A CalWatchdog

The survey, which was cited by Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters, established that the wrongdoing went far beyond the nationally publicized scandals in the small town of Bell, in which a small cadre of administrators and elected officials covertly siphoned millions of dollars away from public use for their own enrichment.

Among the many improprieties: the resignation of the mayor of South El Monte after he admitted taking bribes; officials at the Central Basin Municipal Water District being caught using a $2.75 million slush fund of ratepayer dollars for political machinations; the resignation of two City of Commerce council members for misleading official investigations into their conduct; as well as scandals that led elected officials to quit or go to jail in Cudahy, Lynwood, Maywood, Montebello, South Gate and Vernon.

But something strange has happened since South El Monte Mayor Luis Aguinaga resigned eight months ago after being caught taking bribes from a city contractor for seven years: After a decade-plus of one scandal after another, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office reports a lull in corruption scandals countywide.

According to public records obtained by the Los Angeles Times, just 11 felony public corruption cases were filed last year, down from 39 in 2010.

Explanations vary for lull in prosecutions

In a statement to the Times, Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey suggested that all the prosecutions and forced resignations in recent years might have discouraged corruption. Former state lawmakers Ron Calderon and Tom Calderon — brothers who built a political fiefdom over decades — pleaded guilty to public corruption charges last year after what an investigation showed was years of influence peddling that began at their power base in Montebello and the Central Basin water agency. Also cited as possibly affecting criminal filings: the departure of some senior deputy district attorneys with the most experience in public corruption cases.

Academics have also argued for decades that corruption comes in cycles: scandals lead to crackdowns and tough regulation, which leads to assumptions about problems being addressed and scrutiny slackening, thus leading to new scandals.

But officials at the scandal-scarred Central Basin water agency have a specific reason to stay on the straight and narrow: a new state law adds layers of accountability and transparency specifically designed for the water supplier, which delivers supplies to nearly 2 million Los Angeles County residents.

Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia, D-Bell Gardens, won the signature of Gov. Jerry Brown last September for AB 1794. The measure increases the number of people on the water agency’s board of directors, specifies the ways that the positions can be filled, adopts stricter language on contribution disclosures and says individuals already serving in a elected capacity are ineligible to be Central Basin board members.

Garcia’s measure easily passed the Legislature. Among those joining in the Assembly’s 80-0 vote for AB 1794: Assemblyman Ian Calderon, D-Whittier, son of Charles Calderon and nephew of Ron Calderon.

Ian Calderon, now 31, was first elected to the Assembly in 2012, before prosecutors closed in on his older relatives. He’s not suffering for the sins of his family. After a 2014 primary and general election scares in which he was nearly unseated by Republican Rita Topalian, he was re-elected easily over Topalian in 2016 and serves as Assembly majority floor leader.

Well, maybe not always, as is the case with Assemblywoman Patty Lopez, a pariah in the Democratic Party since she knocked off Raul Bocanegra, a popular incumbent, two years ago. 

Up for re-election in 2016, the party didn’t endorse Lopez (rare for an incumbent absent a scandal), outside interests want nothing to do with her and her Assembly kin are almost nowhere to be found.

But she expects to be back in her office next year, stronger than ever. To her, nothing could be more challenging than her first term.

“I survived,” the thick-accented San Fernando Democrat said with a laugh in a recent interview with CalWatchdog, reflecting on her first term in office. “Believe it or not, the first year was hard.” 

Plagued by inexperience, a lack of connection with many of her colleagues and the loss of her mother, Lopez said the first term was hard just to stay focused. Distractions aside, she managed to author 38 pieces of legislation, 14 of which became law, including one to help conserve Monarch Butterflies and another allowing the use of clotheslines for many residents who want, or need, to save on utility costs.

Her biggest split with the party has been her opposition to high-speed rail, which is set to run straight through her district.

The clothesline bill was emblematic of her primary focus: Constituent services. Lopez reportedly doesn’t spend much time socializing in Sacramento. Instead, she’s at between six to eight community events a week in he district. She keeps only two staffers and an intern in Sacramento, while the large majority of her staff, a dozen or so, stay in her district office where she resolved 312 constituent cases since being in office. 

While all that won’t make her the subject of Robert Caro’s next book, it may be enough for re-election. According to Lopez, it was Bocanegra’s activities outside his district that made voters in his district seek new representation. Instead of campaigning for his own re-election, Bocanegra was on the trail with other candidates trying to help them (media reports suggest Bocanegra was aiming for speaker). 

“I feel like after two years if voters don’t know who you are, they don’t recognize your name, obviously you didn’t spend enough time in the district,” Lopez said of Bocanegra, who was also a one-term Assembly member. “If after two years, if people don’t feel you do anything, they’ll vote for the next person in line.”

