Pages

Friday, June 3, 2011

Friday Free For All - DA Candidates Fundraising & ADDA Affiliation

We're waiting for reports of District Attorney candidate Jackie Lacey's fundraiser at the City Club last night. The event has hosted by Steve Cooley, and was rumored to be "sold out." If we don't get a tip then we'll have to wait until the end of the month when all campaigns have to report their fundraising achievements.

UPDATED 9:30PM: Our mistake - that date of  Lacey's City Club fundraiser is June 9. Apologies for the error, and thank to our eagle-eyes informant for the correction.

We expect DA candidate Mario Trujillo to feature close or top of the list, perhaps displacing current leader, DA candidate Alan Jackson, who has been building on the momentum of his $100k launch, as well as securing a very creditworthy conviction in the Fayed murder case.

Eyes too, will be on Carmen Trutanich's bogus "Draft Trutanich for DA" campaign. The City Attorney has come under fire for not paying enough attention to his duties and concentrating too much on gaining media attention. We are talking about the current City Attorney Trutanich, not his predecessor Rocky Delgadillo.

Danette Meyers must be enjoying a break from handling the Lindsay Lohan case so that she can concentrate on fundraising. We understand that Hamid Towfigh, a former DDA and current campaign manager has promised to raise $500k for her, a healthy goal.

How DA candidate Bobby Grace finds the time to campaign is a mystery. The likeable prosecutor has been racking up conviction after conviction in serious cases, and his commitment to his job is commendable.

Not too much fundraiing should be expected from DA Candidate Steve Ipsen. Last to enter the race, he could nevertheless surprise given his connections to organized labor.

ADDA Affiliation
Ballots were mailed out and dues-paying members should have received them. We are told that the "NO" portion of the ballot contains a typo. A coincidence, surely ...

Rumors suggest that AFSCME has saved the ADDA from bankruptcy by paying off the ADDA's legal fees liabilities arising from the loss of an appeal. AFSCME has stumped up in the region of $140k, although it is not known whether that will have to be repaid following affiliation or simply come out of the $1M that AFSCME will receive in member dues during the 3-year deal.

A late comment to our last post suggests that the ADDA scanned members' dues checks and that a laptop containing that data was stolen. If true, the ADDA was required to warn members of the risk of identity theft under California Civil Code Section 1798.82(a). Hopefully, now that ADDA President Hyatt Seligman has rediscovered his ability to send emails, he can either confirm or deny the suggestion.

&tc.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

According to Seligman's Question-A-Day emails, under affiliation, $60k of DDAs dues will go towards paying "$60,000 annually for "lost-time" wages to allow members of the ADDA bargaining unit to take days away from work for union business."

WTF? What on earth do they need that for? According to Seligman "The ADDA would decide who to bring out for this work and what the focus of the work would be."

Sounds like a boondoggle on our dime to me. Seligman continues:

"It is likely that the focus of the work, at least initially, would be to help establish a good communication system among offices and to identify DAs at each work location willing to assist with ensuring that all Deputies are informed about the issues the ADDA is addressing and participate in the decisions that are made."

$60k to be given to ADDA goons to have time off so that they can go to DA Offices around the county and set up "communications"

Seems like the Dragnet's doing a pretty good job of communicating and probably doesn't cost a dime.

Anonymous said...

I've never written a check. My dues are deducted automatically.

Anonymous said...

My dues are automatically deducted so I don't write checks either, but last year a load of non-members were allowed to vote for a one time $30 fee. Those are the checks that were scanned and those are the DDAs who might have had the security of their bank information compromised.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Looks like a Dragnet cover-up is in the works.

It relates to false information put out there by the Jackie Lacey campaign.

If you're truly interested in the truth, let it be known her June
2nd event at City Club never happened.

Anonymous said...

I am concerned that the ADDA has not responded to the loss of data reported yesterday, but not surprised. It would be easy enough for one of the ADDA trolls to deny it, or threaten a lawsuit and demand a retraction (their answer to everything) but instead we get silence.

So what's the story? Will AFSCME also pick up the tab for the hefty fines under California Civil Code Section 1798.82(a)?

Anonymous said...

I cannot believe the comment that was posted in response to the rumor that the ADDA lost a laptop containing scanned images of our $30 temporary membership checks. I'm repeating it here:

"I'm not a big ADDA supporter but if the data was on a work laptop then it was encrypted and no reporting is required. All DA laptops have full disc encryption. If it was a personal laptop then obviously it depends on what encryption if any that laptop had. Before accusations of violating the law are made its important to have all the facts. You know, something they teach in DDA basic training."

That seems to me to be an admission that there was indeed illegal unauthorized scanning of our checks, that the laptop was stolen, and that the ADDA has not informed potential ID Theft victims of their incompetence because the data was encrypted.

