Southern California -- this just in

« Previous Post | L.A. NOW Home | Next Post »

Parks defends his pension at South Los Angeles candidate forum

Los Angeles Councilman Bernard C. Parks and opponent Forescee Hogan-Rowles traded jabs Saturday at a candidate forum in Leimert Park, where Parks defended his six-figure pension and compensation package and Hogan-Rowles brushed off accusations that she was a pawn of organized labor.

Hogan-Rowles, who has received heavy backing from city employee unions, has emerged as a strong challenger to Parks, who is seeking his third term representing the 8th District in South Los Angeles. The election will be held March 8.

Parks has questioned Hogan-Rowles’ readiness for the job as well as her grasp of the severity of the city’s budget crisis. In his latest campaign mailing, the former city police chief accused Hogan-Rowles of being the puppet of the Los Angeles Police Protective League -– a group that Parks has long quarreled with. The police union, which represents about 9,000 rank-and-file officers, has spent nearly $125,000 to boost Hogan-Rowles’ candidacy.

“I don’t see any strings here,” Hogan-Rowles told the members of the Cherrywood/Leimert Block Club inside a meeting hall of Transfiguration Catholic Church on Martin Luther King Boulevard. “I am nobody’s puppet.”

The two candidates appeared at different times, avoiding a face-to-face confrontation like the one last weekend hosted by the Park Mesa Heights Community Council. At that debate, they were joined by a third candidate, Jabari Jumaane.

Hogan-Rowles spoke first Saturday, repeating charges that it was hypocritical of Parks to call for scaling back city pension benefits for future hires, while collecting his own $265,000 police pension and a $178,789 council salary.

An audience member gave Parks a chance to respond to those attacks later when he asked whether the election was about candidates’ salaries or what they were going to do for the public. The district includes roughly 260,000 residents.

Parks, 67, called the criticisms “ludicrous” and noted that he didn’t set council salaries or the pension he was awarded from his service in the police department. When Parks asked how many people in the audience would be willing to “start from scratch” -- giving up their pension and benefits when they moved to a new job, only one man raised his hand.

“I worked 38 years in the police department.  I think I deserve the pension I earned,” said Parks, as some of his listeners nodded. “I think I should not leave it to the side and tell my family -- ‘Don’t worry about that, we’ll give it away because I’m young enough and healthy enough to keep working.’ ”

Parks and Hogan-Rowles, who runs a nonprofit that offers financial services in low-income communities, also debated whether the councilman had done enough to recruit new businesses, including to the 22-acre project known as Marlton Square -- at the site of a former shopping plaza that has been a community eyesore for decades.

During Parks’ time on the council, Hogan-Rowles said, Marlton Square has remained “a dump right in the middle of our district.” Parks noted that the project, once the site of Santa Barbara Plaza, was approved before he was elected to the City Council and has been tied up in bankruptcy proceedings.

“We had a developer that actually went bankrupt and his bank went bankrupt,” Parks said. “But we didn’t sit on our hands. We spent over $30 million of city money to buy most of the property along King Boulevard. ... We have the ability now to be a firm partner with equity in the project.”

Several residents complained to Parks about buckled sidewalks and overgrown trees -- services that have been drastically curtailed citywide because of budget constraints. The city is facing a $530-million budget deficit next fiscal year.

Parks said the city has not been able to afford sidewalk repaving for two years. Before that, the city was averaging about five miles of repairs annually, he said, adding that his office had used discretionary funds to try to fix “the worst of the worst” in the 8th District.

“There’s some really bad sidewalks we can’t fix,” Parks said. “We don’t like to see the black top in the community or throughout the city, but sometimes that’s the only temporary repair. ... We’ve maximized every dime we have.”

Mary Stewart, a state worker and the former president of the 4th Avenue Block Club who told Parks that his office had not responded to her complaints about a bulging sidewalk on her street, said she was not satisfied with the councilman’s response.

“We need a new start,” said Stewart, who is voting for Hogan-Rowles. “I believe she will listen to us. This guy has totally ignored the community.”

After hearing both candidates Saturday, Doris James, who is 85 and lives in Leimert Park, said she would vote to re-elect Parks. She called the criticism of his pension and his salary “ridiculous.”