Not a politician

Lopez is far from the typical politician. Born in Michoacán, Mexico, Lopez moved to the United States when she was 12. Her mother reportedly didn’t trust the government, so Lopez was not enrolled in school. It wasn’t until her twenties that she got a GED and took English classes. 

Lopez became a citizen in 2000. And while she had a few odd jobs, like working on an assembly line building home security alarms, her experience as an education activist ultimately led her to public office. 

Fearing budget cuts would threaten adult education, and believing Bocanegra, her assemblyman, wasn’t doing anything about it, she challenged him with little money and little support and ended up winning by fewer than 500 votes.

And that’s the short story of how Patty Lopez, who was once adoringly referred to as “The Mexican mom in office,” came to Sacramento.

Bad at fundraising

When a candidate from any party first considers running for office, his or her ability to raise money is the litmus test of viability. The most common criticism of Lopez is that she’s an abysmal fundraiser, something Bocanegra is not.

“Sometimes, they don’t see me as a really strong candidate, because I don’t raise a lot of money,” Lopez said. “I deliver service (to constituents) and I align with the party on major things.”

Democratic Party endorsements are made at the local level, where Bocanegra received 94 percent of the delegate votes in the district. It’s unclear if the party’s concerns were due to Lopez’s viability issue or loyalty to Bocanegra. But according to a party spokesman, the endorsement of a Democratic challenger of a Democratic incumbent is just politics as usual. 

“This race is getting attention because of the top two dynamic but contested Democratic races are nothing new,” said Michael Soller, a spokesman for the California Democratic Party. Soller did provide other examples of the party not backing an incumbent.

“The Democratic Party did her wrong,” said a high-level, Democratic staffer in the Legislature, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “She is everything they are supposed to stand for and they kicked her to the curb — very sad.”

Leadership

Campaign finance records show that a dozen or so legislators have contributed to Lopez, and she said that Assemblymembers Cristina Garcia of Bell Gardens, Susan Talamantes Eggman of Stockton and Adrin Nazarian of Sherman Oaks have offered help on the campaign trail. 

But while both Speaker Anthony Rendon and Majority Floor Leader Ian Calderon endorsed her and contributed to her campaign, neither has attended events with her in the district. 

“This race is a Dem on Dem race where both candidates are good votes for working families and immigrant communities and both have served in the Assembly,” said Rendon spokesman Bill Wong. “That said, the fact that (Rendon) maxed out to her and publicly endorsed her speaks for itself.”  

There’s a difference between endorsing with a max contribution, which doesn’t buy much in the expensive world of campaigns, and going on the trail with a candidate to help raise support and money. And while leadership may have given tepid support, there’s just not a big push to help Lopez stay in office — particularly in an election cycle where the president of the United States endorsed four Democratic legislative candidates.

“I cant remember the Caucus ever leaving an incumbent unprotected like this unless there was a scandal of some sorts,” said Steve Maviglio, a prominent Democratic strategist. “Then again, Bocanegra was a former member.” 

Money talks

Political parties can contribute unlimited amounts to candidates and outside groups can spend unlimited amounts in independent expenditures — so the lack of both is significant. 

Rendon can usually direct party funds to incumbents, except party rules prohibit funds from going to candidates who aren’t endorsed by the party. And if money talks, then the outside groups have said loud and clear they want Bocanegra.

According to a MapLight analysis of campaign finance records, outside groups of mostly business interests have spent $350,000 against Lopez and $1.4 million in support of Bocanegra, while only a pro-women’s group spent on her behalf — just $10,000. And this is where fundraising matters most: Lopez has raised only $133,000 this cycle to Bocanegra’s $1.07 million — money that goes to advertising and professional staff.

Lopez, for her part, doesn’t think fundraising is the measure by which she should be judged though. She’s been a good Democrat and a help to her constituents and she thinks that should be enough.

And voters will soon decide if that’s true. 

Rarely the subject of entertainment industry buzz, Gov. Jerry Brown sparked outrage and confusion among First Amendment advocates by a new law intended to protect actors’ privacy online.

“Actors who don’t want casting directors and fans knowing their age can conceal their birthday information on subscription-based entertainment sites like the Internet Movie Database [IMDb] under a new California law,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “Supporters of the bill, including the film industry’s largest labor union, said it would help curb age-based discrimination for actors and other artists toiling in Hollywood. The measure passed both chambers by wide margins in August,” the paper added. 

