In election season, there's always complaints about dirty campaign tactics, like missing lawn signs or rumor spreading. We've already seen some questionable behavior from the Democratic Club of Claremont in this election.
But the flier fiasco at the League of Women Voters Candidates Forum on Thursday night just might take the cake on dirty campaign tactics. For those who haven't seen Saturday's paper, here's a basic rundown of what happened.
Candidate Robin Haulman's husband, Alexander Sweida, grabbed a stack of candidate Jay Pocock's campaign fliers during the forum and stuffed them in his jacket pocket. After the event ended, Sweida was talking to Betty Crocker, who works on Opanyi Nasiali's campaign, when the fliers fell out of his jacket and scattered across the floor. Sweida picked them up and walked away, later dumping them in the trash.
Sweida told me the fliers unfairly attacked his wife since it states "Haulman and Lyons support tax increases. [DO YOU?]" According to Sweida, Haulman supports putting the question of a utility tax increase, a recommendation of the Economic Sustainability Committee, before the voters.
Further defending his actions, Sweida said he was just following the League of Women Voter's policy on negative campaign material. He asked Ellen Taylor, president of Claremont's chapter of the League, if he could remove the fliers. Taylor told him to go ahead, even though she didn't inspect the material beforehand to see if it actually contained "negative" information.
This incident is troubling from many perspectives. With his actions, Sweida has certainly embarrassed his wife and may have cost her the election. Dirty tactics like this just don't sit well with voters.
Taylor defended her decision by saying the League is anti-biased in local elections. However by approving this behavior, she showed a clear bias against Pocock. And that reflects poorly on the entire organization.
And what do other League officials think about what happened?
"It would be better to actually look at the material before making a decision on what to do with it," said Jack Mills, Vice President of the League.
I asked Mills if he was aware of any League policy about negative campaign material. He said he wasn't aware of one, although he's only been on the board for one year.
"The only policies I know of are in the members handbook and on the website," Mills said. "I'm pretty sure the handbook doesn't have a policy on negative campaign material."
Showing posts with label Ellen Taylor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ellen Taylor. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
And your new Mayor is ...
Corey Calaycay is the new Mayor of Claremont or "the guy who was born to be Mayor" as Councilmember Sam Pedroza put it. He was sworn into office last night by retired State Senator Bob Margett, Calaycay's former boss.
Linda Elderkin was nominated for the Mayor Pro Tem position, which she happily accepted. There was no wrangling over who would get the 2 posts this time around.
After the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem nominations, all 5 council members spoke positively about Claremont's future and working together to accomplish goals for the city.
New Councilmember Larry Schroeder mentioned some of his hopes for the city, including the "arduous task of attracting and retaining businesses in Claremont."
"With hard work, we will have a thriving local economy that provides jobs, provides shopping opportunities and sales tax revenue to our community," he said.
Also at the meeting, outgoing Mayor Ellen Taylor bid the community a farewell. During her speech, she outlined a lengthy list of accomplishments for the council during her tenure in office. She lamented over some goals not accomplished, like the affordable housing project on Base Line Road.
She was showered with flowers and thanks from community members and city staff before leaving the podium for the final time. She was able to have an early dinner with her husband on a Tuesday night, a rarity for her over a very busy last 4 years.
With her work on the Youth Master Plan, the board of Tri City Mental Health Center, on senior programs and her support of youth sports, Taylor was praised as a champion of Human Services in Claremont by fellow council members.
For a full report on the evening, be sure to pick up a copy of Saturday's paper.
Linda Elderkin was nominated for the Mayor Pro Tem position, which she happily accepted. There was no wrangling over who would get the 2 posts this time around.
After the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem nominations, all 5 council members spoke positively about Claremont's future and working together to accomplish goals for the city.
New Councilmember Larry Schroeder mentioned some of his hopes for the city, including the "arduous task of attracting and retaining businesses in Claremont."
"With hard work, we will have a thriving local economy that provides jobs, provides shopping opportunities and sales tax revenue to our community," he said.
Also at the meeting, outgoing Mayor Ellen Taylor bid the community a farewell. During her speech, she outlined a lengthy list of accomplishments for the council during her tenure in office. She lamented over some goals not accomplished, like the affordable housing project on Base Line Road.
She was showered with flowers and thanks from community members and city staff before leaving the podium for the final time. She was able to have an early dinner with her husband on a Tuesday night, a rarity for her over a very busy last 4 years.
With her work on the Youth Master Plan, the board of Tri City Mental Health Center, on senior programs and her support of youth sports, Taylor was praised as a champion of Human Services in Claremont by fellow council members.
For a full report on the evening, be sure to pick up a copy of Saturday's paper.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Deciding Claremont's Mayor
At tonight's city council meeting, Corey Calaycay and Larry Schroeder will be sworn into office, a new Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem will be chosen and a farewell is planned for Mayor Ellen Taylor, who will preside over her final council meeting. Taylor will likely have a few words to say about her tenure in office.
There is no set guidelines for determining who will be the next Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem based on tenure or any defined criteria. One council member will nominate a fellow councilmember and then a vote takes place.
The mayor is largely a ceremonial post. They moderate the council meetings and act as the face of the city at public functions. But all council members eventually want the position, if nothing more than to tell their grandkids that they were once Mayor of Claremont. Over the last couple of years, there has been some wrangling on the council over who gets what position.
In 2007, Calaycay nominated Taylor for the mayor position, even though Peter Yao made it well known that he wanted the post for a second straight year. Calaycay explained his rationale in nominating Taylor over Yao. The position should be rotated annually so that all council members (including himself) have a better chance to serve as mayor during their tenure in office, Calaycay argued.
Taylor declined the nomination, knowing that Yao wanted to serve one more year as Mayor. She nominated Yao for Mayor, who accepted, and she became the Mayor Pro Tem.
A year later, Mayor Pro Tem Taylor was bumped up into the Mayor position, following the traditional pecking order. When voting came up to nominate the Mayor Pro Tem, Yao nominated Sam Pedroza instead of Calaycay, who had 2 years seniority over Pedroza on the council.
Yao never offered an explanation for the snub of Calaycay. Perhaps Yao harbored some lingering resentment from Calaycay's decision the previous year to push Yao out of the Mayor spot earlier than he'd hoped.
In any case, Pedroza respectfully declined the position, and Calaycay was then nominated for Mayor Pro Tem. He accepted.
We'll see tonight if any more jostling goes on. Calaycay's supporters have been calling him "the next Mayor of Claremont" throughout the campaign. He would be the logical choice, having already served 4 years on the council and earning the most votes in the recent election.
If Calaycay becomes Mayor, Pedroza would make the most sense as Mayor Pro Tem, having received the most votes in 2007.
But as we've seen before, logic isn't always the rule of thumb on the city council, so anything is possible.
There is no set guidelines for determining who will be the next Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem based on tenure or any defined criteria. One council member will nominate a fellow councilmember and then a vote takes place.
The mayor is largely a ceremonial post. They moderate the council meetings and act as the face of the city at public functions. But all council members eventually want the position, if nothing more than to tell their grandkids that they were once Mayor of Claremont. Over the last couple of years, there has been some wrangling on the council over who gets what position.
In 2007, Calaycay nominated Taylor for the mayor position, even though Peter Yao made it well known that he wanted the post for a second straight year. Calaycay explained his rationale in nominating Taylor over Yao. The position should be rotated annually so that all council members (including himself) have a better chance to serve as mayor during their tenure in office, Calaycay argued.
Taylor declined the nomination, knowing that Yao wanted to serve one more year as Mayor. She nominated Yao for Mayor, who accepted, and she became the Mayor Pro Tem.
A year later, Mayor Pro Tem Taylor was bumped up into the Mayor position, following the traditional pecking order. When voting came up to nominate the Mayor Pro Tem, Yao nominated Sam Pedroza instead of Calaycay, who had 2 years seniority over Pedroza on the council.
Yao never offered an explanation for the snub of Calaycay. Perhaps Yao harbored some lingering resentment from Calaycay's decision the previous year to push Yao out of the Mayor spot earlier than he'd hoped.
In any case, Pedroza respectfully declined the position, and Calaycay was then nominated for Mayor Pro Tem. He accepted.
We'll see tonight if any more jostling goes on. Calaycay's supporters have been calling him "the next Mayor of Claremont" throughout the campaign. He would be the logical choice, having already served 4 years on the council and earning the most votes in the recent election.
If Calaycay becomes Mayor, Pedroza would make the most sense as Mayor Pro Tem, having received the most votes in 2007.
But as we've seen before, logic isn't always the rule of thumb on the city council, so anything is possible.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
A slippery slope during tough economic times
The city council did away with deferred compensation benefits for city council members last night. Council members will still have access to health insurance coverage, unlike other part time city employees. They also get a $400 per month stipend and $30 per Redevelopment meeting they attend.
Only Ellen Taylor and Peter Yao spoke out about the issue. No big surprise there, as they are the only active council members taking health benefits.
“Not everybody has a situation where they are covered by insurance, or if they are, they may be paying for it on their own and they can’t get out of their coverage because they’re afraid once they get out of it, they won’t be able to get back into coverage,” Taylor said. “And they may be using that deferred money to pay for the coverage that they are paying for themselves.”
That’s true. We all know that private health insurance is extremely expensive, especially when you get older.
But council members may just sign up for health care through their spouse after leaving the council. Then they could take deferred compensation money (about $40,000 after 4 years) and buy a new car.
I think the latter scenario is what irks citizens the most when the deferred compensation topic pops up. Many people see the council position as a volunteer job and want to believe that city council members have only idealistic reasons for signing up.
Unfortunately, there are some ulterior motives at play. Things like resume boosters (Calaycay, Pedroza), health benefits (Yao, Taylor), influence, control, etc.
Yao downplayed the benefit of getting rid of the deferred compensation. “I think this is probably more a gesture than a cost saving,” he said.
I’m not sure where Yao is coming from here. If all 5 council members were to do the deferred compensation, it would amount to about $50,000 per year. That seems more than just a “gesture” to me.
For now, deferred compensation is off the table for council members. It could always be reinstated in the future when times get better, as Taylor urged the council.
“It is not a wasted benefit for people,” she said. “Just because you don’t need it, doesn’t mean that somebody else doesn’t need it.”
Only Ellen Taylor and Peter Yao spoke out about the issue. No big surprise there, as they are the only active council members taking health benefits.
“Not everybody has a situation where they are covered by insurance, or if they are, they may be paying for it on their own and they can’t get out of their coverage because they’re afraid once they get out of it, they won’t be able to get back into coverage,” Taylor said. “And they may be using that deferred money to pay for the coverage that they are paying for themselves.”
That’s true. We all know that private health insurance is extremely expensive, especially when you get older.
But council members may just sign up for health care through their spouse after leaving the council. Then they could take deferred compensation money (about $40,000 after 4 years) and buy a new car.
I think the latter scenario is what irks citizens the most when the deferred compensation topic pops up. Many people see the council position as a volunteer job and want to believe that city council members have only idealistic reasons for signing up.
Unfortunately, there are some ulterior motives at play. Things like resume boosters (Calaycay, Pedroza), health benefits (Yao, Taylor), influence, control, etc.
Yao downplayed the benefit of getting rid of the deferred compensation. “I think this is probably more a gesture than a cost saving,” he said.
I’m not sure where Yao is coming from here. If all 5 council members were to do the deferred compensation, it would amount to about $50,000 per year. That seems more than just a “gesture” to me.
For now, deferred compensation is off the table for council members. It could always be reinstated in the future when times get better, as Taylor urged the council.
“It is not a wasted benefit for people,” she said. “Just because you don’t need it, doesn’t mean that somebody else doesn’t need it.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
