’t pull their late 90s expansion plan from the FAA?) The terminal they have planned post-election is already almost half again as big as the current facility.
If it loses, they’ll just have to present a better plan to the voters. So don’t buy this scare tactic. Don’t buy either their other claim that the airport’s not earthquake safe, and that it was built in 1930.
It is, and it wasn’t. Actually, is there anything still left there from 1930?
Here’s some pictures of the original facility on opening day:
Looks familiar, doesn’t it? See, we need a new one!
They just lie, don’t they. They’re desperate to get the voters to approve an expensive new boondoggle that most people know we don’t need. We like the old one just fine.
Notice too how the ballot statement lobbies for a “yes” vote?
Whatever works, eh? It also repeats the “greater voice” lie. The future’s already been pegged out.
Your only voice is now, people. So vote “no.”
Since we’re always accused of just complaining about everything and never trying to come up with any solutions, let’s watch what happens when we do have a good idea that will just get completely ignored. And probably immediately. But we’ll try anyway.
This new head librarian they just hired always talks about how she wants to provide Burbank with a grand “21st-century” facility for everyone. Ok, that’s fair enough (even though this usually means getting rid of all the books), so how about this?
Right now if you want to copy something down there for later on you have to buy a copy card to pay for expensive junky copies on their old installed copy machines, the price of which has never gone down since they were first introduced in 1966. Did you know that btw?
But these new type of copy machines they make can do something much different. Besides making copies, library patrons can now alternatively use the machines as simple scanners onto a flash drive that they provide on their own.
The New York Public Library has just introduced this feature into their Rose Room facility on Fifth Avenue, and it’s free (!) No more 20-cents-a-page copy cost when you don’t necessarily need or want a printout. Some universities also allow students to do this.
Great idea, right? And it’s never going to happen here. Right again?
The Bill Blass Catalog Room down there also has brand-new Bang and Olufson computer monitors too; and so yes, maybe we are living in a dream world.
Or, the wrong town.
Jesus H. Christ.
Ikea removed a photo of a boy from a store in Wales after a customer noticed that the child’s pose looked a bit like Adolf Hitler.
The photo, which is printed in black and white and used in a showroom, shows a boy holding his finger in front of his top lip as if he has a mustache.
Shopper Stevie Davies-Evans was the first to notice the resemblance.
He furiously tweeted to Ikea about it.
1. He’s not a little boy.
2. He doesn’t look like “Hitler”
3. He’s not doing anything Nazi-like
4. No one who’s offended by this photo was ever subject to Hitler’s behavior. People back then had much more to worry about, and so the sense of outraged concern is insincere.
5. Young people are insane. Does generating such phony umbrage make them feel like better human beings? What next, repression?
This was a funny response:
Both the city and BPD have a long history of hiring right-wing law firms to help pull political strings to get them out of trouble. Among other things, these law firm are also highly paid fixers with big political connections:
The Los Angeles County coroner’s office deferred ruling on the cause of death of a man struck by a Taser during a fight with Burbank police officers earlier this week, officials said Friday.
Coroner’s officials performed an autopsy on the body of Thomas Binkley — who police said went about 14 minutes without medical aid while authorities were in a standoff with his brother — but ordered additional tests, which could delay a ruling by up to nine months, said Lt. David Smith of the Los Angeles County coroner’s office. He did not know which tests were ordered.
A few years ago GDC (and a lucrative multi-million dollar fee) got Burbank out of a very serious criminal/discrimination problem with the Department of Justice involving the same police department. They’re natural go-to fixers for the City of Burbank.
A conscientious council member should ask to see this month’s outside billings at the city attorneys office. Think we have any?
Great old story here.
So what else is new, eh?
In his most recent no mea culpa, the vice mayor of Burbank made a ridiculously misleading historical claim about the old ROAR initiative “Measure A.” We’ve italicized it here:
At the time, all but one lawyer I know of (a candidate for council at the time), one expert after another told us Measure A was doomed. Time and again it tried to impose through a ballot measure standards and rules the city has no jurisdiction over. As had been expected, Measure A passed easily with one of the highest turn-outs in recent history, and as predicted by every credible observer, it was all rendered moot by the courts. The city even paid the legal expenses of a citizen who wanted to try defending Measure A in appeals. Measure A was nonetheless (and rightfully) laughed out of the courts.
So nice of them to have done so, right? A helluva group of people that was.
Now here’s what really happened — we’ll try to make a long and complicated history a bit clearer:
1. The night Measure A won the vote in 2000, the Burbank City Council met in closed session and voted 3-2 to immediately file a lawsuit in court to have it vacated. That’s right– the City of Burbank voted to go to court to get a citizens initiative tossed out, not some other aggrieved party like the Airport Commission. And right after it had won!
