.
.
This invitation comes from good OJ friend Steve Baxter, dean of Fullerton’s insurgent liberals:
Free Booze & a legal coup d’état:
Jane Rands, Matt Rowe & Glenn Georgieff
tell us how they plan to emancipate Fullerton from the pimps that bought her 20 years ago.
This coming Friday, May 11th, at 6pm, you are invited to the home of Stephan and Noele Baxter, to meet and question Fullerton Recall City Council candidates Matt Rowe, Jane Rands and Glenn Georgieff. [E-mail Sbaxter65@gmail.com to RSVP, and for address.]
Matt, Jane and Glenn are the candidates who I am supporting for each of the three recall races to replace Pat McKinley, Don Bankhead and Dick Jones. Matt, Jane and Glenn have agreed to come prepared to address the following:
- The Kelly Thomas murder: What would they have done differently compared to the man they are running against, and what do they plan to do in the future to protect the citizens of Fullerton from the Police.
- What are their plans for Coyote Hills?
- Because The Fullerton Art Walk, in my opinion, provided Fullerton with the life support it needed during the aftermath of Kelly’s death, and because it remains one of the most popular and positive Fullerton events, I would like the candidates to address what role city government can or should play in helping to promote more positive art, music and culturally relative events.
- Whatever other one issue they feel is their top priority.
Unlike many of the other candidates’ statements, and other meet and greets, there will be no f*cking platitudes about community oversight and accountability allowed without specifics. Specifics will rule the day, and questions from you, our guest, while civil, will not be filtered first by the sensibilities of a 70 year old League of Woman’s Voters docent. (My opinion of the LVW only, not the candidates).
To varying degrees, I know all three candidates personally, and they each bring a unique and differently focused passion to city government. I would never support any one of them if I was not 100% sure that their outrage over the murder of Kelly Thomas was solely focused on justice. For Matt, Jane, and Glenn, Kelly’s murder was not first and foremost viewed as a conduit for a personal or political agenda, or as a political rematch opportunity with McKinley. We welcome the support of all who are fighting to hold accountable the police who murdered Kelly, but I personally will only vote for those whose motives in doing so are pure.
These three candidates have not endorsed each other and are today are not aligned in any way. They will not agree on everything and I do not agree with them on everything, but for our convenience they each were willing to accept this invitation to speak to us at the same gathering.
My hope, however, is that their supporters, and they themselves, might find enough common ground, that they consider taking advantage of the unique circumstance offered by this recall election. Mainly, that they consider pooling their resources and core support since they are not competing against each other. Unlike some others, they do not have unlimited self funding, or a political machine behind them. But together they can change the dynamic of this race, like no other local political election before it. In my opinion, individual success is possible and perhaps likely, but together it is almost assured.
Joining resources could be the game changer that rescues this city from the self serving hacks who now represent us, without handing the reins over to the Teabaggers, who, in truth, care more about a water tax than a homeless man’s murder, and care more about Chevron’s profits, than our city’s livability.
This may or may not happen, but either way, having three candidates, all contenders, and all representing somewhat different voting blocks, at a private residents house on the same night, is a first, and it is guaranteed to not be a snore fest. If you are registered to vote in Fullerton, please RSVP as soon as possible if you can attend. Space will be limited. We very much look forward to seeing you.
Do you love Fullerton? If the aswer is yes. Then get informed and fight for her.
Booze, hors d’oeuvres and inappropriate hugs will be provided by your handsome hosts.
-Bax
(Let’s wrap this up with a few of Bax’s great political posters!)
Nice graphics.
Hart, Shaftner and Marks? Or Louie, Dooey and Louie? The Three Bears? The Three Caballeros perhaps? Which one is Eric Idle? Or….John Cleese? They definitely need an identity……check. Perhaps several.
Winships — the peyote is for after lunch!
*Huey, Dooey and Louie….sorry!
*Dewey…..of course!
You might want to mention the candidates’ web sites. Here’s Jane’s:
http://janerands.com
End the shame. Vote Jane.
http://www.rowe4fullerton.com
http://www.facebook.com/rowe4fullerton
http://www.youtube.com/rowe4fullerton
http://www.twitter.com/rowe4fullerton
An excellent post! I only wish there would have been more like it earlier in the process. As you say, the Kelly Thomas murder was hijacked almost from day one in favor of a far more political agenda. And for all their talk of “accountability” and “transparency”, this faction has shown an amazing willingness to pick and choose the issues they’re willing to discuss in public; namely, those issues they can hype and exploit for their own gain. Do we really want to trade one cabal for another? I may not agree with everything Matt, Jane, and Glenn will have to say, but I think they leave no doubt they’re more interested in what’s good for the community as a whole than in pressing a single-minded, ideologically-driven agenda.
I’m trying to picture a Fullerton City Council with Sharon, Bruce, Matt, Jane, and Glenn. I have to admit that that would be about as far away from a cabal as we could get.
This is sort of a fun game. Now try a Council with Sharon, Bruce, Greg, Barry, and Travis.
OK, now try a Council with Sharon, Bruce, Doug, Glenn, and Paula.
OK, now try a Council with Sharon, Bruce, Rick, Sean, and Dorothy.
(I know that I’m forgetting a couple of people here.)
One thing’s for sure: Fullerton voters can’t claim that they don’t have a real choice this year.
LOL! I wonder how many words you could create just using different combinations of the candiates first initals….
None. We desperately needed a candidate whose name started with a vowel.
Thank you for posting Vern.This is only my opinion, not any of the candidates, but because i brought up the water tax, (which I myself oppose by the way, it’s just not at the top of my get angry about list) I feel obligated to also say the following:
Tony and I, or at least some of Tony’s bloggers and I, have not agreed on very much over the years: But an honest reflection of the last 9 months will lead to the conclusion that had Tony not met with Ron Thomas and convinced him that it was time to release the picture of Kelly’s beaten face, and then been willing to fund the recall, I would not be hosting this event, you would not be voting. Two cops for the fist time in OC history would not now be held over for trail, and Sellers, the police chief at the time of the murder would not have retired in disgrace. Three corrupt councilmen, all men well established in this town, would not be facing a humiliating landslide recall, and the Thomas family would not now feel all the support they do no. Most importantly every outsider in Fullerton would be at a much greater risk of a beating than they are today.
In light of all this, if Tony uses the recall to also address another agenda, he has certainly earned the right to do so. You and I in turn have the right to try and get other candidates elected.
I have not invited any of the candidates which I suspect Tony and FFFF endorse, yet he has wished me luck. I believe in the need for justice, and that is way I am very grateful that Tony stepped up, when few others with a real political voice in Fullerton had the courage to do so.
To those, my friends included, who used Tony’s involvement in the recall and Justice for Kelly movement as an excuse to sit this one out, you have essentially stated that the torture and murder of a local homeless man, arguably the most vile 10 minutes in our city’s history, by our own police department, is less important than your petty bruised ego, or political ideology and that is pretty pathetic.
When Ramos and Cicinelli were told today that they are being held over for trial, they should have cursed Tony’s name louder than any others.
My graphic of Wolfe is on the cover of the LA Times this morning.
.
That’s right, cool!
Okay, for what its worth, here’s what I’m looking for in a candidate. I’d like to see someone who knows the difference between:
Blame vs. Responsibility: Its easy to blame but its another to assign responsibility and make real changes. You can look at the Kelly Thomas killing and discern the most likely cause: a departmental culture that fosters abusive tactics and shields officers from discipline. So you can do one of two things: 1) blame very cop in the department, calling them thugs and gorillas, then threaten them with disbanding the department, etc. etc., or 2) make it clear things are going to change, create realistic goals for cultural change, and hold the chief and top managers responsible if it doesn’t happen. Which option is more likely to yield positive results soonest? I’d be impressed if some of the candidates were able to use the words “public employee” and “union” without attaching the word “thug”.
“Transparency” vs. Leadership: If someone holds a vote, “transparency” will probably win the prize for the most-abused word of 2012. Transparency has no value without context. Lets’ say a Tea Party slate wins and starts dismantling city government and services. They do it using proper procedures like publically noticed Council meetings, etc. At the meetings, many members of the public criticize having their service reduced, but the Council, driven by ideology rather than commitment to the community, forges ahead with its plan (sound familiar, Costa Mesa?). You can’t say the Council wasn’t “transparent”. Everything was done in public and per the Council’s stated intention. But that doesn’t make it right. Leadership—the ability to approach each situation with an open mind and the willingness to articulate a position and defend it in terms of the community’s best interests—is what’s really important.
Fear & Hype vs. Facts: Some of the candidates have been quite willing to bend the facts to fit their views. For example, “The City’s retirement account has an unfunded liability of $[use the most shocking number you can find] million dollars”. Given the vast amount of misinformation on the Internet, you can find and use just about any number to support your view. Or another, “The City’s water rates include an illegal tax that’s overcharged customers $[use whatever number you choose based on the number of years the franchise fee has existed since the 1970’s] millions and they deserve refunds. Ignore for the moment the emotions the phrase “illegal tax” evokes, regardless of its accuracy. Again, you can choose any year you want and the cost associated with it, and use it to show the need to radically cut services so customers get a break. But you can’t ignore that means decimating services those same customers expect from their city. Scott Walker did the same thing in Wisconsin: he manufactured a crisis by giving corporations huge tax breaks, creating a budget deficit, and then blamed state employees for the problem. Now he’s being recalled. Candidates should base their positions on realistic numbers and reality instead of hype and fear.
Practicality vs. Ideology: The recession has hurt all cities, including Fullerton. Elected officials have two choices: they can take a realistic look at revenues in relation to the city’s needs, establish priorities, and create policies directing staff to do their best to meet those needs. Or officials can stick to a strict ideological approach, force changes based on those beliefs, and not really solve any problems. You could, as some candidates seem willing to do, consider municipal bankruptcy to justify your position on unfunded pension liabilities. Never mind bankruptcy would cost taxpayers far more in higher costs for loans and other obligations and severely damage the city’s’ financial standing for years. All you’re interested in is making your decision fit your version of the facts. At the end of the day, blind ideology solves nothing and causes even more damage.
Community vs. Politics: Finally, elected officials are supposed to represent and balance the needs of all the city’s constituents: residents, businesses, and other stakeholders. No group of human beings will ever agree on everything all the time. In California, local positions are supposed to be non-partisan. It’s an official’s job to balance everyone’s needs without the filter of party politics. They should choose polices that most benefit the community at large rather than those that justify (or are dictated by) party positions. Good ideas and real solutions should be able to stand on their own without the need to be justified by political positions. We’ve seen how partisan politics has poisoned government at the national level. Do we want the same locally?
In short, I’d be willing to vote for candidates who take an intelligent, principled, and balanced approach to the City’s issues, without cherry picking the most incendiary just so they can be elected and impose their political will on the rest of us. Don’t treat voters as imbeciles who need to be told what’s good for them, nor as a means to a political end. We are the end—the ones who put people in office and the ones who can vote them out. Take a look at each candidate’s positions and it becomes pretty obvious who’s who.
OC Lib – I really don’t see anything i would disagree with here. I can also tell; you, that from speaking to all three candidates that they would never hold ALL of anyone responsible for the actions a for a few. They would never think or say, that all cops are thugs. They are much smarter and more reasonable than I am, and even I would not say that. I’m too tired to answer the rest, but I can tell you that they don’t agree with each other on some of this stuff, and that to my mind is a good thing.
Even if you do not live in Fullerton, you are welcome to attend and bring your questions. Let me know and I will pass on my phone number.
Take care.
Stephan–my post was already too long, but I did mean to include kudos to you for your previous post. I think we’ve all seen the consequences (and not just in Fullerton), when elected officials vote in lock-step conformity. In a functioning system, dissension leads to discussion, which leads to consensus, which is generally a lot better than rigid conformance. Thanks for the invitation, by the way!
Almost forgot–I also agree with your comments about Tony B. Say what you will about him or even his motives, but his persistence brought some important issues to light and will hopefully lead to some good out of terrible tragedy. Just more proof you can’t put anyone in a box and strictly define him by your own preconceptions.
*John & Ken on KFI are all over this story. 13 Candidates for three spots from the Recall guys. Doug Chaffee got blasted tonight…on John & Ken because he did not
sign the Recall Petition.
My thank you after a wonder evening:
______________________________________________
Massive Gratitude and a hope that this good feeling translates into action
Noele and I would like to thank our old and new friends, as well as the candidates, for bringing your truth, your love of Fullerton, and your sense of fun to our corner of the suburbs. I’ve been involved in local politics since I unsuccessfully ran for the Placentia City Council at the age of 18, and last night was amongst the best democratic experiences of my life. Our house is still standing, my wife still loves me, and last night, for fucking once, it felt like we took the reins off of Democracy and let her run.
Had any of the candidates decided an event like this was too risky and pulled out, or had you not arrived ready to engage with them, this could have been a disaster. And by disaster I mean the bore fest every single candidate’s meet and greet I have ever attended proved to be. Try to picture any member of the current council, Chaffee, Levinson or Travis, or their other opponents, fielding these questions and enjoying it like Jane, Matt and Glenn did. It’s not possible.
The three candidates you met last night all took a risk in being here together, as they are not all supported by the same voting blocs, and I hope that all of us, in turn help them make it worthwhile by voting on June 5th, and by donating time and/or money to their campaigns. If one, two, or, as I feel, all three of them are type of people that you think should represent us at City Hall, I urge you to spread the word to friends, family and colleagues. If my limited agenda did not address the things about which you are most passionate, please contact them on your own. You now know how approachable they are, and they will tell you how they feel, regardless of whether it is what you want to hear or not.
You will find contact information and their platforms at the following sites.
Jane Rands http://www.janerands.com/
Matt Rowe http://rowe4fullerton.com/
Glenn Georgieff http://www.glenngeorgieff.com/
My sister took a head count during the break, and told me that there were between 75 and 80 people in attendance, by the time it got dark we had folks in the back yard, sitting on the floor of the living room, and looking in to the kitchen.The two hour meeting got bigger as the night progressed and lasted 1.5 hours past the schedule time. That simply does not happen at meet and greets.
If all of you hold on to the energy and good feelings you had when you left last night, and direct it in a way which will help the candidates with whom you connected, we will collectively have the power to greatly influence the outcome of this recall election. There will most likely be a low turnout on June 5th as the recall is tied to an already decided primary. The three corrupt incumbents know that they are done and are no longer putting up a fight, (McKinley has already privately endorsed Chaffee) and the list of challengers is mostly long on rhetoric and short on talent. Consequently, your vote, and the votes of those you influence, may never have the impact for positive change that it will in this election.
Each of us owe it to the community we love to apply this power while we have it, and to ensure that Fullerton can once again be known for the Institutions of Education, the Fender Guitar, and the ground breaking bands that Fullerton produced, and not for the actions of an unchecked police department, and the city council that failed to boldly act. If we do grab this opportunity, perhaps we will have also saved another family from ever again finding out that their child lay beaten and choking on their own blood, while the police and paramedics on the scene joked about the ass kicking that he had just received.
Regular elections are for regular people, recall elections like this one are for us!
I thank each and every one of you for being who you are. You are exactly what Fullerton needs at this very moment.