Local Assembly Races
42nd Assembly District candidate Abbe Land has announced two prominent endorsements - City Councilwoman Wendy Greuel and former Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg. In her endorsement of Land, Greuel said "Just like me, Abbe Land has a commitment to empowering neighborhoods to improve the quality of life. "Speaking of endorsements, 38th Assembly District candidate Lyn Shaw-Hilfenhaus failed to take the endorsement of the Democratic Party of the San Fernando Valley as was expected. In fact, in voting for the endorsement, Shaw-Hilfenhaus came up short against her main opponent, Northridge West Neighborhood Council President Jim Alger. Alger received 56% of the vote of the delegates to Shaw-Hilfenhaus' 44%. However, in order to receive an endorsement, a candidate must meet a 60% threshold. Therefore, the party will not endorse in this race.
44th Assembly District Candidate Brian Center has released the next item on his list of "Top 10 Reasons Government is Off-Center." Its an interesting one for a Democrat - he's proposing that social services spending should pass a cost benefit test.
Posted by Mayor Sam @ 5/03/2006 12:05:00 AM
40 Comments:
Just yesterday the LA Times endorsed Adam Murray in the 44th. Here's what they said: "Adam Murray is the best of four challengers . . . . Murray is an up-and-comer with a comprehensive knowledge of the biggest challenges facing the state and his district. A commercial litigator and part-time community college teacher, he is a true policy wonk, but one who also knows how to communicate with both voters and politicians." He recently picked up the United Farm Workers support as well. It's worth checking out his great website: www.Murray2006.com. This is going to be quite a race.
If someone secures an endorsement from Hertzberg, that is reason for most of us to be wary.
Good luck Mike Feuer!
I don't know, I think Land might just have it. She seems to show more energy and lord know Tamm is working his ass off for her.
Greuel doesn't generally endorse, although she strays from that occasionally but she is beloved in CD 2 so that will definitely help her... Hertzberg may be a whole other story, not sure I would have released that one.
Barring some major donor carrying his opponent across the finish line, the 38th is over. With the loss of DPSFV, Young Dems and the State Party Shaw-Hilfenhaus has lost what she needed to beat a guy who has been campaigning in the district for a year.
Alger seems to consistently get about 55% of the vote. Absolutely amazing for an "outsider". In a four way race it is going to be interesting to see if he crosses 50% on June 6th. Sammy, how about some over-under action?
Hey Sam, there is an idea. How about odds for the SD 20 race? Maybe AD 42 as well.
Those seem the closest anyway... the rest will probably be a blowout.
Abbe Land doesn't show more energy than Mike Feuer and Daniel Tamm can't sell her. He had an easier job with the mayor.
Greuel is fast losing her base in CD 2. All of the fans she had were strictly based on her supporting them in their planning issues. Wendy has gone to the dark developer side now, (didn't take too long) and that old fan base is deflating like a balloon with a hole in it. She should get a grip if she plans on running for mayor, controller or whatever office she has designs on.
Dunno, I see wendy as quite involved with the community on various issues.
Perhaps you need to revisit the community. Since the last parade, I believe she has lost many of her old fan base.
The horse keeping community is done with her.
Feuer -- He's got name ID. Represented much of the district on the city council. Has run city wide. Land's constinuency is the city of West Hollywood and they are notoriously apathetic voters!
Shaw -- No one's mentioning the elephant in the room on this one. She's a woman. In Democratic primaries, especially down-ballot ones, women do better than men on average. It's because of the tilt of the party and its most partisan voters. We may be wathcing 38 closely, but voters in the 38 aren't. They might show up to vote for Governor, and then skim down the ballot. Jim is not a shoe-in.
rumor has it there is a major shake up in the padilla camp? supposedly they changed camapaign managers, any truth to the rumor?
Jim Alger did not "receive 56%" of the vote at DP/SFV. The motion was to endorse Ms. Shaw, and many voting against the motion did not wish to endorse either candidate. (This was the recommended course of action by the Endorsements Committee.) It's also worth noting that DP/SFV is not "the party" - it's a grassroots organization representing twenty-something clubs, not an official party committee like LACDP.
In other news, Mike Feuer received the LA Times' endorsement on Monday. In their words, "Land, plus three other Democrats, have the misfortune of facing off against the most highly qualified candidate in the race."
10:13 am, yes but the women's vote will be split with Jane Lowenthal. She may be a fruit loop but she will give women two people to vote for.
Alger has the killer ballot designation of "Senators' District Representative" which will sway many voters at the last minute. That is just more evidence of him thinking out his campaign. Alger is walking the district every single day with volunteers.
DPSFV would have helped any of the candidates overcome deficits in the San Fernando Valley, without it Alger clearly has the advantage. Sid Gold may cost him some votes in Granada Hills but that's about it.
Not saying Alger is a shoe in, but he is certainly the one better positioned. With her inside connections, this was Shaw-Hilfenhaus'to lose and my money is on her being resoundingly defeated.
I can't wait for 45th AD newspaper endorsements.
My first DP/SFV meeting was on Monday.
There are three candidates in that race and I thought that group of people treated one of their own, Sid Gold badly. I'll never know why Democrats treat other Democrats that way.
I'm not sure why one man kept jumping up in a very excitable way to ignore the endorsement committee's recommendation for no endorsement. First he wanted the item pulled. Then he wanted to ignore the committee and endorse Lyn Shaw. Then he changed his mind and wanted no endorsement. What a bizarre night. Why did he jump up and down for no reason? In the end, he just wanted what the committee recommended.
This is a weird group of people. The other thing they did was pass a resolution about supporting gay rights. That was before my time, but I heard people discussing it. Then they endorsed a man, Horton who continuously abstains because "his district doesn't like gays" or something. They should stick to their resolutions or not make them.
They operate much like the city of L.A. making laws/rules they can't/don't enforce.
And these are our future elected leaders? We're on a merry go round that won't stop. How depressing.
10:49, thank you for attending DP/SFV's E-board for the first time, but you appear to have misunderstood some of what happened.
First off, DP/SFV did not endorse Jerome Horton. Horton was recommended by the Endorsements Committee but the E-board endorsed Judy Chu instead, by a wide margin. Part of the debate on this race indeed focused on Horton's many abstensions on gay rights votes, and the effect John Chiang's replacement will have insuring domestic partners receive fair tax benefits. Endorsing Ms. Chu was consistent with DP/SFV's previous resolution supporting marriage equality.
On the 38th AD race, the original recommendation was "No Endorsement." Shaw's supporters voted against this recommendation and then tried to endorse Shaw. While Shaw did not garner 60%, the vote demonstrated that no other candidate would be able to achieve 60% in subsequent votes, therefore the motion was again made to affirm a "No Endorsement" position. This motion passed.
I don't dispute that DP/SFV meetings can sometimes be confusing to newcomers, but I urge you to continue attending and lending your voice.
Speaking of Assembly races, Frank Quintero come out in support of school vouchers in the 43rd Assembly District race.
http://www.dailynews.com/glendale/ci_3777907
11;11 am - you are absolutely correct. I too am disappointed with how Sid was treated. But even Sid's supporters were supporting Jim Alger so what can you do?
When Shaw-Hilfenhaus only got 44% it was quite obvious that Alger only had about 56%. I actually would have liked to see Alger go for it he might have changed 2 votes which is all he would have needed.
Shaws' people were handing out stickers to every person as they were being credentialed, and the chair of the meeting was wearing a Shaw sticker (complete violation of Roberts Rules of Order). Obviously people who were wearing stickers were not necessarily voting for Shaw-Hilfenhaus. In fact, many of her own "friends" voted against her.
DPSFV was Lyn's race to lose, there is no way she should have lost it. Alger had actually got out of the endorsement committee the first time with the recommendation. The Shaw-Hilfenhaus folks then started attacking Alger on his finances and whatever else they could think up. They stirred up enough mud to switch to "no endorsement".
Even with the deck stacked, she still couldn't make it. I think it just shows how lethargic her campaign is.
Who is Jane Lowenthal? I live in the 38th Assembly District and I've never even heard of her.
Let me get this right. They only voted on a motion whether or not to endorse Shaw. Only 44% voted in favor of the motion.
They did not vote on whether or not to endorse Alger, Gold or Lowenthal?
The only other motion entertained regarding the 38th was not to endorse anyone?
If this is the case that means Shaw was the only candidate to even force a vote on this issue.
So Alger did not get 56% of the vote because he could not even get a the group to entertain a motion to endorse him? It appears the same is true of the other democratic candidates.
What is the truth here and who is putting out misinformation?
Alger had originally asked for no endorsement and that took 56%. This was after the Williams-Shaw-Hilfenhaus camp stirred up the shit because they had recommended Alger.
