Second, why the HECK did the city buy the SUV in FRESNO? Didn’t Johnson just get through saying “As mayor you have to lead by example”?  Um, buying high ticket items outside the Sacramento area is NOT setting a good example, Mr. Mayor. Not a good example at all.

So much for supporting business in Sacramento.   Wonder how Matt Mahood feels about this. Perhaps this would be a good topic to explore (and rebuke) at the mayor’s next Metro Chamber-sponsored  “State of the City” address?

I had previously suggested a BUY SACRAMENTO! campaign prior to Johnson taking office. What better way to raise tax revenues than to educate residents about how their internet purchases (and purchases in, e.g., Fresno) ROB the local economy of badly needed revenue? Johnson never responded, of course. Then again he didn’t respond to my suggestion that he hold the state of the city address in a public venue (like a park), for free, and invite local bands and caterers out to truly address “the city” instead of only addressing its business leaders.

Third, since we’re celebrating LABOR DAY and all, did you know Johnson not only has police personnel driving him around, but also has them OPENING HIS CAR DOOR for him?  I was quite surprised when  I watched this video and saw–what I presume to be–a Sacramento Police Department detective opening his door for him. How humiliating for this sworn officer. Wow.

I thought Johnson was all about SERVICE TO OTHERS?

KJ, you are a Christian, right? No disrespect intended here, but did you catch that chapter in the Bible titled John 13? Servant Leadership is the theme. You may want to read it again if it’s been a while. Next time you go out maybe you should labor a little, and open your own door? Maybe even open the doors for those officers? I know how important “service to others” is to you, so I thought I w0uld just add a gentle reminder.

Fourth, did Johnson REALLY need a new SUV right now in the midst of this recession, the crippling city budget situation, with the 13% unemployment rate? Seems kind of like a kick in the teeth to residents? Am I overreacting?

Fifth, does Johnson REALLY need Sacramento Police Department detectives chauffeuring him around? Does he feel even the slightest bit of guilt about this? When departments are laying cops off, when thugs are robbing and shooting people in pharmacies, stealing copper from schools, etc etc etc etc cops are driving Johnson around? I just don’t get it. If I was mayor I would NEVER have a city-paid “security detail.” I would never even consider it. But that’s just me.

Happy Labor Day Weekend everyone.

Watch here if it doesn’t load

There is so much I intend to comment on.. but for starters how about this one “looking down at my  council members…”   Fun with Freudian slips.

PROVERBS 16:18. That is what I am going to start posting every time I read something about Kevin Johnson’s dismal, time consuming  “strong mayor initiative.” In fact that is what I am going to post every time Johnson unleashes his ego going forward..

When Johnson took office I said his NUMBER ONE challenge would be to transition from celebrity to public servant. I warned his ego could be his worst enemy. Well I hate to say it, but I told you so, Mayor. I saw all this coming  a year ago and wrote many times about it.

Johnson, wake up and smell the reality all around you. You may be a celebrity, and yes a lot of people want to stand next to you or get your autograph, but it is not for the reasons you think.

Mayor, you are only a celebrity to those who fawn over athletes and are enamored with anything they see on TV. To the rest of us you are merely a public servant. What part of this do you not understand? What will it take for you to comprehend that respect must be EARNED with proven communication, collaboration, and sound leadership??

PS: Hey Mayor: You see now how it feels when people whisper and talk while you’re trying to talk Mayor? Now maybe you’ll stop doing it when members of the public are addressing you on the dais..?

Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap

[Ray sits in Starbucks with his staffers discussing the upcoming election and reviewing various press releases]

Ray [pointing to screen print of a blog on the table in front of him]: What’s this business by this Cosmos feller from News and Review saying someone bought my name? Who are these people? How is this possible?

Staffer2: Yes sir, in a nutshell someone appears to have bought your  name on the web.

Staffer [impatient]: Uhh bought your DOMAIN name sir, not your actual name of course.

Ray: Are you two telling me I have been the victim of identity theft?

Staffer2: Technically yes.

Staffer: Technically NO.

Ray [exasperated]: Yes or no!!?

Staff [glaring at staffer2]: NO!

