Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Have you heard of the city of Bell? I didn’t think so. It’s one of the dozens of little municipalities that surround Los Angeles, and it’s now on the surprisingly large list of such municipalities that are in trouble. In this case, it’s because of an LA Times story revealing that the City Manager earns about $800,000, his assistant earns $400,000, the police chief makes nearly half a million dollars, and the city council members pay themselves $100,000 per year. All for a town with a population under 40,000.

Surprisingly, this is not actually all that surprising. The variety of corruption varies from town to town around LA, but there’s a helluva lot of it. And Bell’s is typical, the result of a small cadre of insiders who manage to gain control of the municipal apparatus and basically run it as their own little fiefdom. But the question is, have they actually done anything illegal? California law limits the pay of city councilmembers, but they got around that via a technicality: paying themselves not for being on the council, but for being on a variety of planning boards — all of which met infrequently and consisted solely of city councilmembers. The city manager and the police chief got loads of cash, but there’s nothing illegal there. The city council voted to pay it to them fair and square.

But it’s even worse than that! Here’s the latest:

Bell City Council members are seeking the resignations of the city manager and two other top officials amid growing public outcry over salaries that appear to be among the highest in the nation, according to three sources close to the discussions.

Resigning would make City Manager Robert Rizzo, Police Chief Randy Adams and Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia eligible for lucrative pensions. But the three also have contracts that protect them from being fired without cause.

As a result, unless they agree to resign, the city would face the prospect of buying out their contracts, which could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional payments.

Isn’t that great? These guys connive with the city council to get paid astronomical salaries, and when the gravy train finally ends they have (enforceable!) contracts that pay them big bucks if they’re fired without cause. And since pensions are based on salary levels, they’re entitled to astronomical pensions even if they do leave.

All I can say is: there just has to be something illegal here. I don’t know what, but is it really possible that such an obvious abuse of the public trust can be legal? I know the answer to this: yes, it’s possible. But in practice, I sure hope someone manages to figure out how to pin something on these guys.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate