Rogers is no stranger to ginning up phony questions about character and deportment right before a contested election


Someone pointed out today that the sudden burst of sanctimony we saw from Vice Mayor Rogers last Tuesday night bore a remarkable resemblance to what Columnist Rogers exhibited about Ted McConkey and his supporters towards the end of the quite heated 1999 election campaign.

As with Gordon, Rogers hated McConkey and wanted him out. Those who remember this campaign might also recall the last-minute banner stories in the Leader that supposedly confirmed Will’s longtime derogatory narrative about Ted and his supporters’ seriously damaged sense of moral clarity and proper behavior. Yes, long before Dr. Gordon arrived on the council there was another class of alleged hypocrites, nutballs, liars, fools, dirty hippies and whatever other vestige of the local unwashed this old Leader columnist could dream up as a target.

Outside of suddenly parading around a McConkey tax lien that hadn’t been any big deal four years earlier during his first campaign (Ted was temporarily broke because of his wife’s serious medical expenses, a fact that Will conveniently omitted from his striking Leader exposé), Rogers also made the exciting last-minute claim that McConkey and his minions had nefariously attempted to “thwart the will of the voters” by going around early one Saturday morning before the election and stealing copies of the Leaders’ endorsement issue.

The paper back then had chosen McConkey’s opponent David Laurell, who interestingly enough was also at the time one of their backroom employees. Naturally, according to Rogers, this meant that the “McConkeyistas” (his word for that imaginary group of incompetent naysayers, which also included Dr. Gordon) were so incensed at the paper’s noble action that they couldn’t help but reveal their true lack of character by suddenly going around town and robbing a couple of stacks of free newspaper copies. You should have seen his outrage.

The problem with Rogers’ claim back then though was simple: there was no evidence that Ted or anyone else had stolen copies of the local newspaper. There wasn’t even evidence that copies had been stolen in the first place. This of course didn’t stop Will from trying to parlay his scoop of a story into a master narrative about Ted and his gang of lunatics and stooges. Just like now with Gordon, they were almost all uncontrollable louts who lacked brains, character and integrity and this time they’d gone too far.

Some things never change. Rogers likes to take on Gordon for his grandstanding, but who’s the real scold? And which one’s more accurate?



Filed under Uncategorized

37 responses to “Rogers is no stranger to ginning up phony questions about character and deportment right before a contested election

  1. Willie Watcher

    Will Roger’s behavior was unforgivable. He was using the dais as a platform to kick certain resident’s asses. It was purely disgusting. Surely the other council members (whether they agree partially with him or not) realize that he cheapens all of their positions by being so insulting and juvenile.
    When he went so far to point out that Greg Souza is not a lawyer was pathetic. It’s my understanding that Mr. Souza has one or two law degrees but is not a practicing lawyer with a license at this time. So what? That doesn’t take away from the fact that Mr. Souza has a vast knowledge of the law. Most of us would only pray to be half as intelligent as Mr. Souza.

    • semichorus

      He may not have passed the bar.

      But so what. Rogers never graduated from college, and once said in his application for a city clerk appointment that he had no idea how many academic credits he’d acquired over the years.

      Which to me is inconceivable. Like, what in the world DO you care about?

      He’s obviously not Jewish, that’s for sure! Many times I’ve thought that that was the big problem with him!

  2. EE

    and Rogers says it’s bad at Burbank City Council Meetings ? This lady must be a Will Rogers fan, she sure talks like Rogers does,

  3. Anony Miss

    Rogers was wild. He said he’s never seen a city employee be rude to people when the tall guy was talking about city employees abusing the merchants on Magnolia during the PBID. Rogers was just abusing a guy from Burbank during the orals!
    Luddy, Talamantes, Frutos and Rogers need to know that there was a huge amount of intimidation and bullying during the PBID by city employees. They squandered over a million dollars and were never held accountable.
    Don’t sit there and act like you don’t know it happened. When over half the district voted it down, you’d have to have your head in the sand to not sniff out major dissension. They were abusive. It was criminal. Kudos to Dr. Gordon for backing this up in a constructive manner. History is history.

  4. Anonymous

    The strange, sad, hypocrisy of Councilman Will Rogers:

    “Is the city doing enough to be transparent about its negotiations with the airport regarding the replacement terminal and/or the so-called “opportunity site?” What, if anything, could be done better?”