Ray: That’s it get the chief of police on the phone right this instant.

[Staffer2 dials and hands the phone to Ray.. Staffer glares at his colleague]

Ray: Yellow…. who is this? Oh hi Chief it’s Ray… hey listen I have a code red emergency and I’m going to need you to send a few units–maybe even SWAT– out to Natomas.

Chief: What in the world are you talking about?!

Ray: Someone. People. They stole my good name. It’s all over the news.

Chief: What news? I haven’t seen anything.

Ray: The uhh…  [looks at screen print again] the NEWS..  all the newspapers.. I’m looking at a headline about it RIGHT NOW by the Cosmos feller.

Chief: What do you mean they stole your good name? They pulled YOUR campaign signs now too?

Ray: No no no. They literally went and bought my name on the black market on the internet… probably for thousands of dollars for all I know.. and the SPOA may even been in on it too.

Chief: Yeah maybe the pipefitters too, huh?

Ray: Listen, no offense, but I don’t speak your cop language. Here, talk to my staffer [shoves phone at Staffer]

Staffer: Uh hi Chief well apparently someone bought the raytretheway.com on the internet and Mr. T is hot about it.

Chief: WOW!! That’s amazing!!

Staffer: What, that they bought raytretheway.com?

Chief: No that it was available to begin with!

Staffer: Yeah well…

Chief: What did they put on the site?

Staffer: It’s an empty, blank, white slate with absolutely no substance whatsoever.

Chief: Ironic.

Staffer: Not funny.

Chief: How about this, tell your boss I will send Mayor Johnson’s security detail over. I think they are out on lunch right now. Keep your eye out for a big motorcade of black SUVs with tinted windows ok? Ha ha ha!

Staffer [feigning importance]: Sure thing Chief, we’ll talk to you later, thanks for your help [presses end and puts phone on table]

Ray: Well?????? Are they sending units over here? Maybe we should suggest canine units too? That could make a big impact. Show these  people we have teeth.

Staffer [grabbing coat and helping Ray to his feet gently]: You bet sir, they are sending the units. Lots and lots and lots of units, ok?

Ray: SUPER! So I’m going to get my good name back right??

Staffer2: Technically YES sir.

[staffer sneers at staffer2 behind Ray's back and mouths the words  "shut up!"]

. If the mayor is not seeking new P.R. representation, he should be..  OK I admit that was a bombastic headline intended to provoke double-takes.   Not THAT “F” bomb!  Get your mind outta the gutter! It’s only a  parody of a KCRA newscast covering the Ray Kerridge press conference. Of course I’m just having some fun with satire here, but the point remains: KJ’s P.R. really needs a reboot. Check out this book, Mayor:

Armchair P.R. advice aside, should we laud Johnson for admitting his failure? Not if he is passive aggressively implying that he has only failed because there is some conspiracy against him among the council. That seems to be what he is saying. KCRA quotes him:  “There is tension among city council members.” Errrr no.  There is tension BETWEEN Johnson and city council members. Gosh I wonder why. I wonder if it’s because the first thing Johnson did as mayor was attempt a hostile takeover of city government? Hmmmmmmmmm.

I am really beginning to think Johnson perceived the entire city government as broken and truly believed he was going to be the people’s hero who reformed it. He was dead wrong. Instead of reviving city government, he set out to reform it. The result? The majority of  his  actions  have been divisive and  NOT conducive to team building and cohesion. He has done just about ZERO to build bridges (and trust) to instill a true spirit of collaboration with the council. In fact I speculate he never wanted to work with the council in the first place.

But in the end I agree with Johnson. Even though his press conference language is all but guaranteeing he will never win another election again, he has indeed failed to lead at city hall. It’s really too bad he jumped the gun and wanted  to be strong mayor before he ever took a shot at being a strong leader.

Strong or weak in mayoral status, Johnson was expected to be the type of leader who UNITED people. That was the spirit of the Obama campaign and people were under the [false] impression that was also the spirit of Johnson’s. It’s not that he has failed to “change the way city government works,” it’s that he has failed to be an effective leader.