2. ROAR of course vociferously objected to this action, and immediately demanded that their legal fees be paid as prospective defendants. They didn’t have the money for such a defense –because it’s supposed to be the city’s job to defend a voter initiative in court!
3. When the city eventually filed the lawsuit, it turned out that they didn’t sue the ROAR sponsors of Measure A. Instead, they sued the Airport Authority(!)
4. ROAR again objected to this action, rightfully fearing that the Authority was a bogus defendant who wouldn’t put up any kind of fight to defend an obviously hostile Measure A.
5. The city council then voted to offer to pay for ROAR to be an “intervenor” in the case. An intervenor can be any interested party who wants to get legally involved in a matter of public import. It was their idea to do this, not ROAR’s.
6. The problem with such an offer though is that if there is an intervenor around, and the judge in charge happens to toss the Authority (say) from the case because they’re not seen as a legitimate defendant, the lawsuit will still go on.
7. This indeed was ROAR’s fear– that the city’s financial offer to pay their legal fees was just a trick to keep their lawsuit on course if the Airport was removed from the case. Which seemed likely at the time. The Airport was legally fighting to do so in fact.
8. So ROAR of course told Burbank to go to hell. Remember, they were against this city’s lawsuit to begin with. They (legitimately) thought it was appalling that our city council members would basically sue the Burbank voters over the election result instead of allowing someone else do it (such as the Authority or the airlines) who would have been potentially impacted by Measure A. ROAR wanted to have nothing to do with this lawsuit.
So after several months the City of Burbank’s case goes in front of a judge. Here’s what happened next:
1. The judge reviews the case and asks “Where’s the initiative’s sponsor?” He immediately demands that ROAR enter the case as an intervenor. He also allows the Authority to remain as defendant.
2. ROAR — stuck now in a city initiated lawsuit that they never believed in — goes back to the council and demands intervenor money. The council refuses to give them any.
3. Rogers of course writes a typical series of pieces in the Leader mocking the ROAR group’s supposed inconsistency, ineptitude, and sheer nuttiness in first refusing city money and then later demanding it — and, naturally, he left out the completely new set of legal circumstances. The judge had now demanded they be there!
4. After a week of discussion, the council reverses course and agrees to fund ROAR’s legal fees. The vote was 3-2, with Golonski and Laurell voting “no.”
5. The trial court eventually throws Measure A out — even though A never “required” the Burbank City Council to do anything illegal. It just said that if the council couldn’t get the specific deal provisions as listed then they couldn’t approve a new airport terminal. Big difference.
6. An appeal being appropriate — as it usually is with every city issue that garners an 80 percent approval vote — resident Mike Nolan reluctantly agreed to take it on.
What Rogers leaves out is crucial. The only reason there was a lawsuit to begin with (and later appeal) is because the city itself levied it against the Measure’s outcome, and essentially too the Burbank voters. ROAR didn’t want to have anything to do with it! Rogers also ignored the question of why the city council now wanted to refuse intervenor money that they had once been eager to push on the Measure A sponsors.
ROAR believed – correctly so – that it was the responsibility of an airport-related party to try to get Measure A tossed if desired, and not the city. It was the city’s job to defend Measure A, not Mike Nolan’s.
So no one in the city “even” did anything nice or charitable for Measure A in its defense. Or morally or legally optional. They created the problem.
No one’s going to be happy about this unless they live along Marmion Way:
Let’s plug in to Hip-dom!
Already a growing haven for artists, fashionistas, foodies and techies, the Arts District is about to get a major influx of song and dance.
In a shift that reflects the increasing importance of infusing the music industry with tech culture, Warner Music Group plans to move hundreds of employees from Burbank and the Westside into a renovated former auto plant in the downtown neighborhood.
The Arts District has witnessed a flood of new residences, shops and restaurants — and the development of a nascent start-up scene. But the move of the company’s West Coast headquarters into the historic Ford Factory building is a watershed moment, said Carl Muhlstein, international director at real estate brokerage Jones Lang LaSalle.
“After years of courting tech and media, downtown has finally snagged a whopper,” said Muhlstein, who was not involved in the deal. “Downtown has been rehearsing for this part for close to 10 years, and Warner Music took them up on it.”
Yuuck. Developers + Art + Culture = Developers.
The world’s third-largest music company plans to build offices, recording studios, performance spaces, a cantina and artists’ lounges. It envisions a large outdoor space leading to a 750-vehicle parking garage. Warner Music said it would spend $40 million to $50 million to complete the structure to its liking, the regulatory filing said.
