Many of you have been reading about the issues within the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council, ranging from the increase in personal crime to the lack of fiscal accountability of its budget process. You've also read about the petty attacks by Council member Tom Long, including those of you among the more than 4,000 residents e-mailed from Long accusing fellow Council member Peter Gardiner of cronyism and acting on personal vendettas. Gardiner has been a voice of accountability, and has been a thorn in Long's side as Long tries to impress enough Democratic leaders for higher office, including a possible judgeship if the Democrats win the governor's race in 2010.
For those who worked with me on the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council elections in 2007, you'll recall former Mayor Tom Long trying to tell us that the Republican Party being involved in a local, non-partisan race, in his words, "violated the state constitution". He was, and still is, a political bully who tries to intimidate anyone who disagrees with his motives and plans. The verbal attacks on Council member Gardiner have been what I would expect from Long, who STILL has not given any accountability to the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes regarding the frivolous IT budget spending or the improper and unethical use of the "PV on the Net" resources that the Daily Breeze confirmed is not permitted for campaign purposes, even if, as Long puts it, it's available to everyone.
But this type of hypocrisy is not something that Council member Long holds an exclusive claim to; this is the same types we hear all of the time from Democratic leaders throughout the state. So it's no wonder that the majority of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council has issues presenting its residents with honest accountability and fiscal responsibility; the majority of the RPV City Council is Democrat.
Now while I agree that not all Democrats have issues like this, I believe that Council member Tom Long has serious issues with accountability to the residents he has been charged to serve; worse, Long also has issues with humility when confronted with situations that conflict with his motives and plans, and will verbally attack anyone who challenges him.
I look forward to challenging him and anyone who aligns themselves with him. Bullies have always been my primary peeve, and I take a personal stake in finding those that bully others, especially politically, and will always seek opportunities to remove them from office, regardless of their political registration. We have a few in our party, including a couple I've mentioned in earlier posts. Council member Long is an exceptional one, using his knowledge of the law to twist it and take advantage of those that he thinks know less than him.
When the next RPV election approaches in 2009, I plan to be there to help swing the RPV City Council back to the Republican majority, and in the process return fiscal responsibility & resident accountability to my former hometown.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Turning disputes on local issues into a partisan debate is really unfortunate and does nothing to help address the issues. Those who know my history know that I have endorsed a number of Republicans for local office and that I have not acted in a partisan way on the RPV council. The votes on the issues are rarely divided by party registration.
Sadly the Republican Party 54th District Organization and some of the candidates it has supported have made a mockery of the California Constitution's requirement that local elections be non-partisan.
As for the rest of the blogger's comments, people should not judge issues such as these on party affiliation. I encourage you to get the facts. Most of the facts are available (from different perspectives) on my webpage www.palosverdes.com/tomlong and on www.pvpwatch.com
Tom Long
Councilmember, Rancho Palos Verdes
tomlong@palosverdes.com
Dear RPV Councilmember Tom Long,
Thank you for finding my blog and reading it!
I'd like to address your two main assertions from your posting, which I published without edits for the mutual benefit of ourselves and my readers.
To start, we know that both you and Doug Stern endorsed Steve Wolowicz last fall in your re-election campaigns because you both knew that:
a) Steve has a very high base of supporters that would not have voted for either you nor Doug if you hadn't endorsed him. You chose a wise tactic of giving voters a complete slate to vote for, and making sure that the strongest candidate on the ballot was a part of it.
b) You and Doug needed a 3rd person to complete your slate or else risk Paul Wright getting more votes than one of you two. If Steve Wolowicz had NOT been on your slate card, Paul Wright would have easily closed the 80-vote gap and beat Doug Stern.
So your strategy worked and I would have done the same; but your claim of endorsing Republicans is purely for survival, and not proof of any claim of being bi-partisan. When you're willing to look at Republicans over Democrats for key non-partisan races, like say judicial races, then you'll get some credibility. As for me, ask judicial candidate Kathleen Blanchard, a Democrat running against two Republicans, if I'm willing to look objectively and endorse the best candidate regardless of party.
Next, you continue to cite a CA constitutional requirement that local elections MUST be non-partisan and alluding to our November 2007 involvement in the RPV elections as somehow being unconstitutional. This is both sad and mistaken, and your constant harassment of our volunteers at the PV Farmer's Market about this will continue to be challenged by both me and the Republican leadership at the county and state level. For over 30 years, your own Democratic party has been significantly MORE active in local elections throughout the state and throughout Los Angeles County than Republicans until just recently. When you're willing to call out your own party for making elections throughout the state partisan, maybe then I'll give you some credibility. Until then, you're simply another Democratic hypocrite that only complains about something when it doesn't serve your own purpose.
I published both your comments and these because I want my readers to get a chance to respond with comments of their own.
Thank you for affirming what I've been telling my supporters throughout Long Beach, San Pedro, Avalon, Signal Hill & the Palos Verdes Peninsula! We are having an effect, and the tide is shifting!
We know it, and we now know that YOU know it!
John S. Stammreich
Chairman - 54th AD Republican Central Committee
SWEET!
John
Dear John,
No doubt you and others like you are having an effect. It's just not a very positive effect.
Why not focus on the real issues at hand? None of them are partisan on a local level. And why misrepresent the "ethical" issues you raise? (No journalist and no objective observer has accused me of doing anything unethical. A talk with Megan Bagdonas of the Daily Breeze should clear up your confusion.) There is nothing improper about accepting a free webpage (many of your party's candidates have done it) and there is no reporting requirement.
It's too bad you have been misled on some issues. The city's spending on IT is not out of line. And the higher level of IT services the city is getting were ironically all supported by Councilman Gardiner. The issue isn't a partisan one at all--it's quite different. And it has nothing to do with free webpages. It's a personal vendetta against Ted Vegvari by Peter Gardiner and Gabriella Holt.
Nor are local taxes such as the user fee partisan issues. Here, as on many other issues, Councilman Wolowicz has been supportive of my position and so has gotten my endorsement. Moreover, even when we do rarely disagree, I am confident Steve's judgments are based on the merits of the issue rather than on hidden personal agendas.
The state constitution makes local elections non-partisan precisely to avoid the kind of undesireable influence organizations like yours bring. You know I never harassed your volunteers. You just feel harassed because you don't like being reminded of your disrespect for the state constitution.
Your role in local politics is aimless. You endorse people with very different stands on the issues merely because of their party registration. Your only issue seems to be electing Republicans to office. Why would that be? I think we all know.
The comments I get reflect that many people are connecting the dots and realize that politics based on party and not principle is just cronyism.
Tom Long
Councilmember, Rancho Palos Verdes
Dear Tom,
I sincerely thank you for the opportunity to re-establish our positions on these issues and to continue to expose my readers to this valuable discussion about the differences between both the parties and the elected officials that represent them.
I will try to go down your latest comments point-by-point and try to keep us both on topic.
What are the "issues on hand" that you'd like everyone to focus on? Maybe the crime issue that Paul Wright and Peter Gardiner introduced last year that both you and Doug Stern worked so hard to suffocate until after the November election? Asserting crime is lower than other cities in Los Angeles is like asserting that poverty in the U.S. is not as bad as most other countries. Should we ignore those struggling in poverty until the levels are closer to nations nearby?
But I'm sure going after Trump National's overly-patriotic American flag that blocks their local neighbors' view of a small patch of ocean is a BIG concern!
Regarding the "free webpage", whether far-left leaning, Random Lengths reporter Megan Bagdonas has given you the opportunity to respond to the Daily Breeze's issue about the use of "PV on the Net" is for you to determine. I agree that this is a minor issue that should not hinge the voter perceptions of the RPV City Council. However, criticizing anyone who dares to inquire about the fiscal responsibility of elected officials by asking for details of the city budget is a significant one. Government fiscal resposibility on the local level is exactly why it is VERY IMPORTANT for voters to learn more about the political associations of their local elected officials. Republicans hold ALL of their government officials responsible for being fiscally resposible, from the tax-payer funded city worker to its local elected officials. We do this across all party lines, and it can be well established that the primary reason Republicans lost control of both houses of Congress was the abandonment of the Republican princples of fiscal responsibility by its leadership. It's a lesson we plan to take and apply at ALL levels, including city councils.
The Democratic Party, based on your continued assertion about the CA constitution, has been openly "violating" it for decades by working with and funding local candidates. In order to forward the Democratic Party principles at the local level, and to build a "farm team" for state and federal level elections, the DCP has a very open and active strategy throughout both L.A. County and within this district. I know my counterpart, Sergio Carillo, well enough, and see him at many local election events. Is your own cronyism so high that you will continue to bring up this issue against Republicans and totally turn a blind eye to your own parties' operations?
Regarding the Storm Drain Tax, our Party understood the importance of it, and was a prime factor in our committee NOT forwarding an endorsement for candidate Don Reeves. As a result, I took the brunt of the political damage with PVP Watch, though two members of their core group are also on my central committee and also voted to not endorse. Such is the responsibility of being the chairman.
Finally, I make no false statements about my role as the Chairman of the local Republican Central Committee. Just like my counterparts in the Democratic Central Committee, my purpose is to promote Republican principles and values through the election of candidates who also support these. Bylaws within both parties are specific about endorsing only party candidates, but both our county party and our local central committee has taken many positions that show your assertion that we "endorse people with very different stands on the issues merely because of their party registration" and that our "only issue seems to be electing Republicans to office" is false, misleading, and in my opinion, totally ignorant.
In the last term alone, we supported Democrat Dick Vladovic for LAUSD (working with Sergio's group), did NOT endorse Don Reeves, supported two Democrats in Long Beach for re-election, and are now supporting at least three Democratic judicial candidates over Republican alternatives due to our party leaders doing an objective analysis of each candidate's background and qualifications. We worked with local Democrats in San Pedro against Measures R & S, and look for other conservative "JFK/Reagan" Democrats to work with and maybe convince them to join our own party.
Again, I sincerely thank you for the opportunity to re-establish our positions on these issues and to continue to expose my readers to this valuable discussion. I leave it for the readers to decide how well I've addressed your assertions and accusations, and will listen to them in order to continue improving the exposure of local issues and how Republican principles and values help bring about the best solutions and opportunities to them.
Post a Comment