Union support

SAG-AFTRA President Gabrielle Carteris, whose organization had begun the push for legislation during the term of the organization’s previous president, was quick to laud the governor’s decision to sign. “Gov. Jerry Brown today stood with thousands of film and television professionals and concerned Californians who urged him to sign AB1687, a California law that will help prevent age discrimination in film and television casting and hiring,” she said, according to Yahoo TV.

AB1687 was authored by 30-year-old first-term Assemblyman Ian Calderon, D-Whittier, who told the LA Weekly his goal was to shelter newcomers to the film and television industry from having their age revealed publicly against their consent. “Even though it is against both federal and state law, age discrimination persists in the entertainment industry,” he said. “AB1687 provides the necessary tools to remove age information from online profiles on employment referral websites to help prevent this type of discrimination.” 

Legal questions

But some respected legal experts have cast doubt on the constitutionality of the law. “This raises serious First Amendment problems,” Irwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Irvine’s School of Law, told the Weekly. “The law is clear that there is a First Amendment right to publish truthful information that is lawfully obtained. Holding someone liable for publishing accurate facts likely violates the First Amendment.” One question for free speech activists, however, has gone as yet unanswered: who would sue? Any plaintiff would have to have standing to bring suit, including celebrities or perhaps less well-known actors affected by the law. 

In response to the criticism, Calderon tried to emphasize that AB1687 had been closely written to fit a specific segment of the internet. “Limiting the bill to only subscribers makes it clear that the bill advances an important government interest,” he told The Hollywood Reporter, “that of reducing age discrimination in a manner that is substantially related to that interest and no more extensive than necessary to achieve that interest.” 

Wary media

Critics have not been convinced. Michael Beckerman, CEO of the Internet Association, warned previously in an opinion column at THR that “[r]equiring the removal of factually accurate age information across websites suppresses free speech. This is not a question of preventing salacious rumors; rather it is about the right to present basic facts that live in the public domain. Displaying such information isn’t a form of discrimination, and internet companies should not be punished for how people use public data.”

Media companies with an offline as well as an online presence have also reacted with wariness. “Opponents of the bill note that even though the law is narrowly tailored to restrict the speech of just a few websites, it’s precisely this narrow language that makes the law useless to begin with,” Gizmodo observed. “If you censor IMDB, why not censor the Los Angeles Times?” Perhaps pondering the same question, the Times editorial board weighed in against the law: “Forcing public sites to remove information about someone at the person’s behest sets a troubling precedent for deleting all kinds of information that’s in the public record, but that someone might not want the public to know,” wrote the board. 

A bill sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, would have added three members to the South Coast Air Quality Management Board, which regulates air quality in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and Orange counties.

And while that probably seems as dull as watching paint dry to nearly everyone who just read it, the measure had major implications for Republicans, local governments, business interests, environmentalists and residents of the broad district that has some of the most toxic air in the nation.

De Leon introduced the board-packing plan shortly after Republicans engineered a takeover of the board, swinging the focus from environmentalists to business interests. In December, the board disregarded SCAQMD staff recommendations and instead adopted rules on refineries backed by the oil industry, and in March it ousted the the longtime director who had been seen as anti-business.  

Representatives to the board are local city council members and county supervisors, appointed locally. De Leon’s bill would have added three seats to the 13-member board, appointed by the the Senate Rules Committee (which de Leon chairs), the Assembly speaker and the governor.

During floor debate, proponents argued that the measure was about adding diversity to the almost all-white board that had no Latinos, which defies the demographics of the heavily-Latino region. 

“Needless to say, I’m disappointed,” de Leon told CalWatchdog on Thursday. “Any time people of color are excluded from decision-making processes directly tied to their health and wellbeing, fundamental change is needed. This is a textbook example of institutional racism.”

De Leon added that Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich, a Republican who also sits on the SCAQMD board, is termed-out and will soon be replaced by “someone far more progressive on the matter,” likely shifting the balance of power back to the environmentalists. 

However, of the current board’s ethnic composition, and the persistent lack of diversity, belies the fact that it’s largely been in Democratic, or environmentalist, control for years. De Leon did not say whether he’d reintroduce similar measures in the future.

Local control

Many opponents of the measure argued that the bill was a power grab by state policy makers at the expense of local control. And the large bloc of Democrats who either voted no or abstained suggest that the matter is not purely partisan.

“State versus local, that’s what this is about,” said Mike Madrid, a GOP strategist who helped devise the SDAQMD takeover. “It happened to be Republicans, but it was a state/local fight.”

But it was still a big win for Republicans, who are steadily slipping in their share of voter registration throughout the state, face the very real possibility of a Democratic supermajority in the Legislature next year and are not considered a consistent threat in any statewide election. For Republicans, local offices are where they can have a policy impact.