“He deserved everything he got,” she said. “I think they should leave the man alone.”

-- Maeve Reston


Voter guide: March 8 Los Angeles Election

Councilwoman Perry calls campaign spending a "ridiculous tantrum" by union leader

Controversy over raves spills into South L.A. council race

Ridley-Thomas endorsement sparks an old rivalry

Parks announces glints of hope for stalled L.A. redevelopment project

L.A. County Labor Federation endorses little-known election challenger to Parks

Union opposition quashes councilman's proposal on DWP pension

Comments () | Archives (10)

Most of the city council members have taken a voluntary pay cut. Parks has refused to, despite the fact that he is the most well-compensated council member. What does that say about his values system?

Also, there are people in city government who have strong second salaries or personal wealth who take $1 a year in salary. People do it all the time. If Parks cares about the budget so much, and believes we need to lay off city workers and accept fewer city services, why doesn't he do the same? If he did he'd still make $90K MORE than his fellow council members collecting his $265,000 pension.

What Parks seems to completely gloss over is the utter hypocrisy of anyone earning a $265,000 pension calling for everyone but himself to sacrifice and his son, who is his chief of staff (can someone say NEPOTISM).

Either you're in the boat together with your employees or you're not. Parks has indicated that he is not. It's a legit issue, because it totally exposes his lack of values and poor view of leadership.

It's time for a change.

Would YOU vote for a former police chief whom nearly the entire rank and file force referred to as 'Darth Vader'?

If you like the way things are going in the city then re-elect Parks

If you don't then vote him and all of the other incumbents out

Really, the audience of member of CD 8 whose salaries average at around $34,000 a year didn't all volunteer to 'start from scratch' when Parks was questioned about his double dipping? I'm not only offended that he would ask, I'm offended that he would suggest his nearly $180,000 a year from city council was 'scratch' or that deferring his pension until he wasn't working full time was considered 'giving it up' causing his family to suffer. Are you in CD8 really going to buy this again? Haven't you had enough yet?

I disagree with those that think he deserves his pension right now. A retired Army vet worked 30 years on a Goverment job. When he retired he was told he could not receive 2 government retirements. One law for us and one law for them? About 40 years or so ago I remember Younger getting 2 government retirements and working on his third one.All of which is very unfair to the "ordinary" persons.

$265,000 police pension...

He get MORE than $20,000 a month for doing nothing? Forever?

If Parks ever ran for public office against the present lapd clown-in-charge Beck they could call it "Blacula's twin brother vs. Magnum P.I.'s gay stunt double"

"When Parks asked how many people in the audience would be willing to “start from scratch” -- giving up their pension and benefits when they moved to a new job, only one man raised his hand."

Increasingly, those of us who work in the private sector are freelance and do not have pensions -- but we now understand that we will be making widgets in our 90s to pay for the obscene amounts of money Parks and others will get.

I am extremely appreciative of police and fire personnel who lay their lives on the line to protect the rest of us, but there needs to be some fiscal reality applied to pensions.

If Parks were truly a public servant, he'd voluntarily take far, far less in pension money. But, apparently, he's a public servant in the sense of serving himself -- helping himself to vast riches while those who pay the price, the taxpayers, will never be able to retire.

I think it's time to have someone who is affected by these hard times be a council member. The current ones don't have clue of what is going on,
what needs to be done because nothing of what they decide on effects
them at all. They have coushy job and coushy pension. They have no
reason to care at all.

This is corruption. His son makes over $154,000. Therefore, he and his son make $265,000 + $178,000 + $154,000 = $600,000


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...


About L.A. Now
L.A. Now is the Los Angeles Times’ breaking news section for Southern California. It is produced by more than 80 reporters and editors in The Times’ Metro section, reporting from the paper’s downtown Los Angeles headquarters as well as bureaus in Costa Mesa, Long Beach, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Riverside, Ventura and West Los Angeles.
Have a story tip for L.A. Now?
Please send to newstips@latimes.com
Can I call someone with news?
Yes. The city desk number is (213) 237-7847.


Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: