By Stephen Gale, Chair, Sonoma County Democratic Party

May 20, 2010

Fellow Democrats,

Do not be misled by negative campaign tactics in the 7th AD race.

Many of you have read the PD's latest hit piece (morning of May 19, 2010 - Empire Section) about a pending audit report from the County Auditor.

The PD, in typical form, based the entire article on allegations made by Victoria Hogan, former Campaign Manager for Lee Pierce, who convinced Supervisors Paul Kelley, Valerie Brown and Efren Carrillo to request the audit.

The author of the hit piece -- Derek Moore -- is the same person who has been attacking Pat Wiggins for the last two years.

He did not wait one day to allow the Audit Report to be received, likely because he knew the report would not find fault with Michael Allen's performance. That would mean his only story would have to be about the false allegations by Victoria Hogan, former Campaign Manager for Lee Pierce, in what has become an extremely dirty race for the 7th Assembly District seat.

So that you are not misled, this is the conclusion lifted directly from the Audit Report issued today, May 20:

"Conclusion: Based on our discussions with Agency staff they indicated that although issues have been identified, the Agency is satisfied with the work and documentation provided by Mr. Allen, and the progress that has been made with the employee housing program.

"Based on our procedures and related results, the Agency received all documents as described in the Scope of Work for the Agreements with Mr. Allen, except three (see results I.1b, I.2b and I.2d). A document written by Daniel Hoffman was included as Exhibit 5 of the report titled California Public Sector Employer Assisted Housing Programs, provided for task 1, it contained source information. The contract between the Agency and Mr. Allen did not prohibit Mr. Allen from using the work or ideas of others.  The report on Employee Housing Program Alternatives prepared by Mr. Allen included language from Mr. Hoffman's report which had previously been provided to the Agency, this subsequent report did not identify Mr. Hoffman's document as the source. We identified one change in scope, which was not properly authorized by the Agency's General Manager or Chief Engineer."

Mr. Allen has been exonerated by the County Auditor.

Although I am sure the PD will find some way to warp reality to support their endorsement -- the California Democratic Party and Sonoma County Democratic Party have both endorsed Michael Allen for 7th AD.  We continue to stand behind the endorsement.

Please share this information widely since the PD likely will bury the actual results of the audit somewhere that no one will be able to find.

Don't get angry. Take action. Send letters to the editor of the Press Democrat and also contact other local publications that are more likely to cover this story without bias.

Stay the course -- continue to phone bank, walk door-to-door and make sure we get out the Democratic vote for our endorsed candidates from the top of the ticket to the very bottom.

All my best,

Stephen Gale

Chair, Sonoma County Democratic Party

 

By Stephen Gale, Chair, Sonoma County Democratic Party

May 3, 2010

This election year is turning nasty. But they always do. 

In partisan races, one expects to hear the Republican front-runner for Governor referred to by Democratic Party Leadership as "An empty suit," even if the empty suit is named Meg Whitman. Unfortunately, this year the derogatory innuendo, half-truths, lies and damn lies told in negative campaign advertising is spilling over into both local non-partisan political races and the Democratic Primary races.

In the 2nd District Senatorial race, a candidate started this year's round of mud slinging with an 8-page press release targeting Noreen Evans, the presumptive front-runner and endorsed candidate of the CDP. In the 7th Assembly district, presumptive front-runner and endorsed candidate of the CDP, Michael Allen, has been similarly targeted by the former campaign manager of one of his two opponents, who left that candidate’s staff before starting a negative campaign that extends to the halls of the State Legislature. Recent Press Democrat articles cite more "softball" mud-slinging in the 4th Supervisorial District race, and it's likely there may be a little mud thrown in the 2nd Supervisorial District race before June 8th arrives.

In some races, there are certainly going to be Independent Expenditure committees that will slam one or more of our endorsed candidates and perhaps others who did not receive the local party endorsement. Although the names attached to an IE are often difficult to find, some prominent Democrats -- names you would certainly recognize -- will be contributing to IE's as large-dollar donors or be personally active in their operations.

In the race for the 3rd Judicial Seat, endorsed candidate Jamie Thistlethwaite has been attacked for errors made by the local party and false statements made by some Central Committee and/or Club Members to the local press, in one case with the person quoted in the Press Democrat taking the cowardly approach of remaining anonymous.