And despite several major policy victories for environmentalists, the defeat of the de Leon measure is a big win for the advocates of economic development. 

John Husing, the chief economist of the Inland Empire Economic Partnership, has been studying Southern California’s economy since 1964. His research suggests a correlation between the rise of poverty and the rise of environmental regulations in the state. Husing argues that while the policies have had a positive impact on air quality in the region, the policies are imbalanced in relation to business development and subsequently drive poverty, which affects health. 

“The whole air-quality, green initiative is having detrimental effect on moving people out of poverty and into the middle class,” Husing said of the SCAQMD region and the neighboring central valley.

Environment v. economy

Environmentalists have often said that any job loss associated with these air-quality policies would be offset by job creation in green sectors. However, Husing says statistics say that isn’t true, at least not in areas with high unemployment, like many communities in the SCAQMD.

Citing data from the California Employment Development Department and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Husing said from 2010 to 2016 the U.S. added 836,000 manufacturing jobs, compared to California which added 42,500 — a mere 5.1 percent. While the growth rate is on pace with with the national average, it lags by over 50 percent behind the state’s share of gross state product.

Husing said that the sluggish growth of manufacturing jobs in the state is attributed to three factors: Companies leaving, companies growing beyond the state’s borders and out-of-state companies refusing to grow in the state.

“Whose affected by that? It’s not the companies,” Husing said. “They’re doing fine some place else. It’s workers whose jobs are never created. … So you’re basically cutting off routes to the middle class for those workers.”

The vote

The measure failed just before the stroke of midnight on Wednesday, 30-36. And while it is seen as a victory for Republicans, the measure was largely defeated by the 14 assemblymembers, all Democrats, who didn’t vote.

Those who didn’t vote were Luis Alejo of Watsonville, Joaquin Arambula of Fresno, Kansen Chu of San Jose, Jim Frazier of Oakley, Rich Gordon of Menlo Park, Adam Gray of Merced (who was not present), Kevin Mullin of South San Francisco and Shirley Weber of San Diego. The six who didn’t vote and live in the region were Ian Calderon of Whittier, Eduardo Garcia of Coachella, Mike Gipson of Carson, Roger Hernandez of West Covina, Chris Holden of Pasadena and Patrick O’Donnell of Long Beach.

His red pen and marked-up copy stood out as he and fellow protester Mike McGetrick reached the sixth floor of a steely high-rise in Anaheim.

Their message for Assemblyman Tom Daly, an Anaheim Democrat, was simple: “I’m just gonna go with this,” Lauten said, unfolding his statement. “I’m gonna tell him to say no,” McGetrick said.

With only one working month left in session, California legislators will likely consider a bill that would eliminate most religious exemptions from Title IX requirements for colleges and universities that receive public funds. Title IX is a federal policy designed to combat gender discrimination in colleges and universities, and SB1146 would, among other things, require housing and restroom accommodations that adhere to the student’s gender identity.

Religious freedom v. discrimination

Lauten, McGetrick and others split into groups to target five Southern California assemblymen last week to urge a “no” vote. Some groups came with more posters, cameras and statements for the media than the Anaheim protesters, but all were ready to discuss their concerns.

Opponents argue the bill would restrict their First Amendment protections, while supporters say current and prospective LGBT students are discriminated against by religious colleges, especially after federal recommendations that Title IX should include transgender students.

“This is about putting outrageous pressure on schools, opening them up to interminable liabilities, and at its core, making it easy for people to deprive these schools of the opportunity to operate by and to pursue the core principles they’ve laid out,” said Arthur Schaper, the director of California MassResistance, a group that aims to limit the LGBT movement and organized the protests.

But does it fight discrimination?

SB1146, sponsored by Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, would allow only colleges that prepare students for religious vocations to apply for a Title IX exemption, a special waiver that allows colleges to make admissions and hiring decisions based on their religious beliefs about sexuality. The bill would also require that colleges make public their Title IX exemptions.

Current law exempts religious institutions from both federal and state laws if they believe Title IX requirements are not consistent with their religious beliefs. 

“All students deserve to feel safe in institutions of higher education, regardless of whether they are public or private,” Lara said in a statement in April. “California has established strong protections for the LGBTQ community and private universities should not be able to use faith as an excuse to discriminate and avoid complying with state laws. No university should have a license to discriminate.” Lara did not respond to CalWatchdog’s requests for comment.

Besides Daly’s office, California MassResistance activists visited district offices of four other Assembly Democrats: Ian Calderon of Whittier, Miguel Santiago of Los Angeles, Patrick O’Donnell of Long Beach and Chris Holden of Pasadena.