Alger didn't need DPSFV, Lyn did. She stole the recommendation and pushed it to no endorsement but then got greedy and overplayed her hand. She couldn't even muster 50%.
To draw the inference that the votes that went to no endorsement were Jim's is a fair one since he was asking his supporters all day to vote that way.
She didn't get endorsed in her own club... does this have to be a schoolyard fight now too? Or can you just move on.
The only votes in the 38th AD were for No Endorsement and to endorse Lyn Shaw. So it is true that Alger cannot claim to have recieved 56% of the vote just because only 44% were for Lyn. He probably would have received close to 56%, but a few of those who voted against Lyn would have voted against Alger as well, because they wanted no endorsement.
However, it is also unfair to say that Alger "could not even get the group to entertain a motion to endorse him." All it would have taken was one person to make a motion and one person to second it, and he could have easily done that. However, he chose not to because he knew he needed 60% of the vote, and with Lyn's motion getting 44% support, it was clear a motion for him would also fail, although we can't speculate the exact vote count. It was already turning into a very long meeting, and he did not pursue a motion to endorse when he knew that he did not have the votes to pass it.
Using the minutes of the meeting to refresh my memory:
The recommendation from the Endorsments Committee was for "No Endorsement." This recommendation was pulled from the consent calendar so it could be voted on separately. The motion to approve the committee's recommendation failed by a vote of 29-20. It needed 60%, or 30 votes, to pass.
Then a motion was made to endorse Lyn and that motion, also requiring 60%, failed by a vote of 22 for, 26 against.
At that point a motion was made to go back to "no endorsement" since it was apparent that no candidate would get the 60%. This motion passed by a voice vote.
No separate vote was taken to endorse Alger, Gold, or Lowenthal. After sitting through the debate and 2 votes over a pulled endorsement for BOE, and sitting through this debate and votes many of us were eager to move on since it was obvious no one would be getting the 60% required.
I read his press release and now I am confused. Did Alger get an up or down vote to endorse him as a candidate?
No, there was no motion to endorse Alger, so there was no vote on that.
Alger instructed his supporters to vote "no endorsement" and on the first ballot they did just that. 58%, just 1 shy of the 60 needed.
Then Lyn decided she would try for the endorsement, with 59% going no endorsement the first time I can't imagine how she thought she had much more than 40% in the first place... obviously she didn't get much higher than the 40% (believe it was 44% so 1 or 2 votes switched over)
Alger shook his head no when a supporter went to try and make the motion to go for it, then someone made the motion for no endorsement again and it passed.
Chalk this one up to Jim for knowing when to hold em.
Personally I think he might have gotten it with Lyn failing the options would have been Sid, Jane or Jim so I think he could have pulled it off but hey, it's his campaign I am sure he knows what he is doing.
So Mr. Alger's press release is false. He was not endorsed by 56% of the membership of this group.
We do not need this kind of dishonesty in our State Assembly.
And what about the 45th?
The Times seems to have skipped it altogther...
They're staying out of that one.
1:54 am - your an idiot.
Algers' position won, and your person didn't get the endorsement. Now go cry about it someplace else.
Ethelyn Lyn Williams Shaw Hilfenhaus has bigger problems, herself. She keeps telling people she can't win the election in November. (as recently as 2 days ago)
Not a good display of confidence in her own abilities for someone seeking the Democratic Nomination.
Quintero supports vouchers? Was asked at a forum in Glendale, as reported in the News Press, and said "Yes."
Now his campaign manager says that it was a mistake. He's going to have a tough time convincing voters that Quintero is both a "veteran educator with 38 years experience" and "confused when he was asked point-blank 'do you support school vouchers'"
This race is going to be close, but Democrats can't afford to have someone who is either pro-voucher or so lost in education policy that he doesn't understand what vouchers are.
Alger, where do you stand on school vouchers?
Mr. Alger: Liar, liar, Pants on fire....
11:28,
Would you rather eat a cockroach or get kicked in the nuts? By your logic, if only 2% of voters want to eat a cockroach, the other 98% want to get kicked in the nuts.
Nice try. The resounding sentiment here was "none of the above."
It would be pure B.S. to think that Jim Alger got 56% of the vote unless one of the the 5 aliases he goes by is no endorsement.
Kinda of like the B.S. poll he put out that shows better name ID than the candidates for Governor with no undecideds.
Boy you Ethelyn Lyn Williams Shaw Hilfenhaus folks still going at it? You guys can seriously NEVER EVER ONCE say why your candidate should be elected without attacking Jim? God is that sad.
It hurts getting your asses handed to you every place you go huh?
Maybe if you would stop attacking and jesus christ for one single time show where your candidate stands on ANY issue you would have a campaign that existed off of Mayor Sam!
Look, Lyn keeps telling people that she can't win in November... Noone wants to vote for someone whos strategy is to lose, period.
You guys have received open invites to post real news, events, or ideas on here for months and still not a single thing.
Nothing more needs to be said.
Alger = Liar..... Liar,Liar,Liar.......
To all candidates in the 38th, I have questions to which I would like answers:
What can you do about:
1.Congestion from Santa Clarita to the Valley?
2. The fact that we are not getting enough parks for the homes being built. Building a 200 square foot green area with a bench on it does not constitute a real park in my book.
3. The size of LAUSD? Do you support its break up?
How about answering some questions on the issues and get off the name calling, who ever is doing it. For all I know, it is not Shaw's and Alger's people who are doing it, but is actually Smythe's people who are doing it.
A great many families left LA for better schools and low crime rates in places like Santa Clarita. Congestion is the typical result.
Santa Clarita does need more parks but so does LA. Also parks cost money. If developers are required to develop parks with new housing the cost is passed onto consumers who are already having trouble buying houses now.
Most viable Democratic candidates are supported by teachers unions. I doubt any in this race will support the break up of LAUSD.
What can you do about:
1.Congestion from Santa Clarita to the Valley?
I have made 2 separate proposals that will have an effect in traffic in and out of Santa Clarita.
a) Creating an "Economic Component" to the term "Infrastructure". What that means is that when a developer says he is going to build a large scale residential sub-division, a requirement would be that he also construct commercial with guarantees of occupancy by companies who will pay people a wage that will support the community.
This proposal is obviously much more complex, but the idea is that people will live where they work, therefore commuting less.
b) Creating tax incentives for business to encourage their employees to commute through public transportation. Also create incentives for business that are able to operate in odd hours. [such as 7am-3pm etc.]
c) expanding available parking at MetroLink Stations
2. The fact that we are not getting enough parks for the homes being built. Building a 200 square foot green area with a bench on it does not constitute a real park in my book.
This plugs right into my campaign theme of "Local Control over Land Use" allowing communities to decide what gets built in their own neighborhoods. Parks generally are an expensive proposition because they absorb valuable land and incur the cost of upkeep, security etc. However, we need more of them and need to preserve open space not just in Santa Clarita but the entire State. My proposal of local control would allow this to happen as the people who live in a given community would have a much larger say in what does, or doesn't, get built in their neighborhoods.
3. The size of LAUSD? Do you support its break up?
No. At least not at this time. Breaking up LAUSD is a popular catch phrase to lure people into some magic wand solution. There is none.
What can be done, is convert every board member into the top of the food chain so to speak. In other words essentially breaking up LAUSD without the expense of breaking it up.
By giving each board-member the latitude to do what works for their district, and the board-member giving the principles lattitude to find what works in their individual schools we can then talk about accountability.
There are the micromanaging issues such as getting us away from "teaching to the test" but it must start by putting the control of the school back in the hands of the parents. We can rid the local districts of the downtown mentality of "one size fits all" without spending millions to do it.
No Democrat will support the break up of LAUSD because they are tied to the hip of teachers unions.
Many public school teachers vote by their actions and send their children to private schools. Our Mayor sends his son to Loyola H.S.
We need a school choice program or vouchers at least for the worst performing schools. Unlike teachers they do not have an option.
A bill recently came out of committee in our state Senate that would require all school districts to remove any indication of gender in the instruction regarding families and that they teach a required course regarding the accomplishment of Gay, Lesbian, and transgenders to our society. Clearly indoctrination by liberal dems of students who have no other options.
The bill was supported by committee democrats and rejected by committee republicans.
Where do the Democratic Candidates including Mr. Alger, who clearly monitors this site, stand on the recent action in the state senate?
For a centrist Dem like me, I do wish that my children were taught tolerance and that there are different lifestyles and different kinds of families. That IS the truth and it IS the way of life.
Get used to it. It's not like they're teaching kids "how to be a homosexual", which is what some Christian Right groups claim.
Republicans need to forget about the "christian" base and accept that homosexuals live amongst us and have for thousands of years. They aren't going to stop the practice.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home