    WR’s ANSWER:
    “No. There is simply no way to adequately address the astounding scope and depth of the mistakes made thus far on these two major projects in the space allowed. Virtually EVERYTHING “could be done better.” If the city advertised information about these projects half as well as it did the downtown skating rink, the public could participate in a way that informs and actually influences and serves the end result.”
    YET, WR knew about the illegal 50K of tax money, given to the BHA, before it became public, yet said nothing, and continues with excuses as to why not to hold hearings etc. on the issue

    “What is the worst thing about how the current city government is run?”

    WR’s ANSWER:
    “The lack of leadership and focus on solving important issues. Residents want traffic cut, lights synchronized, parks maintained and streets repaired!

    There is always a waiver or exemption for developers, but no corresponding flexibility serves residents.

    Also, lip service is paid to better informing residents on substantive issues, when repeatedly only one-sided, incomplete information is available at the last moment.

    I will provide the leadership and focus needed to fix these problems.”
    YET, repeat the above. WR knew about the illegal 50K of tax money, given to the BHA, before it became public, yet said nothing, and continues with excuses as to holding hearings etc. on the issue. As to the “lack of leadership” issues he describes, they have only gotten worse while he is on council.

    When City Manager Mark Scott was hired in 2013, his salary was more than the city managers of Glendale and Pasadena, as well as the mayor of Los Angeles. Has he earned it?”

    WR’s ANSWER:
    No, but I hold the City Council most accountable. I have yet to see a Council majority clearly articulate a vision and policies for the City Manager to take as marching orders, and its success or failure in accomplishing those assignments I’d use to weigh his performance.

    It appears the city manager has been expected to maintain the status quo, operating purely on a reactive, defensive basis day to day, with little room or direction given for new initiatives.”
    YET, WR voted to give our approx. 300k a year City Attorney a raise this month. Even though he stated the below comment on her.

    “In light of the legal issues the city has been involved in, including the water transfer suit, is City Attorney Amy Albano providing the council sound legal advice? Why or why not?”

    WR’s ANSWER:
    I’m deeply concerned about Ms. Albano’s understanding of the voter-approved ballot initiative (Measure B) that clearly says the council can’t vote on a new terminal before the citizens have approved it. She also seems to have difficulty articulating legal views in open meetings. I would like to work with her to improve her communication with the public. But I can’t render a fair judgment on the soundness of her legal advice without access to that given in closed sessions on myriad topics/cases.”
    YET, WR, as a council member voted to approve it before the citizens had the chance to vote on it, of which the citizens were influenced by the Yes on Measure B flyers that blanketed the city and they WERE PAID FOR BY THE ILLEGAL USE OF 50K (of tax payer money) HE KNEW ABOUT AHEAD OF TIME!


    * “There is no project, proposal city business I refuse to comment on or discuss with voters.”

    * “Stabilize our budget regardless of outside economic swings;”

    * “I submit that no other candidate can demonstrate a decades-long record of advocating and acting on principles such as these, and so a list of my promised priorities as a council member is not simply rhetoric, but is instead a credible forecast of my agenda.”

    * “Encourage development that respects neighborhoods;”

    * “Ensure that airport-adjacent development does not bring about the city-wide gridlock it’s now on target to deliver;”

    * “Assure residents know what is proposed in their neighborhood long before that proposal becomes a foregone conclusion to city staff or council members. ”

  5. Anonymous

    FROM FB:

    I might add that at the Tues. nite council meeting, WR went on a rant about some 3rd person hearsay about citizens being accosted by other citizens due to who they supported in an election in an alleged attempt to get them to change their vote. Yet, seems Will has had his own parking lot accosting “gremlins”:
    “Personal Injury
    Lawsuit: Susan Spanos vs Will Rogers et al. – Los Angeles Superior Court – BC058589
    Filed: July 10, 1996
    Case Type: State civil
    Status: Settled

    Summary: Spanos, at the time a member of the Burbank City Council, claimed that Rogers, who was at the time a columnist for the Burbank Leader, sexually assaulted her following a January 1996 council meeting. She reported the alleged incident in April of that year, and filed suit against Rogers and the Leader after the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office declined to press charges.”
    Perhaps he was having another one of his health episodes then and tues nite and got confused on events and which lies to promote?