Exemptions on the rise

At least 42 California institutions qualify for the exemption. And of the nine that have submitted applications, seven have been granted and two are pending, according to the U.S. Department of Education.

Exemptions are usually granted, though the college must specify the areas to which their application applies, such as in housing, athletics, facilities or admission by gender identity.

Though Title IX exemptions have been around since the federal Higher Education Act was amended in 1972, exemption requests have soared in the last few years since protections were expanded to include transgender students.

According to the Human Rights Campaign, two schools requested exemptions between 2009 and 2013. In 2014 and 2015, there were at least 56.

Limits to religious freedom?

The Supreme Court has ruled on the limits of religious freedom at universities before. Perhaps the most well-known ruling was against Bob Jones University in South Carolina.

Bob Jones University did not admit black students until 1971, but barred interracial dating and marriages among students after that. In 1976, the university lost its tax exempt status based on IRS regulations against racially discriminatory admissions policies.

The Supreme Court upheld the IRS’ decision to withhold tax exempt status in 1983. Instead of changing its interracial dating policy, the university chose to keep it intact and pay years of back taxes.

“Title IX was created to stop discrimination based on sex,” Schaper said. “Now Democrats are distorting the word ‘sex’ to mean orientation and identity.”

Schaper is also concerned about the bill’s requirement that makes Title IX exemptions public. Colleges would be required to advertise their Title IX exemption status on admission materials, in student orientations and in a prominent place on campus.

“This puts an undue burden on colleges and makes them vulnerable to lawsuits,” Schaper said.

Discussion on campus

An LGBT activist group at Biola University in La Mirada is pushing against religious colleges from the other side of Title IX.

In May, Erin Green, the executive director of Biolans’ Equal Ground — a group of Christian, affirming LGBTQ students and supporters — wrote a letter to the college asking it withdraw its pending Title IX exemption request.

“There is a vast difference between upholding Biola University code of conduct versus the outright discrimination against a certain group of people,” Green wrote. “The request for a Title IX exemption is an attack on your LGBTQ students and their safety.”

But Biola opposes SB1146 and it doesn’t appear institutional leaders will withdraw the college’s exemption request.

“We are not asking the LGBT community to change who they are,” Biola president Barry Corey said in a video created as part of the college’s “Oppose SB1146” campaign. “We are simply asking that they do not force us to change who we are, either.”

SB1146 already passed the Senate and faces a floor vote in the Assembly. If it passes, the bill will reach Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk later this year. Brown has been supportive of pro-transgender and LGBT legislation, most recently signing the “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Disparities Reduction Act” in 2015.

Bipartisan coalition urging vote on civil asset forfeiture bill

Good morning! Happy hump day.

Proponents of a measure to close a loophole that allows local law enforcement agencies to seize citizens’ property without a criminal conviction or even an arrest — a practice dubbed “policing for profit” — are moving behind the scenes to shore up support for the bill that died last September after a last-minute flurry of opposition from law enforcement.

The high-profile coalition of supporters — which spans the partisan divide with powerful advocacy groups and influential members of both parties — is aiming for a vote in the Assembly next week to block law enforcement from circumventing strict state law by partnering with the federal government in a program called “equitable sharing.”

On the right, Republican consultant Mike Madrid and Shawn Steel, a former chairman of the California Republican Party, are urging Republican support while California Democratic Party Chairman John Burton is working with Democrats. 

CalWatchdog has more.

In other news:

• Kevin Faulconer, the Republican mayor of San Diego, says he will not run for governor in 2018 if re-elected in November as mayor, reports the San Diego Union-Tribune. Faulconer was widely seen as Republicans’ best potential candidate for governor.
• The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved a measure on Tuesday that amends its sanctuary city policy, giving local law enforcement greater discretion to notify immigration officials of an undocumented felon’s release from custody, according to SF Gate.
• “The Cal State Board of Trustees approved a plan Tuesday to raise faculty salaries by 10.5% over three years, capping a long-running dispute over pay that threatened to wreak havoc on the nation’s largest public university system,” writes the Los Angeles Times.
• “Assemblyman Ian Calderon, D-Whittier, has spent $41,500 in political funds to support Proposition 50, an anti-corruption measure put on the ballot in response to issues raised when his uncle, former Sen. Ronald Calderon, was indicted in a bribery case,” writes the Los Angeles Times.

Assembly:

• Full slate of hearings, including packed appropriations meeting.

Senate:

• Several joint hearings, including one on a ballot initiative to redirect bag fees away from grocers.

