REGARDING LACERS PENSION BAILOUT STORY THAT ONLY ZUMA DOGG IS COVERING, AND I FINALLY GOT ON THE RADIO TODAY ABOUT IT...IT WAS A "NATIONAL" RADIO SHOW...LOL! (Hello local L.A. talk show hosts, ZD's first radio call on the matter was on a NATIONAL talk show, you circus clowns. Meanwhile, someone sent me this in the email so I may as well post it.)
New ZUMA TIMES readers, look on this blog for more exclusive coverage of the $7 BILLION LACER pension fund bailout, that will bankrupt the City of Los Angeles in the next fiscal budget, if extreme measures are not taken. At this point, there is NO avoiding the pain. WE ARE SERIOOUSLY LOOKING AT DECLARING "BANKRUPTCY" AS THE ONLY OPTION, which would allow the city to renegotiate city worker contracts, because the unions are too greedy and won't give anything back, so extreme measures will have to be taken. In 2012, the city budget experts (CAO's office) declared that 56% of every city dollar, from the general fund, will be going to pay for this pension and retirement bailout.
AND ZUMA DOGG SAYS IF AND WHEN THEY LOOK INTO THE INVESTMENTS BEING MADE, AND LOS ANGELES MAYOR ANTONIO VILLARAIOGSA'S INFLUENCE INTO RISKY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS; YOU COULD SEE SOME FOLKS GOING TO PRISION!
ZUMA DOGG ALSO PREDICTS THE MERUELO MADDUX DOWNTOWN DEVELOPER THAT JUST DECLARED BANKRPUTCY MAY END UP LOOKING LIKE A BERNIE MADOFF/ENRON BAMBOOZLE. (It's all being exposed in this down economy, as they are all caught with their pants down during this game of musical chairs, and when the music stopped, there were no seats availble. So look for massive fraud in the downtown development bankruptcy scandal. CRA (taxpayer money) was invested in these projects, and I wonder how much LACER was invested in all this "belly-up" real estate development.
So new readers, THANKS TO the new link to Zuma Times' blog at http://news.alltop.com/ with all the heavy hitting news sites from across the country. It's almost a joke. But the link wouldn't be there if the blog wasn't worthy. So hello, "ALL TOP" readers and hello to Guy Kawasaki, THE KING OF TWITTER, Y'ALL! And to NEENZ for ALL TOP (All Top News) for the hook-up! ;)
Check out "ALL TOP" and ignore the LA Times links. And check this blog for more on the LACERS/Murelo Maddox real estate problems that will be sinking the City of Los Angeles with MUCH more to come.
If the trustees for the city pension investment fund invested in the speculative LA Projects (downtown condos etc) one can make the argument that they truly violated the prudent man role.
If the trustees are the mayors appointees and the developer who ran the investments that the pensions invested in was a substantial contributor to the mayor one could argue that the investments in the projects was compensation for the contributions.
A link between violating the prudent man role by investment in poor quality developments that produced political contributions could result in criminal prosecution of the Major and will certainly dampened his ability to run for governor.
Send me the link and I'll see what I can do with it.
...A fiduciary shall act with the care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use."
From the Prudent Investor Rule
prudent man rule n. the requirement that a trustee, investment manager of pension funds, treasurer of a city or county, or any fiduciary (a trusted agent) must only invest funds entrusted to him/her as would a person of prudence, I.e. with discretion, care and intelligence. Thus solid "blue chip" securities, secured loans, federally guaranteed mortgages, treasury certificates, and other conservative investments providing a reasonable return are within the prudent man rule. Some states have statutes which list the types of investments allowable under the rule.
Unfortunately, the rule is subjective, and some financial managers have put funds into speculative investments to achieve higher rates of return, which has resulted in bankruptcy and disaster as in the case of Orange County, California (1994). (See: fiduciary, trustee)