Warner Music Chief Executive Steve Cooper told employees by email Friday that the Arts District “is a burgeoning art, fashion and food scene that’s a magnet for businesses, entrepreneurs, and creatives.”
Remember those old Iowa state tests in school where you had to pick what object didn’t belong? One of those words is a definite outlier. Guess which one?
The consolidation of the firm’s West Coast operations follows a similar move two years ago in New York, where the company has its official headquarters. The firm, whose talent roster includes Beyonce, Coldplay, Flo Rida and Sheryl Crow, found that consolidating offices on Broadway nears Times Square boosted productivity and creativity, according to the source familiar with the deal.
How do you measure “creativity”? And what do those NY employees do now that’s different, run over to the Schwarzman during lunch? The prudence and fortitude’s gone up a lot over there as well we hear. When the L Train closes down for a couple of years for repair their Brooklyn employees will also be loving the new move for sure.
Like others in the music industry, Warner Music has been hit with a decline in music downloads as consumers have shifted to streaming services. The privately held company, controlled by billionaire investor Len Blavatnik’s Access Industries, recorded just a $33-million profit in the nine months ended June 30, but that was better than its $65-million loss for the same period last year.
In moving to the Arts District, the company decided on a neighborhood undergoing huge changes. Real estate firm CBRE estimates 2 million square feet of office space is under construction in the district, already a fast-growing hub for media and tech that has lured businesses such as venture capital firm Greycroft Partners and crafts-selling start-up Seedling.
Transportation start-up Hyperloop One, which is seeking to build high-speed transit tubes worldwide, has an expanding campus of more than 55,000 square feet a few blocks from the Ford building.
Maybe Goethe and Schelling will locate next. We heard Mozart had to pass.
Other development envisioned in coming years could make the area more of a residential community.
Last month, Irvine-based SunCal announced plans to erect two 58-story condo and apartment towers at 6th and Alameda streets. The mixed-used project, also featuring hotels and creative offices, would dominate the skyline in the largely low-rise area.
Art for all, all for art.
Who knew that we didn’t even own our own telephone poles in Burbank? From tomorrow night’s staff report about setting attachment fees for outside users:
A Pole Committee? Imagine what those meetings must be like.
They don’t even count the votes now. Or, take the ballots to the post office:
No wonder these city clerks just love our all-mail ballot system. They don’t have to do anything any more!
The council will be asked to approve these expenditures tomorrow night.
Or is this unctuous and oh-so-offended crowd just so literal and stupid?
(CNN)WARNING: This story contains graphic language.
It was nothing more than some good ol’ fashioned “locker room talk.”
At last night’s town hall-style debate, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump strongly denied that he had sexually assaulted women after a leaked video captured him saying that because of his fame, he could “grab [women] by the pussy.”
The video has prompted some Republicans to distance themselves from the candidate. Though Trump made a defiant apology this past weekend, he downplayed the recording as he answered the first question of the night.
“It’s locker room talk, and it’s one of those things,” he said before pivoting to another topic. “I will knock the hell out of ISIS.”
Unsurprisingly, professional athletes grew irate at the insinuation that similar lewd remarks were commonplace in men’s locker rooms. Here’s what they had to say…
Naturally, the media’s parroting this ridiculously dishonest complaint, phony “warning” and all. They’ve been running with it all morning. All they’ve talking about is sex and grave, “troubling” accusations of “depraved” sexual misconduct.
This last weekend has proven one thing for sure: the Trump haters are just as dishonest and bad as the Hillary haters. So full of righteous crap.
If so, then everyone’s guilty of breaking them:
Cooper didn’t mince words while characterizing the recording.
“You described kissing women without consent, grabbing their genitals,” Cooper said. “That is sexual assault. You bragged that you have sexually assaulted women. Do you understand that?”
Groping’s one thing, but kissing without consent is how most if not all first kisses begin. Even afterwards they can still play out that way.
Trump’s point in that tape though was that they “let you do it.” That establishes consent.
It’s hilarious as well tonight how hard the media’s trying to keep this sex thing going — before they cut to their next licentious commercial. They’re so disappointed that this debate didn’t follow their phony narrative.
The holier-than-though tone coming from this same crowd tonight is making us retch. Such fucking hypocrites. Everyone’s grabbed a dick or a pussy or kissed someone without obtaining prior permission or “consent.” That’s because the other party let’s you. Where are our own Thackerays and Dickens to be documenting these self-righteous monsters in charge?