Gov. Brown:

• No public events scheduled.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @kelseybrugger @mattmahon

More than one week ago, the Hews Media Group broke a big story about California State Assembly Speaker John Perez collaborating with former Assemblyman Tom Calderon and Central Basin Municipal Water District officials, “in an attempt to coerce three Maywood Mutual Water Districts into taking on unwanted projects that if they did not accept, the districts, as Calderon said, would be ‘dissolved with a stroke of a pen.’”

One of the water districts’ general managers later asked who Tom Calderon was, with Calderon answering, “I was a State Assemblyman, my other brothers were Assemblymen too, so (laughing) we got the politics covered.”

The projects would have landed Calderon and his allies, as well as the Central Basin Municipal Water District, a lucrative $25 million dollar consulting contract to “fix problems” that one Maywood Mutual Water District General Manager insisted twice in the audio recording “we don’t have, or we were already working with the WRD to fix,” Randy Economy and Brian Hews reported.

Hews Media Group has three audio tapes of the meetings and deal making, which are now in the hands of the FBI.

“Calderon is heard on the audio recording saying he was ‘summoned’ by Speaker Perez and the Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to call the meeting that included Enrique Gasca, one of Perez’s top staff lieutenants, CBMWD General Manager Art Agiular, Sergio Palos, General Manager of MMWD #1, Gustavo Villa, GM of MMWD #2, and Bob Ruhlf, who is the GM in District #3,” Hews reported.

This is big news worthy of a RICO investigation. RICO is the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, passed in 1970, to eliminate the ill-effects of organized crime on the nation’s economy.

But since the Hews Media Group October 24 story, it’s been only crickets in the mainstream media.

The other Calderon scandal

Instead, most news outlets are focused on the latest scandal surrounding Sen. Ron Calderon, D-Montbello, Tom Calderon’s brother and chairman of the Senate Select Committee on California’s Film and Television Industries. He stands accused of offering to help provide a state tax credit for films that cost less than a $1 million.

On Saturday, I published a story about Freshman Assemblyman Ian Calderon, D-Whittier, Ron’s nephew, authored two bills in 2013, AB 344 and AB 533, also involving the movie industry. And, Freshman Assemblyman Ian Calderon, 28, was given the chairmanship of the Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism and Internet Media committee, by Speaker John Perez.

Again, it’s been crickets in the main stream media.

It is likely that representatives of Assembly Speaker Perez made some phone calls discouraging further reporting of his Calderon connection. Hews Media Group reported that the Los Angeles Times was also provided with the audio tapes, but refused to do the story.

The meeting, the deal

At the time of the meeting, Hews Media Group reported that records show Calderon was being paid $11,000 per month by Central Basin Municipal Water District for “public affairs.”

Aguilar begins the meeting with an explanation of why they were “summoned” by Perez and Villaraigosa and then says to the Maywood Mutual Water Districts general managers, “anything can happen if the money is there.”

“Almost three minutes into the meeting, Enrique Gasca enters the room and is introduced as Speaker Perez’ Director by Calderon,” Hews wrote. “Calderon goes on to say, ‘if we can’t make this (the project) happen we are all in a lot of trouble, in terms of things you want from Sacramento and his (Speaker Perez) ability to retaliate or encourage things… I have never seen a Speaker who does not get what he wants.’”

Calderon continues: “Here’s the deal, we need to be proactive, if we are not, if we do not put a plan together we can all support, the MMWD’s can be dissolved with (Calderon snapping his fingers) a ‘stroke of the pen’, it can be done,” reported Hews Media Group.

“One of the GM’s angrily says, ‘and this is your solution to better quality water?’”

“Calderon answers him, ‘it (the water quality) doesn’t matter, the (goal of the project) does not matter.’”

The bill that Calderon was talking about was Assembly Bill 240, first authored by Perez after he became Speaker. The current bill was authored by Assemblyman Anthony Rendon, D-Lynwood.

The bill was also being pushed by former Assemblyman Tom Calderon, and only targeted the Maywood Mutual Water District.

AB 240 was signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown.  According to Rendon, “AB 240 addresses the water quality problems in the 63rd Assembly district by requiring mutual water companies like those that that deliver water to Maywood’s residents to comply with the Brown Act and the Public Records Act—two icons of public agency law.”

The audio recording has Calderon telling the group that “the quality of the water is not an issue, but painting a perception that the water is bad is the intent and if the water is presented as being bad, then the money will be there.”

He goes on to say, “if we can do that, then that will make him (Speaker Perez) feel comfortable enough to go ahead and move forward (to disburse the $25 million). He (Perez) will want to have an independent agency receive the disbursement-Calderon indicates that CBMWD as the agency-and would be the appropriate entity to control the process.”

