Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

Bergfeld should stop boo-hooing Rogers It...

Bergfeld should stop boo-hooing Rogers

It always amuses me that letters to the editor from windbags

unhappy over being skewered in Will Rogers’ column usually

demonstrate precisely the faults and flaws he wrote about.


City Council candidate Michael Bergfeld gave me the latest

example. In his recent letter, he complained that Rogers made

“personal attacks” against him instead of talking about election

issues. It’s irrefutable that Rogers did not write about the issues


Bergfeld wants him to. But many Burbank voters think that candidates

manufacturing controversy at council meetings and taking advantage of

the television cameras that taxpayers pay for to advertise themselves

as candidates is a legitimate campaign issue. For many people,

exploiting meetings the way Bergfeld and some of his friends do

definite- ly speaks to a candidate’s lack of integrity and concern

for the taxpayer’s dollar.

Bergfeld complained Rogers wrote that he talks almost exclusively


about airport issues. Claiming “that is not correct,” Bergfeld

followed up by describing the issues he talks about. In the four

paragraphs that followed, three were dedicated to airport issues. The

one-paragraph exception was Bergfeld’s promise to protect Burbank

hillsides from million-dollar mansions.

Does anybody know of hillside developments being considered by the

Burbank City Council or developments on the horizon? I guess he

thought it would be a hot topic for voters here, after seeing how


hillside preservation won elections for so many council people in

Glendale.The only issue I’ve heard him talk about that didn’t involve

the airport was his criticism of business development downtown. He

didn’t mention it in his letter, but at a couple of meetings, he said

it has all been a failure. I have a few complaints about business

development downtown: The city has given away too much money, parking

is still hidden and traffic is terrible. But anybody with two eyes

and a brain can see Bergfeld’s complaint about it being a financial

or commercial failure is absurd.

I was surprised by one part of Bergfeld’s letter. He complained

because Rogers “coupled” him with former councilman Ted McConkey.

Bergfeld said he’s a past politician who has been “discredited.” It

seems to me that little show he puts on almost every week is intended

for and encouraged only by the little troop that idolizes McConkey.

Last, Bergfeld didn’t like what Rogers said about how people react

to seeing his council meeting commercials. It doesn’t happen a lot,

but this time what Rogers said reflects my thinking and that of

everyone I know who can stand to watch Burbank’s circus meetings.

Bergfeld comes off like the spooky host of a cheap Saturday afternoon

horror movie on a small-town TV station.



BTA candidates are beholden to union

For months now, we’ve been hearing accusations that the school

board violated the Brown Act. They’ve come from Will Rogers and from

partisans of the ex-school superinten- dent. Yet there has not been

one iota of proof -- nada, nothing, zilch. The obvious reason is

because as much as people want to believe it happened, it never did.

Basically, to violate the Brown Act, three of the school board

members would have to work in secret to push an agenda. It’s

interesting that with so many people concerned about it, the Burbank

Teachers Assn. would now be pushing its own threesome: Dave Kemp,

Larry Applebaum and Paul Krekorian. Or, to shorthand it, the “KAK


Let’s understand how the KAK Clique came about. Repre- sentatives

of the BTA invited each of the board candidates into a room to answer

ques- tions. The BTA is a teachers’ union, and these were teachers’

questions. It would seem Kemp’s, Applebaum’s and Krekorian’s answers

were the most union-friendly, so they became the “chosen ones.”

The BTA’s agenda is to promote teachers’ issues, not the welfare

of children. Parents might be mystified that teachers’ issues and

student welfare could be at odds, but it happens all the time. You

only have to go back to bilingual education for a prime example. A

few years ago, bilingual education was a cancer to our system,

holding back the assimilation of Spanish-speaking students into the

student body and costing the district thousands of dollars. Even when

it was pronounced a failure by the state, the BTA defended it. Why?

Because bilingual teachers were being paid more than nonbilingual


If the BTA is successful and the KAK Clique gets elected, I don’t

know how these candidates cannot be beholden to the teachers’ union.

After all, they’ve accepted the lawn signs, the phone-call canvas-

sing and everything else. Even Rogers says Krekorian’s campaign would

be nonexis- tent if it weren’t for the BTA.

Everyone agrees the economy is in a budget crunch that will mean

tough negotiations between the district and its unions. Who are you

going to vote for to make your tax dollars count? I say, fight the

KAK attack. There are plenty of independent candidates, not the least

of whom are the current board members. The one thing we know about

them is that they are beholden to no one.