In my opinion Johnson’s failure to work WITH the city council (I’m pretty sure the first time he called them his “colleagues” was a week ago–only after his SAMI bombed)  will most likely be his legacy unless he does a complete 180. I THOUGHT RE Graswich might bring some sanity to the table, but that has definitely failed to materialize–in fact it seems Johnson’s rep has taken on even more water since Graswich got on board.

Finally, I think it’s astonishing people are STILL coaxing Johnson to continue fighting for strong mayor given all that has transpired.  Those who care to see him succeed should be imploring him to step away from the strong mayor thing for good and start BUILDING BRIDGES–something that I have called for him to do since DAY ONE

For a brief moment in time, it appeared as though the stars were finally beginning to align for Johnson, especially when it was divulged that none of the proposals demanded even a dime of public funding. Johnson seemed to have pulled off the impossible–and he didn’t even need to fly to Vegas to get it done!

Enter city council dead weight  Robert “I-still-hate-you-for-winning-the-election” King Fong, and CA Assembly hopeful Kevin McCarthy in last week’s council meeting.  In my opinion both did their best to stage a hostile takeover of SAP in last week’s meeting (watch here: http://sacramento.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=8). Given their painfully awkward  attempts to remain PC while implicitly ripping Johnson (and SAP chairman Chris Lehane), it’s obvious to me they got together before the meeting and agreed on a strategy (which was to direct city planner John Dangberg to analyze the leading land swap proposal supported by the Maloofs and the NBA).

Johnson isn’t happy about this development–or the council members’ behavior on the dais last week.  He refers to Fong’s awkward, rambling, implicit diatribe as “charades and games” and smacks McCarthy down for his character assassination of Lehane. I agree with Johnson wholeheartedly on both counts. Fong clearly has a well-documented problem with speaking in direct terms, and McCarthy was absolutely WRONG for dissing Lehane. In fact McCarthy owes Lehane and the public an apology in my opinion. That is not conduct becoming of a city council member (let alone a member of the Assembly!)

So what gives? Why are are Fong, McCarthy and co. suddenly so passionate (and angry) about SAP? Well DUH! Because it’s SUCCEEDING and their names aren’t on it!  Hello!

I suspect King Fong and McCarthy can’t stand the thought of Johnson pulling this off without their “help.”  Forget the fact that Johnson laid out a clear plan from the beginning and said he was going to bring the leading proposal to them for support. Forget the fact that Johnson is the ONLY PERSON IN SACRAMENTO HISTORY who has led an effort that produced proposals that don’t demand public financial support. Forget the fact that the council has FAILED miserably to work with the Maloofs and/or the NBA and/or local developers to produce a viable proposal. Forget the fact that the SAP’s staff has worked tirelessly on the public’s behalf to come up with a plan that would undoubtedly be a GOOD THING for Sacramento. It seems to me,  to McCarthy and Fong, the only thing that matters is that something good is happening for Sacramentans and they have absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

But wait a minute here. Is that so wrong? Perhaps King Fong and McCarthy have a point. Is this just another exclusive Johnson crusade intended to boost his ego and approval ratings, council be damned?  Personally, I don’t think so–BUT I can see how some might get the PERCEPTION that it is.  One could argue Johnson should have anticipated who his most vocal critics would be, then actively solicited them to PARTICIPATE on the task force team before it even launched. Johnson claimed he did that by sharing his plans early on, but Johnson apparently doesn’t understand there is a HUGE difference between sharing one’s plans and actually getting documented, BUY IN from colleagues EARLY ON to avoid this very sort of sabotage we are seeing now.

Granted, McCarthy is very immature and unprofessional at times, and King Fong clearly has great difficulty in communicating honestly and openly (I agree with Johnson that his “games and charades” are getting old), but I believe the in-fighting we’re seeing now is the result of poor communication between Johnson and the council representatives, Watching the videos one gets the feeling these people do NOT routinely and actively sit down and problem solve together. It seems there is a lot of backstabbing, gossip, and private meetings going on in silos. All of them are saying the public is confused.  Yes, we are. We don’t understand why the council doesn’t work together as a TEAM to solve problems for Sacramentans. We don’t understand why politics are OBVIOUSLY more important to council members than the common good.

Here’s to idea of teamwork to get this arena deal done for Sacramento.  Try it people, you might like it.

Poor Mayor Johnson is taking hostile fire again. Shots rang out all over the media kingdom today when two “ranking” [Republican] senators released information gleaned from an earlier investigation of St. Hope. Specifically the report states Mayor J offered to pay a young woman $1,000 per month in return for her silence about a groping charge she had leveled against the former St Hope boss.

To compound the issue for Johnson, none other than his fiance, Michelle Rhee, is alleged to have played–as one commenter quipped–”the cleaner” for Johnson when word got out about the girls’ accusations against him.

Rhee’s alleged involvement wouldn’t be too remarkable if it weren’t for the fact that she was a St Hope board member at the time, and is alleged to have told at least one employee that she was making the allegations her “number one priority.”

If you can’t read between the lines, the implication here is that a St Hope board member entrusted to do the right thing for the kids at all times MAY have helped a high ranking school official accused of groping one of them avoid prosecution. I’m not a legal expert by any stretch, but me thinks such an act would fall under the umbrella of obstruction of justice, if not aiding and abetting. Perhaps there would have been an element of conspiracy present as well.

At the time, Rhee was on the board of St. Hope. A former St. Hope employee who reported one of the allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct by Johnson told Walpin’s investigators that Rhee “learned of the allegations and played the role of a fixer, doing ‘damage control,’” the congressional report says. -Washington Examiner

But come on you thrill seekers, who are we fooling here? Certainly not the likes of the good mayor’s ardent supporters who will tell you this is all ancient history, and has been approved, stamped, and certified squeaky clean by none other than the Sacramento Police Department and the infallible U.S. Attorney. With typical Mayor Johnson flare Ms. Rhee dismissed the report today as  a “rehash[ing] of old allegations that have long since been dismissed and deemed meritless by local and federal law enforcement officials, including the Sacramento Police Department and the U.S. Attorney.”

So there! You nosey, blood-thirsty, rubbernecking, sensationalist voter vermin! As teens say these days, “You got told, son!” (Don’t ask). It’s high time you idol shunners get off your political high horse and do like the Romans do and celebrate the Mayor’s passion. Get with the program, comrades! And while you’re at it,  you need to give the mayor’s lady props for assimilating the SunKing vernacular so quickly. She talks like a seasoned Johnson PR vet!  Goes to show the best way to learn a language is immersion. Her statement is sharp, efficient, and bluntly dismissive–in other words it has all the markings of the ubiquitous Johnson name brand Sacramentans have grown accustomed to. In other words, she got game. Somewhere Col. Hannibal Maviglio must be cracking a proud smile.

On a related note, judging from the comments in response to this latest accusation against Johnson on the Sacramento Bee’s site, it appears as though Johnson’s online defensive contingent has expanded considerably since the last accusation outbreak. And to think Johnson wasn’t even the primary target of this report.  Clearly the senators aren’t as interested in shining the light on Johnson as they are in shining it on President Obama (who suspiciously fired a senior federal investigator who had  called for a criminal investigation into Johnson’s conduct). But then who needs ballistic testing when you can just go ballistic? Work smarter, not harder, people. Geez. I have to teach you everything.

And then there is the lowly public. Most of us just want the truth, but that appears to be a tall order when it comes to anything germane to the Mayor Johnson experience. Why oh why do we raise questions and call for investigations? Boredom?  Jealousy of Johnson? Spite? Morbid fun? Of course not. We seek truth simply because we are compelled to. We are programmed to. We needn’t make any apologies for that. I know I won’t.

On second thought, perhaps a little fun is in order. All this talk about ethics (cleverly disguised as mere political banter by those super clever types) is getting to be a bit of a bore. Perhaps some enterprising businessman will think to turn the KJ experience into a ride at some amusement park. I envision it replete with soaring peaks and low lying valleys like the graphic at the beginning of this article. My son says his favorite part of riding a rollercoaster is that point at the apex where the cars are suspended for a few seconds as they transition between climbing and falling. He says those waning seconds ticking off immedfiately before the cars succumb to gravity are “soooo suspenseful.”  I suppose that would be an apt description of the Kevin Johnson mayoral experience thus far.