Twenty minutes into the meeting one of the Maywood water districts general managers asks “what do you want us to do?” Calderon’s response was, “as long as it is agreeable to us (Calderon, Aguilar), I don’t think the Speaker (Perez) is going to care how it is done, as long as it is getting there,” Hews reported.

Aguilar then prompts the GM’s for a “needs list” and tells them that, “it is in the best interests of you and your owners to cooperate with us and Speaker Perez.”

“In what was probably indicative of the entire meeting, one GM says to Aguilar, ‘so you want me to give you a list of things that I need to replace to solve a problem I don’t have.’” Aguilar’s response was a loud laugh followed by “yeah.”

For the audio recordings, click HERE.

Freshman Assemblyman Ian Calderon, D-Whittier, authored two bills in 2013, AB 344 and AB 533, involving the movie industry.

His uncle, Ron Calderon, D-Montbello,  is the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on California’s Film and Television Industries. He stands accused of offering to help provide a state tax credit for films that cost less than a $1 million.

The younger Calderon went one for two. AB 344 did not pass and was shelved. It would have authorized the Labor Commissioner to collect into the existing Entertainment Work Permit Fund from child actors, and use the proceeds from this fund to pay the costs of administrating and enforcing the permit  program.

But AB 533 was passed by both houses of the Legislature, and was signed into law in August by Gov. Jerry Brown. AB 533 “exempts an employer of a minor under a contract for services as an extra, background performer, or in a similar capacity from the requirement that the employer set aside 15% of the minor’s gross earnings in trust for the benefit of the minor,” the bill analysis said.

The bill’s support came from BizParentz Foundation, Children in Film, Inc., Entertainment Partners, and The Actors Fund of America.

Affidavit shows case against older Calderon

An FBI affidavit obtained by Al Jazzera America detailed alleged bribe-taking by Ron Calderon.

“Undercover FBI agents posed as independent movie executives interested in taking advantage of a program in which films with budgets of $1 million or more are eligible for special tax credits,” Al Jazeera reported. “The agents, focusing on Calderon, asked the senator to help lower the budget threshold to $500,000. Calderon, who chairs the Senate Select Committee on California’s Film and Television Industries, agreed to help lower it to $750,000 but wanted financial assistance provided to his grown children, the affidavit says.”

The document alleges that Calderon accepted $60,000 for bribes from an FBI agent posing as a Los Angeles film producer, to help change a tax credit law and hire a woman posing as the agent’s girlfriend as a Senate staffer, the affidavit says.

“According to the affidavit, the FBI agent gave Calderon $30,000 for work the senator’s daughter never did,” the Los Angeles Times reported. “In return, Calderon offered to help provide a state tax credit for films that cost less than a $1 million. The FBI agent alleges he made another $30,000 in payment to Calderon for hiring his ‘girlfriend’ to work on his office staff. The woman was actually an FBI agent.”

AB 533 passed the Senate floor five days after Sen. Ron Calderon’s office was raided by the FBI. Ron Calderon voted in favor of nephew Ian’s bill.

Editor’s Note: This is Part One of a series on the Calderon family.

June 13, 2013

By John Hrabe

It wasn’t quite the Academy Awards. But the 60 or so people assembled last Saturday afternoon at the Whittier Center Theatre were excited just the same.

The festival, a digital media competition organized by Assemblyman Ian Calderon, D-City of Industry, in conjunction with the California Arts Council, featured the works of 58 area high school students, who produced short clips on human rights and genocide. The nearby picture shows Calderon with two students getting awards.

“Around here, many of the kids won’t go to college because of money,” said Calderon, who provided small scholarships to some of the participants. “I want them to know there are opportunities out there.”

The kids were vulnerable — putting their creations up for judgment by the community. It’s something Ian knows about. Earlier this year, when he and two of his legislative colleagues released their own digital media creation, a surfer’s perspective on coastal protection, Ian’s father expressed his misgivings.

“The surf caucus?” recalled Ian’s dad, Charles Calderon, a former assemblyman and state senator. “I mean, in my day, surfing was associated with ‘Fast Times at Ridgemont High.’”

The film was released in 1982, the same year that Charles won his first election to the Assembly. The film’s 1980s California slacker milieu is an anathema to Charles’s tough-guy image, especially because he came within a handful of votes of dethroning then Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, the self-proclaimed “Ayatollah of the Assembly.”

The old political rules, Ian says, no longer apply. Yet, he understands why it took some time for his father to come around. “The old guard keep things close to the vest because that’s when they come after you,” Ian said.

The Calderon “Dynasty” Storyline

This week, everyone seems to be coming after the Calderons. No sooner had FBI agents executed a search warrant at the Capitol offices of Democratic state Sen. Ron Calderon, Charles’s brother, than the press was churning out headlines about the “political dynasty” mired in scandal. “Sen. Ron Calderon, target of FBI raid, is part of a political dynasty,” read the headline of one LA Times piece. The Times wasn’t alone. Almost every major outlet has repeated some version of the “Southern California political dynasty” storyline.

The Calderons have certainly made politics the family business. Charles, the eldest brother, started it off in the Assembly in 1982, followed by middle brother, Tom, in 1998, then Ron in 2002. Last year, Ian, the surfer son, won a hard-fought campaign for his own seat in the Legislature. The dynasty storyline is easy and convenient. It’s also an oversimplification of the major differences among the Calderons.

The people who know the Calderons best, old friends, current and former staffers, community leaders, and Sacramento lobbyists, say that each of the Calderons has brought a unique style and approach to the family business. Far from speaking with a uniform voice, the Calderons often have had heated political disagreements within the family and been on opposite sides of controversial legislative fights.

The FBI says it won’t comment on the ongoing investigation, which has only intensified the Capitol rumor mill. The best evidence suggests that the FBI is investigating Ron’s relationship with the Central Basin Municipal Water District, where Tom has worked as a high-priced consultant. At least one state Senator, Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, has confirmed that he has been subpoenaed.

That Ron and Tom are the subjects of the FBI investigation, without any evidence to suggest that either Charles or Ian is involved, doesn’t surprise many Calderon confidants. When speaking candidly on background or not for attribution, these individuals described two brothers in conflict with Charles’s reputation as an honest broker and effective legislator.

Centinela Valley school desegregation case

Last Thursday afternoon, I sat down with Charles Calderon just a few blocks from the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office, where his professional career began as a deputy city attorney. Under then-City Attorney Burt Pines, now an LA County Superior Court judge, Calderon got his start prosecuting misdemeanor cases that ranged from assaults to drunk driving. “My dream was to be a lawyer,” Calderon explained.

After two years, he moved into private practice, while also serving on the school board. Almost immediately, Calderon took up a low-paying, controversial school desegregation case representing a group of white, black and Latino parents that had already been turned away by the NAACP and MALDEF.

“Here I was, I’d just started with a private law firm, and I’m taking a risky case,” Calderon recalled of the lawsuit. “The case was a 50-50 proposition, maybe.”

Calderon’s clients claimed that the Centinela Valley Union High School District had closed a Lawndale high school in order to prevent integration of other high schools in the area. It was an uphill battle; the parents had to show intentional segregation. So Chuck, in search of any evidence to show de jure segregation, headed down to the school district headquarters to review years of board minutes.

Hours into his search, a secretary offered Calderon something to drink and casually mentioned that all the meetings were recorded. “I immediately knew if there was going to be anything, it’d be on those tapes,” he said. “Finally, I heard it.”

Calderon found audio of school board members making racial slurs about the students at Lennox High School, the segregated school that the board kept open. The school district quickly settled. Writing of the case in 1985, the Los Angeles Times observed, “The Lawndale group raised the focus of the community debate to a loftier level.”

“It takes discipline to go through that kind of exercise,” Charles proudly shared as he sipped a cup of coffee and ate a slice of pie a la mode. “It also takes a lead ass.”

A disciplined taskmaster who’d drive staff crazy

A year later, Charles was up and on his feet, walking door-to-door in his first legislative campaign. That first election, he estimates, he walked 98 precincts. He’d walk one side of the street, his mother the other side.

The discipline — to finish law school, to tediously review school board minutes, to walk door-to-door — explains Calderon’s approach in Sacramento. His former legislative staff members consider him “a taskmaster.”

“Chuck used to drive staff crazy,” says Tom White, who worked for Calderon all six years of his second stint in the Assembly. “On policy, he was a taskmaster. He wanted to walk through the bill, talk through the bill and think his way through it.”

Charles: “Head and shoulders above his brothers”

Phil Pace, a Montebello community leader whose friendship with Charles goes back decades, describes him as someone who has “always been straightforward.”

“I consider him a good friend, a good person, and a good legislator,” Pace said. “He tried to do the right thing for the right reasons.”

Personal friends say that Charles’s smarts and discipline are what separate him from his brothers. Another close personal friend, who has known the family since the days before a Calderon served in the Legislature, described Charles as “head and shoulders above his brothers.”

“In terms of everything, smarts, style, class, honesty, work ethic,” the friend said of Charles, the first in his family to earn a college degree and the only one to graduate from law school. “That doesn’t take anything away from his brothers. They just don’t have Chuck’s smarts, not even close.”

Part Two will explore Ron and Tom’s Reputation in Sacramento