Councilwoman Perry calls campaign spending a ‘ridiculous tantrum’ by DWP union's president

Los Angeles City Councilwoman Jan Perry said Thursday that the more than $100,000 worth of spending on behalf of a rival of Councilman Bernard C. Parks by the union that represents city utility workers amounts to a “massive, ridiculous tantrum” by the group’s president, Brian D’Arcy.

D’Arcy, the head of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 18, clashed with Parks last year over a proposed ballot measure that would have allowed the City Council to assert greater control over the retirement benefits earned by Department of Water and Power workers, who have an independent pension system. When that proposal was discussed in late October, workers from D’Arcy’s union packed the City Council chambers to protest and the idea was shelved.  

At a luncheon hosted by the Los Angeles Current Affairs Forum on Thursday, Perry said it was unfortunate that other members of the City Council are “afraid” of D’Arcy.

“I’m a little tired of people being intimidated,” said Perry, who represents part of downtown L.A. and South Los Angeles. “I don’t take well to that kind of behavior. And it needs to stop.”

Perry is a strong ally of Parks, who is running for a third term on the City Council in the March 8 election. As the city's budget chairman, Parks has repeatedly expressed concern that pension costs for city workers are becoming “unsustainable.” By 2015, pension costs for the city’s public safety employees and civilian employees will account for a third of the city’s general fund budget.

D’Arcy recently formed an independent committee to support one of Parks' challengers, Forescee Hogan-Rowles, a former commissioner on the DWP board. D’Arcy's union, which represents about 8,600 DWP workers, and another IBEW local have contributed at least $350,000 to the independent committee so far. They have spent more than $110,461 on radio and television ads, and other costs, according to City Ethics Commission records.

Perry argued that the independent spending on Hogan-Rowles' behalf was D’Arcy’s way of “acting out” against “an individual who has been consistent in trying to move the city to solvency even when others don’t want to, or just don’t have the fortitude.”

D’Arcy’s union was among the first to back Hogan-Rowles, whom he called a “trailblazer.”

Asked to respond to Perry’s comments Thursday, D’Arcy said in a statement that his union wants to “let voters know that Forescee Hogan-Rowles understands what it takes to get people working again” and is seeking to publicize her work as the chief executive of a South Los Angeles-based nonprofit where he said she “helped small businesses succeed by providing loans where big banks wouldn't, so local entrepreneurs could grow and create jobs.”

RELATED:

Voter guide: March 8 Los Angeles Election

Efforts to right L.A.'s finances highlight March ballot

L.A. County labor federation endorses little-known election challenger to Parks

-- Maeve Reston

Comments

[Malby]

It's NOT D'Arcy's union and he should learn that.

[Melroser]

If the corrupt union bosses are against Bernard Parks, then I am for him!

[BB]

Kudos to Councilwoman Perry calling it like she sees it. D'Arcy is simply trying to buy the election so he can put a puppet into office who will consistently vote to give DWP workers raises. Just like she voted to raise ratepayer's rates when she was on the DWP commission. Politics at its worst.

[kuruc]

i never thought i would support perry and parks, but count me in.they are now the prudent politicians.

[Sophie]

Jan Perry is hack who is in the pockets of developers in downtown. She is not helping Parks when she has no credibility amongst anyone.

[Ed Potter]

I didn't know I was part of a voter revolt. I think I'm voted against a Council Member who has been especially ineffective at keeping my neighborhood clean and mending the potholes. I won't go into the Marlton Square debacle.

[Just my 2 Pennies]

So it's okay for Parks to collect his pension, but not workers who have to work LONGER for pension that is a fraction of what he is "earning"?

Parks is wuick to mention that HIS pension does not come from the general fund, but do DWP pensions come from the general fund. I do not think so. It was okay for him to sign up for the terms of his pension, but not others? The system needs to be reformed on a 'going forward' not 'reaching back' basis.

How many of the readers would like their employers to have had a bad earnings period or year and be told 'we need everyone to give back 10,20 or some other percentage of money already earned and agreed to?