This shows the attitude of the ADDA Board Majority better than anything else. First, they don't know the law (which probably explains why the ADDA Board Majority is full of broken toys anyway) and second, they try to lie about their screw ups.

The law is very clear, you have to report data loss. It makes no difference whether the data was encrypted because encryption can be hacked - that's why SONY had to tell everyone of their customers what happened last week.

The worst part of this scandal is that our checks contain our names, home addresses, and sometimes even our spouses names. Now that information is in the possession of criminals. That's even worse than being a victim of ID Theft. I don't want criminals knowing where I live or my wife's name.

If the rumor is true, and judging by the comment I have repeated which looks like an ADDA cover up, then I am pissed that the ADDA has exposed me and others to horrible risks, and then done nothing to warn me, and worse still, tried to cover it up.

I demand an investigation.

Anonymous said...

I think an announcement about the security breach needs to be made asap. I also think it would be a good idea if next week's Saturday seminar had a portion on the steps ddas can take to protect themselves not only from ID theft, but from the criminals who have their names and addresses. All ddas should have the Bureau of Investigation's 24 hour phone number in case of emergencies, in addition to calling 911. This is very serious.

Anonymous said...

The ADDA Board Majority is full of broken toys comment by 10:48am is so true. Ipsens a character withness for a convicted sex offender who he says is one of his closest friends and he is also condemned by the Supreme Court for his misleading arguments in a two defendant murder case. Seligman has his own porno sex-tape scandal. You want these people to represent you?

Anonymous said...

Looks like the wheels are comin' of the ADDA wagon. Only someone on the inside, on the Board, could have known about the loss of the scanned checks. It's amazing that one of the board would rat out the others, but there's a lot at stake with the affiliation and agency shop, and that means things are gonna get even worse.

Anonymous said...

Re: comment at 3:22pm In re Sakarias (2005) 35 Cal.4th 140, the Supreme Court said that Ipsen “violated [Sakarias’] due process rights by intentionally and without good faith justification arguing inconsistent and irreconcilable factual theories in the two trials, attributing to [Sakarias and co-defendant Tauno Waidla] in turn culpable acts that could have been committed by only one person.”

http://www.metnews.com/articles/2005/ipse041305.htm

Ipsen testified that convicted sex offender was one of his closest friends. http://www.metnews.com/articles/2010/ipse032310.htm

Seligman's porno sex tape http://articles.latimes.com/1993-06-27/local/me-7734_1_child-molestation

"Broken toys?" that's an understatement.

Anonymous said...

10: 48 Your ignorance is astounding. Did you even read the law? Here, try this: ". . .shall disclose any breach of the security of the system following discovery or notification of the breach in the security of the data to any resident of California whose UNENCRYPTED personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person." (emphasis mine).

1. I'm not even an ADDA supporter, as my original comment made clear. I am a supporter of reasoned and informed discourse, which your comments do nothing to advance.

2. The vitriolic comments by the ADDA are what turns off many to the board majority. Your similarly vitriolic comments only serve to discredit those who disagree with the direction the board is taking.

I can only hope that if you are a DDA that you arguments in court aren't so similarly devoid of legal knowledge.

Anonymous said...

And by the way, I do believe the ADDA should disclose this data loss if it occurred. Lack of transparency about problems the board is having is a real problem (like why they pursued the appeal of burke's judgement and why the treasurer recently resigned) and a reason why I question their credibility.

But unless the information was unencrypted it is not a violation of law.

Anonymous said...

11:06AM - so it is true then, that the ADDA had our private information, scanned checks etc. on a laptop which was stolen, but the ADDA doesn't have to notify us because the confidential information was encrypted?

That doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the ADDA does it? First, why are they storing this information in that way?

Second, who decides whether the encryption is adequate? It could be a simple password that can be broken by any number of hacker programs freely available on the internet.

Regardless of the encryption issue, it seems that the ADDA needs to come clean about this.

Anonymous said...

HOLY CRAP!
Just read the link to the article about Hyatt Seligman's sex tape.

I don't know what's worse, the lurid details or the fact that Hyatt, like Ipsen, trashed the justice system by manipulating evidence in violation of a criminal defendant's rights. Just like Ipsen in the Sakarias case, the Seligmans made photographic evidence "disappear." (Ipsen made the key photographic in the Sakarias case "disappear" from the defense discovery package)

But all of this raises the following question: My fellow DDA's of the LADA's office are some of the finest lawyers I have ever known. Of all the DDA's in the LA County DA's Office, why must this disreputable bunch be in charge? Yeah, Seligman did squeak by Tavelman to get re-elected, but how?

It's time for us ADDA members to accept responsibility for the fact that these low lifes have been allowed to remain in charge.

And we must, MUST, rally and vote down affiliation, or agency shop, or any other bull these guys want to sell us until they CLEAN UP THEIR ACT.

And if Ipsen and Seligman are the type with whom AFSCME wishes to cast its lot, that tells us all we need to know about them.