As the Chair of the local party, I made the decision not to respond vigorously to the initial attack against Ms. Thistlethwaite. However, during the League of Women Voters debate on Monday evening (at approximately 45 minutes elapsed time), her opponent chose to continue his smear campaign by making a false statement that also impugns the integrity of the local party's endorsement process, and on that point, I cannot remain silent. 

The candidate not endorsed stated, "her campaign chair sat on and participated in discussions" that resulted in the recommendation to the Central Committee to endorse Jamie Thistlethwaite. It appears, from a close review of the video on the Press Democrat site, that he claims the party allowed a “campaign chair” to sit on an interview committee and that was the clear impression left with every member of the Central Committee who was present at the Glaser Center Monday night.

In fact, Patrick Band (Ms. Thistlethwaite's so-called “campaign chair”) notified both the Chair of the Candidate Search and Development Committee and the Chair of the Central Committee of his selection immediately following being hired by the campaign. He was not a member of the interview committee; he did not participate in discussions and did not vote during the endorsement vote at any time during the endorsement process. On the night the Central Committee endorsed Ms. Thistlethwaite, Mr. Band was not even in the room when the discussion took place.

It is unfortunate that Ms. Thistlethwaite's opponent, who was present for both his interview and the public discussion prior to the endorsement vote, did not rely on his first-hand knowledge of events. Rather, he chose to quote an inaccurate statement made to the Press Democrat by a known campaign supporter as proof for a blatantly false claim during the League's debate.

The open letter that follows is being sent as part of this newsletter so that there is no misunderstanding on the part of our local party supporters. Since Ms. Thistlethwaite's opponent and his campaign manager are both on this distribution list, they are also receiving this open letter at the same time it is provided to you.

Supporting Jamie Thistlethwaite – Now More Than Ever

Dear Sonoma County Democrats,

Ever play the party game where someone says something and it is repeated around the room from one person to another? The end statement is never the same as the phrase being quoted. The Sonoma County Democratic Party has not responded to the “he said she said” political hit-piece version of this parlor game that Civil Attorney Chris Mazzia continues to drag around the county like a dead horse. 

Yet at Monday night’s debate, he asserted an easily verified fact that cannot go unchallenged. Mr. Mazzia escalated his negative campaign by stating that his opponent’s “campaign chair” was present and participated in the candidate interviews held by the local Democratic Party. He cited as authority for this outrageous claim, a statement to the Press Democrat by one of two interview committee members who voted to support Mazzia when the interview committee made its recommendation to endorse Thistlethwaite.

The claim cannot go unchallenged for two reasons. As noted by the PD staff writer who covered the initial story and in the official party records, the entire interview committee for the 3rd Judicial Seat consisted of women, and the “campaign chair” for Jamie Thistlethwaite is a man. This is a distinction that most people would expect a judicial candidate to be able to make. Secondly, Mr. Mazzia was presumably present and conscious during his interview.

If Mr. Mazzia was referring, instead, to the actual Central Committee deliberations, similar observations make us question the veracity of his rhetoric during the League of Women Voter's debate. Mr. Mazzia and his campaign manager were both present when the discussion took place and both were able to see that Mr. Band was not in the room during the discussion. When the endorsement vote was taken, Mr. Band was listed as "not voting" because he had recused himself.

The Sonoma County Democratic Party reaffirms its strong endorsement of Criminal Attorney Jamie Thistlethwaite for Superior Court Judge, Seat # 3. She is a person with high moral standards, she is honest and she is the only person running in this race who has the Criminal Court experience so needed at this time. Please make sure you vote all the way down the ballot and vote for Jamie Thistlthwaite for Superior Court Judge.

Stephen Gale, Chair, Sonoma County Democratic Party

I take no pleasure in having to make this public statement on behalf of the local party.

In private discussions, as the Chair of the local party, I have urged various Democratic candidates to run fair and positive campaigns that focus on the real issues we face.  However, it is a hard sell for some candidates who fear they may lose. In addition, it is also easier to make hay with negative information than to actually campaign on the facts and issues that will affect our collective future.

As Gary Galles wrote in Capitol Weekly, "Reality is complex, but appropriately selected half-truths are simple and easier to "sell" to voters paying limited attention." If the candidate being attacked has a long public record, the strategy of negative campaigning can be more appealing, as well, because, as Galles points out, “Politics also involves compromise, and taken out of context, any compromise provides fodder for attacks that a candidate has abandoned principle."