    I’m beginning to understand why he supports SPRINGER for council. And that she gladly promotes that fact.

    • semichorus

      You ever seen Spanos?

      She’s hot.

      As to that old story, I have no idea what to believe. Her timing was a little suspect. But who knows?

      I tend to disbelieve these types of accusations.

      • Anonymous

        Perhaps, Semi. But, why put her reputation on the line? What would be her motive? Not to mention, Will is the one with a criminal record and documented unstable behavior. And, let’s not forget, he’s spewing about garbage of which he has his own.

        • semichorus

          The thinking at the time was that she’d been tipped off that he was doing one of his classic hit pieces on her, and so she retaliated against him.

          There was also an alternate theory: that he’d been tipped off that she’d been complaining to people about being assaulted by him, and might go to police. So he struck at Spanos pre-emptively in order to make HER look like she’d been scorned.

          There had been a critical piece on her or two right before she filed her complaint. So who knows. During the middle of that whole thing she also disappeared for a few days and was found partying and staying at a motel in Anaheim. She’d last been seen in Burbank buying a meal at Kenny Rogers Chicken.

          The whole thing was odd.

        • Anonymous

          Spanos is as mad as a march hare, that is why. Sheese.

          • semichorus

            Nope. She was treated quite badly.

          • Anonymous

            ” Anonymous
            March 30, 2017 at 8:40 pm
            Spanos is as mad as a march hare, that is why. Sheese.”

            So, now, your a psychiatrist! LOL! So, then that must make Rogers a perverted diabolical mad man by your measure, right, Doc.!

  6. Anonymous

    WILL ROGERS on the “daughter” issue:

  7. Anonymous

    Somebody finally called out Sousa as NOT a legal expert with the standing to criticize the CA? But rather being a teamster?

    What do teamster kids do for fun? They go down to the playground and watch the other kids play.

    Well it is about time someone put Sousa in his place. The man is a bitter failure.

    • semichorus

      Don’t teamsters move the country?

      Didn’t Burbank used to be a proud union town? Aren’t studio jobs and teamster jobs good ones?

      You’re a fool.

      With his two degrees — which is twice what Rogers has, btw –Sousa obviously had enough legal knowledge to write a formal complaint compelling enough to have Albano’s office tied in knots over how to handle that T-BID.

      No one either — AFAIK — has ever referred to Sousa as a legal expert. Rogers was making that up, as he does many things. Attorney perhaps, but I’ve more often heard him called a lawyer, which is accurate. Attorneys need to pass the bar.

      • Doug

        Rogers is a disgusting self absorbed boob.

      • Anonymous

        Teamsters are not experts on the pay of a CA.

        • semichorus

          It’s an honorable job. And at least Sousa has one. Rogers hasn’t for years.

          No college degrees, either. I’m curious too why only “attorneys” are qualified to weigh in on staff pay.

          Talk about an appeal to insularity. No wonder Springer is so popular with the Organization Man crowd. Who — hip as they think they are — are still true members.

        • Anonymous

          ” Anonymous
          March 30, 2017 at 7:51 pm
          Teamsters are not experts on the pay of a CA.”

          And trolls, like you, are experts on law degrees. Go pound sand, nitwit. Btw, Jimmy Hoffa was a lawyer, Fred Thompson was an actor etc…’re a idiot with your stereotyping….indeed the perfect minion for your delusional leader Rogers.

          • semichorus

            Sousa wrote a good complaint to the FPPC. Enough to get the ball rolling.

            It’s rich for Rogers to be questioning the formal qualifications of others. And who cares anyway? Rogers went out of his way this week to pick a phony fight with these guys in order to grandstand his longtime narrative that Gordon supporters are nothing but creeps and nuts. He thinks it’ll work.

            • Anonymous

              Rogers baited Sousa by lying about him, from a position of power. ….such a sleazy tactic. Such a spineless, ball-less ,amoral miscreant. Rogers is such the little wannabee power broker….but, he’s just a pussy who hides behind his wife, his keyboard and his short-lived status on the council. In high school, he’s the one I would have let the bullies beat the shit out of, cuz he actually deserved it.

              • semichorus

                He really jumped at doing that, didn’t he?

                Reviewing the tape, it came off like a setup. He was itching to do a pre-election recitation of his phony script about the crazy, awful, stupid critics.

                As I pointed out yesterday, he manufactured the same kind of stunt right before the 1999 vote in order to hurt McConkey.

    • Anonymous

      ” Anonymous
      March 30, 2017 at 6:11 pm
      Somebody finally called out Sousa as NOT a legal expert with the standing to criticize the CA? But rather being a teamster?”

      Hey moron, focus. He never claimed to be a legal expert….that’s just your pigeon-holing him so you can take pot shots. Which I might add, brings light to your qualifications in life….non-existen, speaking of (epic) failures, you can’t even insult accurately. LMAO!!!!!

      • semichorus

        Yeah, I’ve never heard the legal expert thing.

        Attorney, yes, which is a technical term for a working and licensed professional. But Sousa is in fact a lawyer.

        Rogers was just trying to take potshots at him. And pretty much unprovoked. His typical straw man, red herring tactics.

        I had to laugh at his put down of bloggers, and his recitation of all the editors he’d had reviewing him by contrast to us amateurs.

        One of them, one of the biggest — Paul Hubler — told people during the McConkey stunts that what Rogers was doing back then during that election season was “disgusting,” and that he would never have allowed it. Hubler was working for Adam Schiff at the time.

    • Joe

      It seriously does not take a legal expert to see that the Burbank City Attorney is incompetent. Look at her loss ratio and what it has cost the city and watch how she is never able to answer a question. INCOMPETENT is what she is.

  8. Penelope

    Will Rogers is a legend in his own distorted mind !
    At the last city council meeting, I feel WR abused the
    the concerned business owner from Magnolia Blvd.,
    pleading for for some kind of assistance / help from
    the city of Burbank regarding the nasty parking problem
    on Magnolia Blvd.

    The city can’t seem to be able to correct this ongoing
    parking dilemma?

    When the business owner asks the city to beautify the
    nasty oversize tree wells to look comparable to the tree
    wells on Burbank Blvd.?

    WR answer was, look how nice the bus stops look???
    If the city would plant flowers on Magnolia
    they did on Burbank Blvd., it would make Magnolia Blvd.
    look great !

    WR said he received an e-mail saying Burbank looks like East L.A.?

    Magnolia Blvd does look like L.A.? Not quite , but close.
    When WR responded to the merchant’s public comment
    on how rudely he and others were treated at “P-BID”
    meetings now defunct! During a five year run
    $1.25 million dollars was squandered by city appointed employees with over the top……..
    inflated salaries, Lavish events & party”s.
    WR answer was he’s never encountered a rude city
    employee in all his years?
    On second round of public comments,
    the merchant named names because WR called him out on it.
    The names he remembered from attending the P-BID
    meetings were:
    (2 ) MARY ALVORD
    These women were self centered, rude and despicable
    to the merchants and property owners.
    WR should do some investigative reporting on the P-BID?
    Which he is totally clueless on!
    We as a city, are in trouble when WR becomes “Mayor”.
    Will Rogers is self centered and he believes his own B.S.
    Talk about RUDE? He tops the list !

    • semichorus

      Rogers’ comments about city employees was ludicrous. Of course he never had problems with any … he was Will Rogers the local COLUMNIST.

      Who I’m sure they were instructed to cooperate with. Like they were going to get documented for their misbehavior? He also forgets about his lawsuit.

      I’ve had a number of very bad experiences with Burbank employees over the years– almost all women-

      –The full-time library clerks in front

      — The desk civilians at the PD lobby, who can be absolutely awful (they treat EVERYONE like an asshole)

      — One horrible woman at BWP, who must get paid by the landlords, she so favors them, to the point of illegality

      — a couple of clerks at planning, who at first get rude when you request public documents, and then get threatening when you cite the law and insist.

      Ask Mike Nolan about that. They once tried to get him arrested. The DA told Burbank to go to hell about a conviction.

      This employee attitude problem used to come up ALL THE TIME at old council meetings. It was one reason behind the creation of the Bob Kramer ombudsman job.

      • Joanne

        A few years ago I went into the city clerks office to ask a question and this blonde woman was a complete bitch to me. I will never go there ever again

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s