Source: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Sex-scandal-could-threaten-Rhees-school-reforms-70658402.html

Anonymous Bee editorial rips Mayor Johnson for “smoke screen” of accountability

I, a recovering former champion of internet anonymity, have to chuckle at the anonymously-penned article written about Kevin Johnson by the “Bee Editorial Staff.” I have to chuckle because the anonymous writer rips Johnson for his stance on accountability, specifically questioning Johnson’s position on “leaking” information to the public, yet at the same time fails the personal accountability test his/herself by failing to sign their name to the article they wrote! This is particularly amusing in light of the Bee editor’s personal stance on anonymity (she  once replied to an email I sent her with a stern warning about anonymity:  “I have a personal rule that I don’t communicate with anonymous people”).

But let’s understand why the Bee is mad at Johnson. He wrote in his blog: “They [the media] demand accountability — for everybody but themselves.  They choose which rules they follow — then attack others without investigation..”]. He’s got a point, it’s just too bad he didn’t get to the real heart of the hypocritical matter as it applies to the Bee. What he should have questioned is the Bee’s anonymity policy. What he should have asked the Bee is this:  “How you gonna disqualify and flame people for being anonymous, then turn around and post anonymous articles to your web site about local politicians ? What’s up with that?”

Then again, KJ isn’t concerned with petty things like rationale. He’s concerned with promoting his ideals, one of which happens to be “accountability.” KJ prides himself on being accountable, according to him, but oddly he has yet to take any accountability for a single thing he has been called to task on since the campaign trail when he was sauntering through city hall after hours. I happen to agree with the questions the Bee asks of him in its anonymous article. I too think he is climbing up the wrong tree with respect to the “leaking” of the document. If it’s truly all about the “taxpayers” (Johnson’s new moniker for resident stakeholders), then whomever “leaked” the document did the right thing. Right?

Mayor Johnson? Anyone home? In your blog you state you have been all about accountability since your campaign, but we need to clear something up here: We thought when you spoke of accountability on your campaign trail, you were referring to the mayor’s office and the council being accountable to the residents of the city. Now you are deceptively leveraging accountability in a completely different context to defend your position that the document shouldn’t have been leaked.

LET ME BE CLEAR: It is HIGHLY unlikely that many people besides Johnson and/or his staff believe the sharing (not “leaking,” this is not Watergate) of the document was anything less than valorous. Conversely, my money says most people considered it a courageous, responsible act done in the spirit of accountability AND better yet:  transparency.

Apparently Mayor J has forgotten about that little old “transparency” thing he also spoke about so much in his campaign? Come to think of it, I haven’t heard that word out of his mouth in a long time.  Maybe the “mole” in his council ranks was simply inspired by his championing of transparency, and wanted to make good on one of his campaign promises (someone needs to!).  Perhaps the mole was even shocked when, instead of applauding them for such a wonderful example of transparency, the mayor publicly flogged them for being “sneaky” and “dishonest.”

With all due respect, given the borderline incoherent rationale in Mayor Johnson’s rant about accountability, it seems to me his diatribe was merely another futile attempt to flex his political muscle, and demonstrate what a principled leader he is. After all, the article does appear on a web site called “kevinjohnsonformayor.com.” The good mayor is obviously still campaigning, long after making the team. Sell, sell, sell. That seems to be the mantra of his mayorship. In my humble opinion,the mayor’s over-zealousness is the only thing transparent about the article, and he ultimately comes off more like Michael Scott than a polished leader who truly understands what it means to be accountable.

But who cares, right? The only thing that matters now is finding the Kings a new home. That seems to be Mayor Johnson’s new passion, even though he wanted nothing to do with the Kings up until he became mayor. In fact I think the jury is still out on whether he ever attended a game there other than when he was wearing the jersey of the opposing team.

$16M won’t bring her back
There was once a fairly obvious line of demarcation between personal accountability and corporate liability. That was before the Ice Age Litigation Age. What was once a rhetorical question (“Where do ya draw the line?”) is now one that demands a quantifiable answer any time one party believes they have suffered loss as the result of another’s negligence.

You’ve no doubt heard a jury recently awarded a woman’s family $16 million for her wrongful death in a local radio station water drinking contest. According to the awarding jury, $15M of the purse is essentially recompense for the loss of the victim’s  “love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, moral support, training and guidance.”  But can money really replace those things? I think not. The only entity that could replace those things is, well, love from another companion, which–I hope we can all agree–is something that is generally not for sale.

No matter the sympathetic intentions of the jurors, the “reward” is actually a token of apologetic justice on the part of  “the people” (that means you and me), for the defendants’ negligence. In a strange twist of irony, it will ultimately be the people (you and me) who write the $16 million check to Jones, Smith & Doe LLC. While I personally sympathize with this family, and pray for their healing,  I find it astounding the American public ever bought into the idea that the underdog citizen somehow benefits by sticking it to the corporate lion in the court system. That was clearly a myth perpetrated by those who stand to benefit the most from jury rewards.

Truly I express my sincere condolences to the family affected. I just don’t think $16M was the answer. It can’t bring the victim back, and in my opinion it will do nothing but serve as a grim reminder that in our society one’s life has a finite price .. a price that will ultimately by adjusted for inflation, and only cashed in once the litigators are paid in full. The water drinking contest was deplorable, but the contest that took place in the court room was just as tragic in my humble opinion.

Evil Doer paralyzes cat with BB gun
One can only hope the person who is responsible for paralyzing this cat is held accountable for his sin one day, if he hasn’t been already. The cat was found by SPCA officials and found to be paralyzed by a BB lodged in its vertebrae. What kind of person could do this to an animal? Very sad. The cat now needs $1,000 surgery. If you have a few bucks to spare, you can help here:  To help Big Ben call (916) 782-7722 or (530) 885-7387, extension 102 or e-mail funddevelopment@placerspca.org. Bravo to the Bee for posting this article. God gave us the explicit responsibility to care for all the animals on the earth, and one rest assured He DOES hold people accountable for shunning that duty.

Personally, I don’t have any issues with this latest development. When the idea was first hatched I suggested a minimum of one year to prove himself, so I am more than satisfied with two years. Good vote on the council’s part. I just wonder what his strategy is for the next year.  Will he lay low and avoid controversy, or will he be aggressive and forge ahead with his vision for Sacramento to the best of his ability (in his current capacity), critics be damned?

Either way, I think he’s got himself into a bit of a quagmire which will manifest when election time rolls around. Why? Because he’s going to have to sell voters on the idea of strong mayor, and his pitch is going to be rife with conflict.  While the the first part of his pitch (i.e. why the city needs a strong mayor seat like other cities have), will be hotly debated, it’s actually the second part (i.e. why he is the right guy for the job), he might be concerned about.

Think about it; he can’t really take credit for any positive change that has occurred since he was sworn in–without undermining his own reasons for wanting to be CEO of Sac in the first place. Remember why he wants to be strong-arm mayor? Because he can’t get anything done as weak mayor. Too much bureaucracy, says Mayor KJ. Hmm.

So if he truly wants voters to believe he can’t get anything done in his current capacity, it only stands to reason he will probably want to avoid claims such as:  “Under my leadership Sacramento added X amount of cops and X federal stimulus dollars…” or “Under my leadership Sacramento bought IOU’s…”  because all of them will be met with the same reply from apprehensive voters: “Hey wait a minute, I thought you didn’t have any power as weak mayor? If you were able to do all these great things as weak mayor, why do we need to make you strong mayor?”

It will be interesting to see how he justifies the strong mayor position, and at the same time touts all of his accomplishments as weak mayor. It’s the same dilemma law enforcement agencies face. That is, it’s incredibly difficult to get support for more taxpayer dollars when at the same time they’re bragging about, e.g., the biggest drug bust in the history of the state.  Reminds me of a recent comment on Sacbee.com by a reader responding to a story on how law enforcement agencies worked brilliantly together to break up a major meth ring. The reader wrote, “And to think the cops had this major success without a single stimulus buck!”

Can Johnson get his strong-arm mayor proposal passed? Only if he can prove it is necessary… and that’s going to be very tricky as long as he shows up for work every day and does his best at his job, regardless of his title, between now and election time.