”
The Board of Supervisors are at it again to try to control the
political structure of the upcoming election. Now with this
potential limit of campaign contributions, we have to ask ourselves
what the real motive is. Ruth Kesler, Supervisor of District 2, and
Pat Loe of District 3 are the instigators of this campaign
contribution limitation. Kesler wants quick action, as in her
words, to ‘avoid special interest involvement to stop special
interest from influencing the election outcome.’
“The Board of Supervisors are at it again to try to control the political structure of the upcoming election. Now with this potential limit of campaign contributions, we have to ask ourselves what the real motive is. Ruth Kesler, Supervisor of District 2, and Pat Loe of District 3 are the instigators of this campaign contribution limitation. Kesler wants quick action, as in her words, to ‘avoid special interest involvement to stop special interest from influencing the election outcome.’
Pat Loe, who is helping Kesler get this through as an ordinance, appointed Gordon Machado as her planning commissioner. Gordon Machado is listed as one of the authors of Measure G. The authors of Measure G have been totally guided by outside influence and have solicited most of their funding from outside environmental groups. These environmental groups are paying lawyers to defend them.
These Supervisors are for this Measure G, so I would classify them very active with outside influence through a carefully crafted way of using their positions to get their agenda through. Now they are trying to hobble candidates who wish to run for their positions.
Whatever excuse Kesler and Loe use to justify this action, it smells of continued squashing that this Board has been showing in recent times to protect themselves and their intentions to meet their goals.
Aren’t election laws mandated by the State of California, not the local Board of Supervisors? If they attempt to pass this ordinance, the candidates should immediately contact the FPPC for a ruling as to their legitimacy. Isn’t this a conflict of interest for Ruth Kesler to be able to vote on this since she is a candidate?”
“Remember the school bus driver two months ago who parked in the roadway and was rear-ended by a motorcycle rider, causing the rider’s death? Like Mr. Orabuena, the bus driver did nothing wrong and broke no laws, but based on Mr. Wei’s reasoning and the jury’s verdict, if tried, she would be found guilty of misdemeanor manslaughter. Bad law? Kangaroo court? Selective enforcement? Crazy? All of the above? Yes, I think so.
Once the truth came out on Orabuena, it became apparent that this was nothing more than a tragic ACCIDENT and could have happened to any one of us. You have to ask yourself, ‘If it ever happens to me how will I be treated; like Mr. Orabuena or like the bus driver?'”
“So Reb doesn’t want campaign contribution limits. No big surprise there and what does he mean ‘we already have people out there campaigning.’ He’s not up for re-election.
Wake up voters. The outside developer is trying desperately to seat a majority vote and Reb is assisting them. He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. If we vote in the candidates that are backed by developers then we only have ourselves to blame when rampant development continues. As far as enforcement, put a big fine in place if the contribution limit is exceeded and I mean a ‘big’ fine because some of the candidates are backed by very rich development companies. If the fine is big enough, it should get their attention.”
“Why is it the unions are so mad with a certain freshman county supervisor? Maybe it’s because of the county jobs that have been eliminated, while friends continue to benefit from lucrative contracts for work that could and should be done at less cost by unionized county workers. So much for supporting the unions who supported the supervisor. The union is sure to remember next time…”