It is also tragic when negative campaign tactics are applied in a Democrat vs. Democrat race because it hinders our ability to work together in the future by creating personal animosity or more deeply held emotional reactions that, for some people, may never heal. 

If you would like to consider the roots of negative campaigning in Democrat vs. Democrat races, I suggest you follow this link:  http://saigonbob.typepad.com/saigonbob/2006/05/smearing_congre.html to a blog article titled: “George Brown vs. John Tunney -- The Campaign that killed the Democratic Party,” by Bob Kholos. Near the end of his long, historical article, Mr. Kholos makes the rhetorical statement, "No wonder why people are turned off to politics." As a student who volunteered for George Brown's campaign, this story brought back painful memories and reminded me of the reasons I personally hold the deep belief that contests between the members of the Democratic Party should rise above negative campaigning strategies.

Yet, as we all know, this election year is turning nasty. But they always do.

When you cast your vote, I urge you to consider whether you are being unduly influenced by negative campaign tactics.  I urge you to vote for the candidate who most closely aligns with your values and who supports your point of view on the issues.

 

The Sonoma County Democratic Party has passed a resolution urging the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors to deny approval of the proposed location of the Dutra asphalt plant at Haystack Landing on the Petaluma River, across from Shollenberger Park.

If approved, the Dutra plant would be located in a designated scenic corridor, and the expected decrease in air quality and increase in noise and truck traffic would have a negative impact on the wetlands and sensitive wildlife habitat of Shollenberger Park.

In addition, there are serious, unanswered questions about the hazard to navigation along the Petaluma River that the new development would create. This navigation hazard would, almost certainly, create liability for Sonoma County that is unfunded in the current budget.

The area is currently zoned as agricultural, commercial and scenic, but approval of the Dutra project would require a zoning change to industrial and a change in Petaluma’s urban growth boundary. Such changes are ill-advised because the site selected for this project is not appropriate for an operation of this type.

“We are urging the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors to respect the unanimous vote of the Petaluma City Council and deny approval of this project,” said Stephen Gale, Chair of the Sonoma County Democratic Party. “In addition to the negative environmental impact on Shollenberger Park and the surrounding area, the Dutra plant would be located on county land and therefore not subject to local oversight.”

Full text of the resolution follows:

 

Forest conversion project threatens watershed, ecosystem

The Sonoma County Democratic Party has opposed a plan by Napa-based land development company, Premier Pacific Vineyards, LLC (d.b.a. Preservation Ranch) to convert 1,600 acres of coastal Sonoma County redwood and douglas fir forestland to vineyards and luxury estates. CalPERS, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, is a significant investor in the project.

Preservation Ranch would be located in the heart of the Gualala River watershed, which supports threatened and endangered coho salmon and steelhead and their critical habitat. The plan calls for filling and grading roughly 10 miles of Class III stream segments and building 40 reservoirs to be used for vineyard irrigation. Some 85 miles of tall fencing would be required to remove wildlife from the vineyard areas.

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors has stated their commitment to reining in global warming. Clear-cutting large swaths of forest would greatly diminish the County's ability to reduce, at no expense, greenhouse gasses as represented by 1,600 acres of carbon-cleansing (sequestering) forests.

“Western Sonoma County forests and waterways have been irreversibly damaged by years of destructive logging practices, and are now increasingly threatened by development and forest-conversion projects,” said Stephen Gale, Chair of the Sonoma County Democratic Party. "As the largest forest-to-vineyard conversion in Sonoma County’s history, Preservation Ranch poses a serious threat to the natural ecosystem and we strongly oppose it.”

Full text of the resolution follows:

 

The Sonoma County Democratic Party, at a March 23 meeting of its Central Committee, approved a resolution to oppose permitting and approval of the proposed Roblar Road Quarry project.

The SCDP agrees with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board that since the proposed quarry is adjacent to the closed, unlined Roblar Road Landfill, there exists a significant likelihood that wastewater discharged from the quarry would impact ground and surface waters and violate County water quality objectives.

Stephen Gale, Chair of the Sonoma County Democratic party stated: “Since the Regional Water Quality Control Board has determined that  the Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Roblar Road Quarry does not outline a clear plan to avoid ground and surface water impacts, we urge County officials to deny permitting and approval for this project.”

Full text of the resolution follows: