[poll id=”260″]
I just concluded a 90 minute interview of Mission Viejo recall candidate Dale Tyler.
Background for this post. The election to recall Mission Viejo vice mayor Lance MacLean will occur on February 2, 2010.
There will only be two names on the ballot to select from. Dem. Dave Leckness, whom I interviewed on November 9th and Rep. Dale Tyler whom I just interviewed.
Let me preface the Q & A with the following information.
Unlike many interviews where questionnaires are sent to every candidate who is then given one or two weeks to respond, I did not share any of my questions in advance with either of them.
Although I asked Dale many more questions than Dave Leckness, neither of them had a clue as to what I planned to ask nor today’s listing which follows below.
LG. First question. Having been a Mission Viejo resident for over 20 years what participation, if any, have you had in any of our prior city council elections?
DT. I have been involved in every Mission Viejo election over the past 10 years starting with JP in 1998 and Trish, JP and Lance in 2002, to Gail in 2004 and other candidates.
LG. Are you involved in any local organizations? If so, which ones?
DT. The Saddleback Republican Assembly, CIG, (the Committee for Integrity in Government), and DHS (Drivers for Highway Safety).
LG. Although you just filed your nominating papers, what endorsements have you been able to get for this Feb. Special election?
DT. I have not sought any for this election. I was endorsed by the Saddleback Republican Assembly
LG. Of the 8 charges against Lance MacLean which do you feel are the most egregious and why?
DT. Lifetime medical benefits..doubling his salary..disrespecting voters.. Measure K (a proposed tax increase promoted by Lance)
LG. Lance and several residents have stated that he is not the only one responsible for those decisions. How do you respond to those remarks?
DT. You are accountable for your own decisions. The fact that others may have voted for it doesn’t change your vote. Lance made either the Motion or provided the Second on many of these issues.
LG. Aside from Lance, Frank and Trish can any future council members qualify for the same $270,000 lifetime health care benefits that they each voted for?
DT. As of today the answer is NO.
LG. If Lance were to get reelected in Nov. would he qualify for that benefit?
DT. YES.
LG. What do you feel are the largest issues facing the city today?
DT. Lifetime medical benefits..doubling council salary and out of control spending that is a longer term process
LG. What recommendations would you bring forward to address them?
DT. Immediately revoke lifetime medical benefits and rollback pay increase
LG. In your candidate statement you reference projects that end up 200% to 300% over budget. Can you be more specific?
DT. The Murray Center, City Hall and the Montanoso renovation
LG. You also wish to promote a more open government. Can you give us some examples where our government has not been open? What changes would you recommend?
DT. Documentation requests. The data on the electronic sign was laughably incomplete.. the same answer for the costs and subsequent destruction of easels. I would give the city clerk more power to put teeth in Public Records requests and demand compliance from uncompliant employees.
Strictly limit matters in Closed Session to those that are unambiguously permitted by the Brown Act.
LG. A lot has been said about the Casta Golf Course being converted for housing. Is the city Moratorium on this property still in effect and, if so, when does that Moratorium expire?
DT. I believe it is still in effect until February..not sure. Even if they set a date certain, it could be terminated early
LG. What is the Right To Vote Initiative and what was your role in the that effort?
DT. I developed the wording in the Ordinance based on Yorba Linda’s Ordinance and campaigned getting signatures. The Initiative is a means for the citizens to gain control of major planning and zoning decisions
LG. When is that Initiative to appear on a Mission Viejo ballot?
DT. It will be on the regular June 2010 ballot
LG. Does it require a simple majority or 2/3rds for passage of the Initiative?
DT. A simple majority
LG. Same question for major development projects should the Initiative pass.
DT. A simple majority
LG. Can the current owner sell that golf course property in whole or in part today?
DT. Yes, subject to any deed restrictions
LG. How is the Casta golf course property zoned?
DT. Open space
LG. Without the Right to Vote Initiative what would it require to change that zoning to residential usage?
DT. Three votes
LG. If the Right to Vote Initiative is approved, what are the trigger points for that potential voter participation?
DT. Major zoning changes to parcels in our city. I am not opposed to using property as currently zoned and will encourage it
LG. In your candidate statement it reads that you want to “require city budgets to be balanced every year.” Aren’t our budgets balanced or is that balance only accomplished by taking money from our reserves?
DT. I believe today’s budget is balanced by accounting tricks and don’t reflect the actual fiscal state of the city
LG. Another area in your candidate statement says that you want to stop self-enrichment. Can you provide any examples of that remark?
DT. Lifetime medical benefits…doubling your own salary
LG. Recreation has always been a major reason why many families move to Mission Viejo. Were you involved in the 2002-03 effort to save the Sierra Recreation Center?
DT. Yes
LG. Do you support our city’s recreation programs?
DT. I do
LG. Do you support the $4 million expansion of the Marguerite Tennis Center as proposed?
DT. No.
LG. Why not?
DT. It’s $4 million dollars for approximately 150 residents
LG. A recent hot issue in Mission Viejo is the location and cost of a dog park. Do you support that future CIP?
DT. YES. I believe we should have a dog park in our city that is reasonably priced that is away from homes, schools and parks
LG. How much should we spend and where would you recommend that it be located?
DT. Other cities have built dog parks for less than $100,000. I would support a siting process that includeds input form every home and business within 2,000 to 5,000 feet of the proposed site.
LG. Due to the current recession in the construction industry we have not moved forward with any new housing start including the state mandated 94 low and super low income affordable units. Where would you prefer that the shortfall be located?
DT. A number of locations have been given special zoning, including density bonuses. It’s up to the developers. The city doesn’t build the units
LG. Would you promote placing all of them in one project or spread around the city?
DT. We’re done. The RENA allocations could be fully satisfied by the zoning made by the current council
LG. Would you support a new school District in Mission Viejo as some parents and council members have been promoting?
DT. It appears to me that the complexity of creating a Mission Viejo only school district far out weigh the benefits. However, if it could be done in a revenue neutral and site neutral school site I could support it
LG. The current city council has filed lawsuits against both of our school districts. Do you support either of those actions?
DT. I don’t see the point of either action. Any disputes could have been resolved out of court.
LG. A recent request was made by a member of the Mallorca HOA Board of Directors for the city to spend around $500,000 in taxpayer funds to upgrade their private slopes. How do you feel when discovering that over $one million dollars, 28%, was removed from our infrastructure budget for roads and medians?
DT. I think its’ inappropriate for the city to maintain private property. That the city council failed to maintain city property while spending foolishly on things like the Rose Bowl Float and decorating medians on Crown Valley Parkway is simply outrageous.
LG. Let’s address the 700 pound gorilla in this election.
Without providing any names a hit piece and your challenger allege that someone wants to fire staff members, privatize the library and animal shelter, reduce the number of sheriff deputies, get rid of the Kids factory and school crossing guards.
Here is your chance to respond to these charges.
LG. Do you wish to privatize the library? YES, or NO?
DT. NO
LG. Do you wish to privatize the animal shelter? YES, or NO?
DT. NO
LG. Are you familiar with the Kids Factory program?
DT. Yes, I believe its an after school program
LG. Do you want to get rid of the Kids Factory? YES, or NO?
DT. NO
LG. Another general comment relates to our OCSD Contract. Do you want to reduce the number of sworn deputies serving our city?
DT. NO
LG. How about our SRO’s. Do you wish to reduce the number of our school resources officers?
DT. NO
LG. What is your opinion of the taxpayer funded MV Community Foundation?
DT. The Foundation has failed to live up to its promise to raise funds for various city projects
LG. At what point, if any, do you feel the city should support an entry in the Tournament of Roses Parade? And if so, how much should be spent and funded by whom?
DT. Any time the businesses in Mission Viejo want to enter a Rose Parade Float I would applaud their efforts. However, the City of Mission Viejo should not spend another dime
LG. Final questions. As this election will be decided in the next 2 and a half months are you utilizing a professional campaign manager?
DT. NO
LG. What is your campaign budget for this election?
DT. We are going to spend whatever it takes to win.
Note: This exchange took place between 12:30 and 2 p.m. today at Denny’s restaurant on Alicia Parkway in Mission Viejo.
Hi Larry,
Thank you for the opportunity to answer your questions. I hope that your readers will see by my answers that I am quite involved in making the city a better place to live by working to improve city government.
Thanks,
Dale
I usually won’t take the time to read something this long, but I read every word. I like this candidate’s answers because everything he said is the same as what I think. Also, he was willing to give answers and didn’t ride the fence. The other candidate you interviewed wasn’t able to answer questions because he has not been interested enough in his own city to know about the issues.
Yawn. Sounds like just another know-nothing malcontent.
Chango.
Are you a registered voter in MV?
If so, why didn’t you throw your oversized hat into the arena?
I feel very confident that you would be a great candidate.
But apparently you are very brave as you hide behind the curtain with a phoney monikor. Chango you very much.
Everyone in Mission Viejo should read the interviews with the two candidates before voting. Although Leckness isn’t in the ball park, he provides a basis of comparison with his uninformed responses.
Lance MacLean is history. If he hadn’t misrepresented himself to voters, he wouldn’t have been elected. I hope Dale Tyler turns things around in a city that wastes money on ridiculous junk (Crown Valley fiasco) while ignoring infrastructure. It was good to see Tyler’s straight answers that directly address the lies from MacLean.
What a puff piece. “No candidates know the questions beforehand”. What a load. All this junk is on Dale’s blog.
Try real questions
Do you want to fire the city manager?
Will you keep the city’s support of the library?
Will you reduce spending on kid’s factory?
Should the city pay for the dog park at any new site?
More to come, but try some real questions Larry.
Ask the real questions Larry.
Puff piece? Your surely entitled to your opinion. However the majority of our readers would disagree with you. I guess my interview of Dave Leckness was hard hitting?
I have not looked at Dale Tyler’s web site. In preparation for my interview I did look at three very similar special election documents to which I asked Dale to respond.
Do you want to fire the city manager? Thanks for your assistance in my questioning candidates. However, that’s not what Lance’s rebuttal states where he says that a self serving group “will fire key city staff members” or Dave Leckness’s Candidate statement where it reads “firing staff members” to the hit piece which says they will “fire members of the city staff”. I was not aware that a group of people were running in the special election.
Let’s begin with some real facts. Every member of the city staff reports to the city manager who alone has the power to hire and fire staff. As such the council cannot fire “city staff members”.
Let me ask you a question. How many votes will the new council member get? One or three? Informed voters of Mission Viejo will easily see through your sky will fall spin machine. I addressed all of the issues that Dale could directly have a vote, not some off the wall accusations. Furthermore no one candidate can control the council. I don’t know how many times I need to provide proof that the current council minority are not in lock step on their votes as confirmed by simply attending our council meetings or watching rebroadcasts on TV or your computer thousands of miles from Orange County.
As to the dog park. Let me repeat his answer in case your anger blurred your vision of his reply. “I believe we should have a dog park in our city that is reasonably priced that is away from homes, schools and parks.”
Genius. Open your eyes and you will see that he did answer the question of the city funding the park. However, until we find an acceptable location there is no way of knowing the actual cost figure as some locations will require more work than others. I seem to recall the city making a similar statement in the original group of potential locations.
Library. Another waste of my time. The allegation in the hit piece and Dave Leckness’s candidate statement is that there are some in the city who wish to “privatize the library.” Dale said he does not support that idea. Straight forward question and answer.
Did I write his response in some foreign language that you cannot read or comprehend?
Kids factory. Dave said there are some who promote “getting rid of Kids factory(that he feels) is not necessary.” Dale said he does not wish to get rid of the Kids factory program. Should I repeat that for you in case you were not comprehending what I wrote?
Ask me real questions? Hopefully no one deleted your concerns about Dave’s lack of answers on that interview/post. I do not recall any comment from you to Dave Leckness’s admitted lack of general city knowledge nor his remark that we are “too sports oriented” and should add “more focus on the arts.”
You have a concern about the dog park. Try this one on. When I asked Dave Leckness about the very same dog park issue for which you demand answers he responded that “he didn’t know enough about the dog park” but liked the animal shelter.
Are you satisfied with that answer?? If not, why not?
Be consistent with your “puff piece” interpretations.
Real questions. Like Dave’s admitted lack of knowledge of the recall which enables him to be a candidate. He said he was not familiar with any of the charges against Lance.
How about his knowledge of the Right to Vote Initiative, a major zoning Initiative where 11,000 petitions were signed and given to the city clerk this Jan yet Dave admitted having a”lack of knowledge of this issue.”
Help me out here. Perhaps you can create a list of 30 questions for Dave Leckness for which he can provide answers for you to argue about.
Thank you Larry, this was extremely informative. I don’t know Dale Tyler very well, and I was hoping for the chance to find out where he’s coming from and learn more about him.
I was impressed by Dale’s straight and intelligent answers. He is obviously well versed in local government and especially pertaining to the specific issues of Mission Viejo. I was impressed by Dale Tyler’s commitment to keeping Mission Viejo from being overly developed, and maintaining the quality of life in MV.
I would like to send the above article to all the members of http://www.MVcell-out.org; but first, I wonder if you can add a final interview question for Dale:
How does Dale feel about the MV Wireless Master Plan? What are Dale’s views about Cell Tower placement directly adjacent to schools, homes, and in city parks? Would Dale support a City Cell Tower Ordinance such as the one that Ury had Attorney Curley draft? (which Ury later ended up voting against!)
I would like to send this article out as soon as possible; but I will wait to hear Dale Tyler’s response.
Thank you
Haya.
Valid question which I should have asked. I will try to reach him tomorrow.
In my Nov 9th interview of Dave Leckness he did say his being “indifferent ” on “cell sites” in the city.
There were a few other potential questions in my initial draft that were too insider such as the current status of the landslide at Ferrocarril where a few Mission Viejo homes were destroyed to get an update on any FEMA recovery.
Having read print media candidate questionnaires such as “what was the last book you read” I felt that my questions of Dale were most appropriate.
I can help, Larry. Ask Dave a question about the printing business — something he is actually familiar with.
A candidate who wants to be on the council should know the answers to basic questions about city business. The fact that Dave didn’t have opinions was the tip of the iceberg! He had no idea what you were talking about.
I agree that Dale’s answers are to the point and without hedging.
Mission Viejo voter.
Thank you for your common sense response.
Dave could not answer my questions because they do require knowledge of city issues that most residents do not focus on.
One barometer would be attending our city council or any of our city commission meetings. Here we are a city of 100,000 yet there have been council meetings with less than 50 in attendance of which half are there to get an award and most of the others are there for their specific Public Hearings.
One area that bothers me is the lack of MV resident attendance at special events such as Veterans Day where perhaps 100 of our 100,000 attend to give one hour of their year to say thanks to our veterans. As I attend these annual events I do not see former mayors Susan Withrow or Sherri Buterfield in attendance. They each signed Dave Leckness’s candidiate statement yet have been MIA ever since losing their seats in the 2002 election. My point is that even deposed politicians walk away from public service and appearances.
email from Mission Viejo. First time respondent.
Larry,
“As expected, another informative interview which shows Dale’s knowledge of our city government. Now, if you can show both the other candidate’s interview side by side with Dale’s what a comparison it would make!”
XXXX
Excellent interview with key questions. I have practically given up on politics, but I am encouraged to see a candidate of this caliber who is informed and reasonable. I hope he wins.
Tom S.
Thank you for your kind words.
One anonymous respondent said this was a “puff piece” interview.
He or she is probably upset that I did not include traditional candidate questions such as:
What’s your favorite movie?
What’s the last book you have read?
And who’se your roll model?
Any chance of a debate or forum with the two candidates? With such a stark contrast between the two, it would be valuable to hear the exchange. We need Dale Tyler on the council, and we have needed someone like him for years.
Casta del Sol Sistah..
There was some talk of Casta inviting both candidates to a joint meeting of the Casta Democratic and Casta Republican Clubs.
This would be beneficial for those living inside the gates to directly question both men to see what they know and where they stand on issues of concern to you.
I would take it a step further and make it a Town Hall style, without notes, so that the conversation is directly from Dale and Dave, not one of their handlers, if in fact they utilize them.
As there are several issues that are discussed in almost every Closed Session we need to make sure that our city council representatives are up to speed on issues for which they cannot bring coaches into the back room where real property, personnel and other protected issues are debated.
Hello Mission Viejo Voter, this is a follow up to your post about me. Thank you for mentioning that I know about the printing business. However, the printing business and city government have changes and new problems all the time. As soon as I think I know it all about one aspect of the business it changes and I have to learn something new. Mission Viejo city government is the same way. I’m flexible enough to learn and adjust with each new project. The real role of the city council is to make decisions on long term considerations, community growth, land use, business projects etc. When Larry asked about Measure K I admit I could not remember jack (jack is half a word where I come from) about it. I’ve learned it was 5 years ago, my stance then and now is I’m against any new taxes. Thanks again for the compliment.
Larry- in response to Dave Leckness stating he is “indifferent” on the subject of cell sites, I found a contradiction here, which I am having difficulty reconciling.
In 2007, I met at the home of a Minaya Park resident who had organized her community to oppose cell towers in Minaya Park as listed in the original ATS Wireless Master Plan.
While I was at her home, Dave Leckness showed up to get some papers from her. He was serving on the MV Planning Commission at that time, and as it turns out, lived in the Minaya Park neighborhood.
I observed their friendly exchange and heard Dave say; as long as I’m on the Planning Commission there will not be a cell tower in Minaya Park. After he left, I told the resident, “you are lucky that a Planning Commissioner lives near you, who also doesn’t want a cell tower near his home”
So, my question for Dave Leckness would be: Is he indifferent to cell towers in general? or only if they are not in his own neighborhood?
True to his word, Dave Leckness voted “No” on the ATS Wireless Master Plan. Though at the time, I was hoping that he was voting on behalf of all the 18 communities targeted by ATS, and not merely his own.
Now, from his latest answer, I’m not sure.
Haya. If I do conduct follow up interviews I will ask Dave to be more specific in addressing this topic. And I will also ask Dale to take a position as per your prior input.
I also want to add that I was reintroduced to Dave Leckness 2 years later when I was campaigning for Cathy Schlicht and used his priting shop services.
I was impressed by his friendly character and kind manner. I liked Dave Leckness. That’s why I was disappointed by his response to your cell tower question Larry. I did not know what to make of it.
If Dave would like to respond more specifically to the same question I am posing to Dale Tyler, I would be very willing to pass his answer on to the group: http://www.mvcell-out.org
Larry, here is the article from the OC Register about the Cell Tower Ordinance which councilman Ury asked City Attorney Curley to draft (and later voted against):
http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-184014-council-cell.html
In the article, MacLean is quoted as saying: Why do we need an ordinance banning cell towers in city parks when we own the property and can make the decisions ourselves?
Just a few months later, MacLean answered his own question when he took up the cause of T-Mobile and appealed a Planning Commission vote in favor of Gilleran Park residents. At the hearing, MacLean turned his back on the Gilleran community by voting to approve T-Mobile’s cellular installations in Gilleran Park.
My question for both Dale Tyler and Dave Leckness is:
-Given the fact that Mission Viejo has an active contract with ATS allowing them to market cell towers in City parks
-and Given the fact that only 6 park neighborhoods were able to get off the list, and 12 park neighborhoods remain targeted for ATS marketing to all cellular companies
1) Would you support an ordinance such as the one drafted by City attorney Curley, banning ALL city parks from non-recreational uses? or not?
People are looking for honest answers, not political vagaries.
And would you be willing to bring the Ordinance back to council for a re-consideration?
Greetings Haya, The word “indifferent” was Larrys not mine, but it works. I indicated each cell tower comes with it’s own set of circumstances regarding resident appeal and coverage issues. It’s difficult to make a blanket statement on cell tower decisions. Also, you may have me confused with one of the other planning commissioners as I never went out to Minaya Park nor do I live in that area. Thank you for the kind words of being kind and friendly. Stop by again anytime.
To Dave Leckness, posting to my comment above. Dave, if you think I complimented you, my message is that you don’t know jack about city business. Your interview a few days ago convinced me that the reason you don’t know is you don’t care about other people’s problems. You’re obviously interested in your own business, your own welfare and your own self-promotion. You do seem to have a common trait with a lot of politicans, and that’s a king-sized ego. Here you are, jumping in with a belly flop about yourself when the thread is about Dale Tyler. You apparently think everything is about you, so no thanks.
Welcome back Dave.
According to my notes the word “indifferent” was expressed by you which explains my use of quotation marks in your interview post.
Further you did not comment on that word usage or ask me to change it in your thank you response to the interview details so I guess we don’t have a problem with it.
Bottom line. Placement of cell towers is surely an issue as you are well aware.
Until I ask Dale about this issue I will refrain from further comments other than my own testimony at recent planning commission meetings regarding Flo Jo park.
Hi Mission Viejo Voter, I do care about other peoples problems and I do care about my business. I’m new to the blog thing so forgive me. I won’t say anymore on Dale’s blog.
Dave (Leckness)
The Juice Administrators, not other participants, will decide if comments are unacceptable.
I can surely vouch for this being your first participation on the Juice blog.
That being the case, the rules are rather simple starting with no offensive language and no personal attacks.
Each story stands alone. By that we ask that you comment on the main theme and stay on topic. You surely can comment on the Tyler interview because I mention allegations found in your candidate statement.
In fact we would like to have you explain why you included a wide net of generic allegations in your 200 word statement rather than addressing your own accomplishments and desires for our city.
As confirmed by my questions and Dale’s answers he is not guilty of the specific charges you presented which puts the ball and the self-inflicted burden in your court. Now you will need to explain said inclusion when only Dale T and Dave L are competing, not a group of local activists as alleged.
Dave. That 200 words document, that just cost you $1,600, is what 60,000 voters will review to see if your to be their man. Why you went off track is something you need to give serious consideration too. Sadly you cannot un-ring that bell.
That applies to Dale as well. If you notice I purposely questioned him on points expressed in his statement as confirmed by the Q & A found above. As an informed voter I believe he provided valid responses to every point.
In closing we are not asking you to leave this post or the Juice blog.
We rarely engage in censorship or removal as long as you show respect for the writers and other readers. In the 3 plus years that I have been a member of the Juice team we have only censored one individual that I am aware of.
We are all looking forward to your response to the above point!
Regards,
Larry G
I was just thinking the same thing when Mission Viejo Voter said it. Anyone can comment, but they should stay on topic.
Wayne C Booth in The Rhetoric Of Fiction defines an unreliable narrator as one whose credibility has been seriously compromised. The narrator’s unreliability is usually due to psychological instability, a powerful bias, a lack of knowledge, or a deliberate attempt to deceive the reader. We learn the narrator of this piece is unreliable in the following statement: “Unlike many interviews where questionnaires are sent to every candidate who is then given one or two weeks to respond, I did not share any of my questions in advance with either of them.”
The narrator and the Candidate have known each other at least since 97 or 98 when they were in the Committee for Integrity In Government. Time and time again they crop up together at this cause or that and always on the same side. The narrator wants us to believe that they have never discussed these questions before? How stunningly stupid do both of them think the average voter in Mission Viejo is? To back up this claim of a long friendship and political relationship I refer everyone to the following web site:
http://www.missionviejoca.org/Articles/History_and_Mission/history_and_mission.html
Or you could go here:
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/07/is-mission-viejo-city-manager-wilburg-worried-about-maclean-recall/
Where Larry Gilbert says:
July 9, 2009 at 1:46 pm
wazzup. If you can get into the head of our current city manager please let me know. His predecessor once stated that he “only needs to count to three.” I/we have not forgotten that candid remark and his removal by our last Revolution when we took out both the mayor and mayor pro-tem in 2002 Unless one is careful history does often repeat.
So clearly we’re looking at another “revolution” in the mind of this narrator and he is anything but an objective observer. Notice the “when we took out both” construction often associated with organized crime. Perhaps our narrator has a Tony Soprano complex. Also notice how the narrator slings allegations around left and right about “hit” pieces and other imagined wrongs but never backs them up with text. I’m pretty sure you all took the same freshman composition course I took where they taught us to back up each point with evidence or support. Of course if there is no evidence or support available…
Clearly we can’t believe anything after we find out we have an unreliable narrator, one never can, but we can read more closely and think critically about the text. The choice of photos is telling. Dale’s shows a man seriously at work, pen in hand. The narrator took an entirely different approach to his “interview” of Dave Leckness, a supposed friend. I assume it’s the worst photo the narrator could find.
Of the “candidates” community involvement, he lists one group that is no longer in existence. That leaves two others: DHS and the Saddleback Republican Assembly. The republican assembly is in favor of seriously limited government. You can find the entire statement here and I encourage everyone to read it.
http://www.missionviejoca.org/News/2006_Q1/2006_01_21/article2/article2.html
One sentence stood out to me: “School government should be limited to provide quality education in all fundamental disciplines.” It’s a nonsensical statement at first, but with a closer look it becomes clear they want to limit education to what they deem fundamental. It betrays a very clueless attitude toward the education of our youth. In our world today we must go well beyond “fundamentals” if we want to be able to compete in the future. Sticking to the basics and nothing else will guarantee that our children grow into an impoverished adulthood. That’s something the candidate cannot really understand because he’s never had children. I doubt very much that it blips across his computer screen as he sits there for hours writing code for software.
So while he claims he would not close the library, his allegiance to the Republican Assembly suggests he might severely curtail funding to it, or any of the other services he was asked about. Libraries, rec centers, etc., tend to not stay open once their funding has been cut. But this line of questioning was nicely avoided.
So, in summary we have a narrator who lies to us and a candidate whose involvement in our city comes down to two organizations currently and a total of three.
Dave Leckness, on the other hand, is currently active in four organizations, runs a local business, and has been active in an additional six organizations in the past. You can see for yourself here:
http://dave4citycouncil.com/
One thing I find interesting is that the narrator made Dave out to be a rube for having a campaign run and staffed by friends, but somehow for the narrator’s candidate in this interview that is a badge of honor. Pretty much sums up the type of consistency you get when dealing with an unreliable narrator.
Watch, if he addresses this response he will ignore all the important points, focus on some small insignificant thing and build it up. That’s called deflection and it’s a rhetorical strategy unsophisticated minds employ. For instance, notice how the most important question wasn’t asked in the interview:
DA: Dale you were the first to sign the recall petition. Why exactly do we need to spend over a quarter of a million dollars to have a recall election eight months before Mr. MacLean has to run for re-election? Is that the sort of wasteful spending of citizens money you say you find abhorrent? Doesn’t this recall in fact nullify our system of electing leaders?
Dan Avery.
Are you still married to former Rotarian Victoria Avery?
Are you familiar with Rotary’s “four way test” of questions we think and do?
If so, let me reconfirm that my interviews of both candidates pass the very first test. Is it the truth?
You bet. And calling me a liar may put you in the penalty box subject to being thrown out of this thread.
While I met Dale Tyler in the late 1990’s I have known Dave since my 1994 campaign where we spent time together designing and printing all of my campaign materials.
Everything written by me in both interviews are the truth including the statement that I did not share any of the questions in advance with either candidate nor have I looked at Dale’s web site.
As I have a meeting at church to attend I will need to return to add my comments on your extensive piece of fiction. Once I take the time to read it I may in fact find that you are engaging in a personal attack on me rather than the topic and will send your post to the trash bucket.
Mission Viejo voter: You are lame. Your comments had nothing to do with Dale and you make a comment about Dave. He responds and you tell him he only thinks about himself because he is on Dales blog story responding to you. Even so he was very nice in his responce even though you were being a jerk.
If you actually vote why dont you call him at his business. You read one post about him and are making a judgement on who you want to elect already. Dave is more than willing to answer any questions you msve have as I am sure Dale is. Make your opinion from what you learn on your own, not on other peoples opinion. Please dont vote if thst is how you make your decisions.
Paulie, read your own response above and tell us what it has to do with this thread. It’s a blatant personal attack, which Larry just said isn’t permitted.
If Dave wants to continue telling us about himself, here are my questions. The posts he wrote are more than amusing.
I have two questions for Dave. First, who wrote your ballot statement? Having read your answers in your interview, plus seeing what you have written, I find two different writers. This is puzzling, because I would like to know who is running for office — Dave or his handlers (Butterfield, Withrow and Cody). Aside from the “voice” in his writing vs. the writer of his ballot statement, I can point to numerous examples as evidence he didn’t write his ballot statement. Who wrote it?
Question two: Who is paying for Dave’s campaign? He says he’s putting in $1,600 so he can have a ballot statement, but who is paying the balance?
To Janice & Paulie.
One thing that is obvious to non Mission Viejo readers is that posts on this thread, regarding the recall election, will be blamed for global warming.
Please try to focus your comments on the questions asked and the responses from both candidates on the respective posts.Questions about campaign funding will eventually be known once the 460’s are filed with the City Clerk. I have left a message for her and will provide the calendar date once she responds to my call.
My wing it guess is that some contributions and expenditures will not appear as public records until after the election.
Chango says:
November 28, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Yawn. Sounds like just another know-nothing malcontent.
Funny, that same word malcontent was used to describe the homeowners who spent a solid six weeks defending their homes from MacLean’s Dog Park.
Janice, you are right, I shouldn’t have made it so blatent. I guess I should of used sarcasm like MV voter did. I shouldn’t of called that person lame, so I apologize. I just thought it was interesting that MV voter was insulting Dave. It had nothing to do with the post, then insulted Dave when he defended himself after being attacked, which he had the right to do. Then he complained about Dave going off topic and only thinking of himself.
My comment with the post was to get more research on the canidates. MV voter has made their descision already, strictly off of Larry’s interviews. That is unbelievable. I hope Janice you do not also make that same mistake.
Larry was nice enough to spend the time to interview both canidates. I do think he had more questions to ask then he did to Dave, but at the same time he interviewed Dale after the 600 word statement was placed by both canidates. Larry stated he went off of the pieces that were published by Dale. Dave didnt have anything yet when Larry interviewed him, and Dave probally should of waited to do the interview because thats where Larry’s questions came from. It did take Dale a while to get back to Larry. I think Larry said he left him five messages before a response. Not Larry’s fault, but at the same time I think Larry would have had more questions to ask Dave.
Like I said, they both make themselves avialable to the public of MV as they are both involved with multiple groups involved with the city and do business in the city. Dave is more focused on businesses and residents, and Dale is more knowledgable about the issues that Larry talked with him about.That doesn’t make Dave a person who only cares about himeself though. Call them up and ask them about questions concerning the neighborhood you live in and the issues you feel are important. Then make your decision.
I think Dan’s comments were a little off the wall. Larry knows both of them, but he just had more questions to ask Dale. Obvoiusly Larry has stated he feels Dave is more of an insurance policy and is not happy about it. I couldn’t say as I don’t follow the cousil meetings as closly as Larry. Obviously, Larry feels very differently about the two canidates,
Larry, maybe Dave does deserve a second interview though, since you did use Dale’s statements to the city residents for your questions, and Dave didnt have his submitted yet. Just my personal feeling on it.
Larry, I applaude your courage for eating at Denny’s. My stomache can no longer handle all that grease, as I used to work next door to one and ate there a lot. I think it did permanant damage to my stomache 🙂 Have a good week. Sorry for the attack on MV Voter.
Good morning Juice readers.
Just to acknowldge my having just deleted a new comment from Dan Avery.
I am the messenger, not a candidate, and did not lie in the prior responses.
Don’t call me a liar and expect to get a pass from this blogger.For some reason he feels compelled to pick a fight with me that is not going to be tolerated.
Note: Having just returned from a business meeting at our church I will now go back and respond to all the comments which I have not read or finished reading.
I mentioned Dan’s wife only to confirm that we were in the same Rotary Club together and practice, often reading, the Four Way Test.
The Four-Way Test
The test, which has been translated into more than 100 languages, asks the following questions:
Of the things we think, say or do
Is it the TRUTH?
Is it FAIR to all concerned?
Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?
Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned?
1. Is it the truth? My writings and statements are the truth.
2. It is fair to all concerned? It is fair if it is truthful. While each candidate knew I was going to conduct and publish the interviews, neither candidate saw or were given my questions in advance. While Dan may have felt that I was unfair, the fact remains that Dave Leckness included bogus allegations in his candidate statement that preceded a hit piece that arrived AFTER his statement was turned in to our city clerk. Fairness? Those allegations are not attributable to Dale Tyler.
3. Will it build good will and better friendships? Folks. Reporters who are doing their job are not looking to build frienships.
Once again these are candidate interviews conducted to discover what they know about the position they seek.
4. Will it be beneficial to all concerend?
I would hope that the candidate answers to my questions are beneficial to the 60,000 registered voters in our city.
Paulie.
As to your comment that “MV Voter has made their decision already.” I would hope that every voter does their own candidate research and not rely totally on what any reporter or newspaper publishes. Having served as president of the Saddleback Republican Assembly, CRA/SRA, where we mailed out questionnaires to city council and school board candidates, I felt that we can do a better public service by: a) notifying candidates of our intent to publish their responses, b) not share any of the questions in advance, and c) looking at them when asking the questions to see their responses rather than opening your snail mail or email for their answers which in some cases were provided by coaches.
I know a great deal about “coaching” because I coached Trish Kelley when managing her shocking victory in the 2002 election where we knocked out incumbent mayors Butterfield and Withrow.
As to constant charges of my providing questions in advance. It’s lie.
The Cutting Edge producers and myself have interviewed a former Sec of State, high level military brass, a highly decorated CIA operative and the Deputy Consul General of Israel. In every interview we have never given out our questions in advance to any of them. This is not an open book test.
Back to your lengthy comments.
Seeing that Dave was unprepared I chose not to ask him more specific questions such as the Right to Vote Initiative where he admitted “a lack of knowledge on this issue.”
As to my broader questions of Dale. Hello. I challenged him on his own words such as what did he mean about providing more “open government” and his statement of projects with “200% to 300% overruns.”
A major recent issue that has led to pitting MV residents against each other was the potential site of a future city dog park. Dave’s response to me on this topic was that he “didn’t know enough about the dog park.” As such what would you have me do?
I also asked Dale to further comment on his statement regarding self enrichment.
When a candidate spends $1,600 for their statement which is read by every voter we should be able to hold their feet to the fire on every point. And that’s what I did.
It was not too long ago when we in the media failed to challenge Mayor Frank Ury for lying in his 2008 statement by claiming “We completed the Crown Valley traffic improvements” at least one full year before anyone could make that claim. Ironically Lance MacLean expressed his frustration of that delay to city staff months after the Nov 2008 election as to a completion status report on this lingering project.
I was not about to let another election pass without challengng candidates to back up their statements with facts.
In fact several of my questions of Dale were triggered by a hit piece, Lance’s rebuttal and Dave’s statement on our animal shelter, library, Kids factory and OCSD staffing.
To me, getting Mr. Tyler to respond to those charges was appropriate.
Jumping around. Let’s talk about another recent CIP. The expansion of the Marguerite Tennis center where Mr. Leckness said he” didn’t know enough about the tennis center” to comment while Mr. Tyler responded that “it’s $4 million dollars for approximately 150 residents.”
He could easily have dodged that question like Dave but risked turning off 150 voters with his response. He left absolutely no wiggle room in his answer.
Let’s address the comment about Dave only caring about himself. Bogus. Members of Rotary clubs join for various reasons most of which relate to networking. Furthemore Rotary policy limits the members so that the clubs do not have five realtors or bankers as members. Although I left Rotary several years ago I still patronize the businesses of several of the members I met while being associated with that club.
That said, which might have led to new accounts and business for Kwik Kopy, I would still say that Dave is giving back to the community as a result of his involvment in that local service club.
As to “do overs.” Perhaps you might ask any print media reporter if they give second interviews of council candidates.
The insurance policy test is now possible.
Will Dave, or ANY of the 30 voters who signed Dave Leckness’s candidate statement, place a RECALL Lance MacLean sign in their front yards?
If not my suspicion has credibility. He is running as an insurance policy in the event Lance is vote out of office. I would be angry to confirm that those who support his entering the arena back away when the chips are in play.
As to your final comments.
Respectfully, Dave’s candidate statement was received by the City Clerk prior to the Tyler interview. That is where some of the bogus allegations appear.
In reading Dave’s statement I do believe he wrote the opening and closing remarks. However someone else’s fingerprints appear in the negative remarks found in the body.
Folks. Responding to these comments, while challenging, actually take more time than writing the original post. And to think I am not the candidate.
To answer the question above, I will wait for Dave’s answers and then decide about his character. If he lies about his ballot statement, then he is not the honest person he claims to be. Let’s see if he answers or runs away. I also asked who is paying for the balance of his campaign expenses beyond his $1,600 ballot statement. I want full disclosure on both topics. Integrity means wholeness — complete truth.
Larry mentioned follow-up questions, and I want my questions included for both candidates: who wrote their ballot statements and who is funding their campaigns?
Larry, you must have struck a nerve to get a reaction that’s over the top.
So, I’m seeing ousted politicians (Butterfield-Withrow and their associates) who want to be in power, but they can’t run because the public has already rejected them. Dave Leckness becomes their “face” after they talk him into being a candidate, but the old gang is the mouth. Now, there’s a problem because Dave wants to talk as well. Dave doesn’t know much about city dealings and he doesn’t hate anyone. The old gang knows a lot and they hate everyone who doesn’t agree with them (and that’s a big bunch). Well, well. They’ve got a problem — one head with two mouths. So, which mouth is going to prevail?
Capo Taxi.
As you obviously live in Mission Viejo have you noticed the No on Recall yard signs?
Having visited our City Clerk I have the entire 30 names list on both Candidates Nominating papers.
In order for either of them to win on Feb 2nd there is a quick and easy way to see who is in front of rather than found hiding behind the curtain.
Unless Lance is recalled both camps will be the losers on Feb 2nd. That being the case I would be curious to see if the 30 voters who signed in support of both candidates have YES on RECALL signs in their front yards!
Those would include people such as former mayors Cody, Butterfield and Withrow on Dave’s listing and Phil Steinhauer, Carl Schulthess and Dale Sandore from Dale’s list.
As of now I have only seen the NO signs so we will need to wait on some. In the interim I will drive by some of the residences mentioned above to see if they truly are supporting Dave Leckness and are working to remove Lance. That’s the litmus test of candidate support I would be looking for hard evidence confirmation.
Note: As some signers live in gated areas, where signs are not permitted, I have excluded them from the test.
Wait a minute — Butterfield and Withrow’s names are on Dave Leckness’ nomination papers? Is this a fact? When Mission Viejo citizens hear B&W are back and involved with Leckness, he is through. I don’t care if he’s a nice guy or whatever. If B&W think they’re making a comeback, they’re dead wrong. I’ll stick Dale Tyler’s signs in my yard today. I will tell everyone I know to vote for him. No way on B&W/Leckness.
DSL.
Publishing the names of candidate supporters is up to the individual reporter.
I recall the OC Weekly reporter mentioning some of the names on the original MacLean recall application.
Many candidates, who by themselves may not be well known, rely on those signers to enhance their approval by the community at large. It will be interesting to see if Dave includes their names on any of his campaign literature.
Look at all the literaure we receive for our state assembly and senate races. Pages of names in hopes that one of them stick in a positive way with the voters reading the mailers.
“Follow the money.”
OK Folks. I have just heard from Karen Hamman, our City Clerk, on recall election financial statement reporting dates.
On or before Dec 24th the first Pre-Election Campaign Statements are due. This would be for the period of Oct 19th through Dec19 th.
No later than Jan 21st is the deadline for the 2nd-Pre-Elecion Statements. This would cover the period of Dec 20th through Jan 16th.
Late contributions start Jan 17th to Feb 1, 2010, within 24 hours of receiving $1,000 or more.
Folks. After a quick scan on Dan Avery’s comments let me state the following:
The photo of Dave Leckness is directly from his own Kwik Kopy ad and was not posted by “the narrator” as charged by Mr. Avery.
The photo of Dale Tyler was taken by one of his supporters at his meeting with our city clerk and was sent to me. I am not aware of any similar photo being taken of Mr. Leckness in Karen Hamman’s office.
Just a quick illustration of how someone can be blinded by rage.
Note. I must commend our editor who found and posted Dave’s photo.
What a bad impression the Leckness Team has made on this blog: a candidate who can’t answer the simplest questions, angry women seeking revenge while hiding behind their candidate, outsted politicians and name callers.
Larry didn’t do it to them. They self-destructed with their own words. They’re so angry, the rage is boiling over.
Folks. I just deleted two new Dan Avery comments.
No one will get away with cursing me on this blog. His second offense/comment was both nasty and irrelevant to the topic.
Excellent interview with Dale Tyler. Great questions from Larry, and forthright responses from Dale.
Keep up the good work, Larry. I always enjoy reading your articles, and this one was an eye-opener.
wow larry, whats up with Dan. Why is he being so hostile. I like that he posts comments even though they are off the wall and far-fetched. To bad he can’t do it with out cussing and abusing you. He should no better. By the way those were good questions you asked Dale. I wasn’t saying you gave Dale more of a chance. You even stated you knew he had more knowledge on the issues so you were able to ask him more questions. My point was just that you probally would of had more questions for Dave if he did the interview after he put his canidate statement in. And I was refering to your comments about how it was upsetting you that he was throw into the fire as an insurance policy. I hope it didnt come of like I was critical of the post. I thought they were good questions.
Hey Larry, are you going to do a post about the city trying to make its own school district. It seems like that there was some discussion about it and I never heard any follow up. Have you heard anything.
Paulie. Good morning. If you ask around you will discover that every blogger on the Juice has a thick skin. If not we would disappear after our first challenged post.
As to my interview of Dave. The more Dave spoke the more I felt it would be a dis-service to him if I probed deeper on his lack of knowledge on city issues.
One interesting point worth stating is when Dave said he’s “not on anyone’s team” yet his candidate statement contains attack text that is found in the “hit” piece and Lance’s rebuttal. Perhaps Dave can explain that common text.
If you check out his web site, and I did take a look yesterday, you will find his candidate statement. The only problem is that Dave deletes the negative text which some unknown handler added to his statement. If not, should we assume that Dave did the hit piece on his own? As his statement is only 200 words long why didn’t he post the entire text?
When I asked him about the recall I also asked him if he felt he could do a better job why didn’t he run in the 2008 election. Dave responded that he had “no interest” in that election. He also said he was “not for the recall, did not sign the recall petition” and says “it’s time for a change.” At least we can agree on his final remark.
And no. I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT DALE TYLER’s CAMPAIGN WEB SITE. I will later today and should I find anything questionable I will challenge him.
Paulie.
Sorry for not adding the following reply to your comment.
I did question Mr. Tyler on the school district issue as follows:
LG. “Would you support a new school district in Mission Viejo as some parents and council members have been promoting?”
DT. “It appears to me that the complexity of creating a Mission Viejo school district far outweigh the benefits. However, if it could be done in a revenue neutral and site neutral school site I could support it.”
This blog has been terrific at exposing information. Maybe Leckness isn’t aware of what his backers are doing to him, but it is horrendous. Their comments make me think they are mentally ill.
About the school district, when everyone sees what it would cost, the discussion will end. I am just in awe that the discussion has gone on this long with no mention of cost or the damages the two existing school districts would incur.
Gilbert update.
As promised I have now looked at both of the recall candidates web sites. You too can verify my analysis which follows:
Dale Tyler is using dale4mv.com
Dave Leckness is using dave4citycouncil.com
I need to be cautious as the only difference in their first names is a single letter. As such I had better not give one credit for the other.
Dave’s web site contains a good overview of his family and business.
As stated previously, for some unexplained reason, he only shares the “feel good” part of his candidate statement.
Other than that he only has a general comment on the city including our being recognized as the safest city in CA for which neither candidate can take credit.
While Dave’s web site claims “There is a lot of differences between my positions and those of the other guy on the ballot.” he fails to provide any form of confirmation of that remark.
Dave. Be specific. What positions are you referring to and how can you substantiate that broad brush commentary?
Dale’s web site contains a Nov 17th “press release” regarding his completing the filing process. In that document it does mention some of his local activities pointing out shortcomings of Lance MacLean.
What voters want to see and read is his thoughts on retaining our quality of life.
To critique their web sites I would opine that both candidates fail to provide Position Papers on what they perceive to be the key issues of our city and their strategy for addressing them.
And for those who said I looked at Dale’s web site to create my questions my response is simple.
Having assisted every current member of this city council get elected as challengers, I am very aware of the issues that they have been required to confront.
Not boasting but I do not need to check anyone’s web site for background data. Simply adding this comment to making sure that the record is accurate.
As this post is my interview of Mr. Tyler I will add this same commentary to the prior interview of Mr. Leckness
What is the present salary of council members after the increase?
Good Lord, Larry…you call that comparing the two web sites? You didn’t even mention Dale’s site and how it looks like a 3rd grader put it together one rainy Saturday morning. Of course, the slipshod nature of it is understandable, given the slipshod nature of his bookkeeping for the recall campaign and how he had to revise the first filing and was over six weeks late on the second because they both showed he broke campaign law. I thought Dale was some sort of computer Guru, but I guess when you’re busying talking to the Orange County District Attorney and the folks from the Secretary of State’s office, and the people from FPPC, you might not have a whole lot of time to devote to the web site. So what is he telling those law enforcement types anyway? That he was confused? That he didn’t bother to read the law clearly printed on the back of the petition forms? Every page on the back of it? And why don’t you report on that story? I noticed they immediately had you writing about global warming in China. Bet you’re an expert on that. Uh huh…Hey have Dale or Connie given you up yet? Just a matter of time Larry. A matter of time…
Oh and by the way Larry…when you censor someone but not your own comments in response to them, you end up looking like a giant moron. Just sayin….
Dan Avery,
You know who is looking like a complete a-hole? You are. Just so the readers know, I gave you the ability to post here, as an author, so you could put up your side of the story.
Guess what readers? Dan blew us off! He rather come in here and snipe at Larry. Figures.
As far as I can tell, Dan has nothing of substance to say. He defends Lance but never explains why. It is a good question. Why would a supposed progressive defend the likes of Lance MacLean?
Well Dan, you blew it. I have bumped you back down to reader status. And if Larry wants to delete your insufferable comments when they are not germane to the posts in question, that is his right.
You had a chance to tell your story. You decided not to. Some would call that a cowardly act. Larry at least has the balls to come on here and explain his views on a daily basis.
Tell us Dan. Why the man-love for MacLean?
I agree with your comments Mr Art Pedroza, thank you.
Actually I don’t support MacLean, but you know that Art. My position has always been clear. The recall makes no sense unless you look at it as an attempt to undermine our system of elected representation. That I am against and people like you and Larry who champion it disgust me. The recall committee is being investigated seriously by several different levels from the county DA to the Secretary of State’s office. To defend Tyler and Lee at this point is pointless, but you clowns continue to bang that drum. You did not offer me a blog, Art. You said I could write something and it would be held until you approved it. Nice try but I am not stupid.
Hey Art, I do have one question you can answer. It’s a simple one. Do you consider this site to be a public forum?
Dan,
It’s a blog. A feature of blogs is the ability to make comments. We filter those for curse words but also for comments that don’t stay on topic or that are outright spam.
You had your shot at blogging here – on one of the top political blogs in the state. You blew it. That’s on you.
And for the record, I have no position on the recall of Lance MacLean. I don’t live in MV. But MacLean seems like an ass who is worthy of recall.
The argument that he should not be recalled due to the expense doesn’t hold water. We should not have rebelled against the British back in the day, that cost a lot too. And taking out Hitler was a wee bit expensive. Maybe we should have stayed home?
There are times when the public good demands the ouster of villains. This seems like one of those times. Why you would side with the villain is puzzling to say the least. Vern says you are a progressive. There is nothing remotely progressive about Lance MacLean, unless you think that voting himself lifetime healthcare at your expense was progressive.
I am not a “progressive.” Progressives are people who are afraid of being liberal. I am a liberal. A Hubert Humphrey Liberal. Humphrey argued for Nationalized Health Care in the 1930’s. I’m that kind of liberal. And as I have said in plain English I do not side with Lance. I detest the undermining of democracy that recalls are. If Lance needed to be recalled so badly then why did Tyler and Lee have to break multiple laws to do get enough signatures?
As far as blowing writing for your blog, Art. Not a big deal. I have a blog at Salon.com that has a national audience. There were two reasons you gave me that offer. Your sharper readers knew I wouldn’t fall for the first so now you’re using the second one.
Dan, Dan Dan.
Why is it so difficult for you to stay on point.
From your multiple comments on my Juice posts you have spoken to the OC DA and the CA Attorney General, the FPPC, CA Sec. of State, US Attorney General Eric Holder and probably president Obama about the RECALL Petitions.
Please refrain from spamming the same song until you have a written response with action being taken and residents being hauled off to court. If that were to occur we will write a post on that topic. Not only are you embarrassing yourself you are getting very close to the edge of our patience. And let me remind Juice readers that your bride Victoria is Treasurer of Dave Leckness’s campaign, the only other candidate in the race to recall Lance MacLean. I might ask you to recuse yourself from any further comments on the recall election as that’s a conflict of interest but will not take that action against you as long as you have any new points to make that are on the post thread.
This Tyler interview dates back to Nov 28th. For the past month you have continued to raise issues not related to that extensive interview yet we allowed you to add a plug for, and your addition of, a web site for Dave Leckness.
Oh and by the way, I never argued the expense argument. Mine has always been it’s just an attempt to nullify a legal election and put Dale on the council. It’s funny how you and Pillbert never address my argument but constantly invent another one and attack that. Pretty telling. I bet the failure to address my argument has helped add to those who realize the recall is dirty politics at its worst.
Dan,
Hate to burst your bubble but most folks in MV could care less about whatever you write at Salon.com.
If you have a problem with recalls in general then you should be doing something to make them illegal.
I don’t see what your issue is. MacLean clearly misrepresented himself to the voters. Had they known what sort of person he really is I doubt they would have elected him.
In the end it will be up to the voters to recall him. What could be more democratic than that?
And it will be up to the voters to replace him. Again, that is the essence of democracy.
Recalls do not undermine democracy. They give voters the chance to get rid of jerks who lie to them to get elected then turn out to be miscreants.
If not for recalls we would be suck with these awful politicians with no recourse to get rid of them until the next election. Maybe that is OK with you.
As for whether or not you are a progressive or a liberal, I consider you to be wrong no matter what you want to call yourself. But you’re right about being insufferable…
Larry,
Ruh roh! Dan’s honey is making money off all of this? Priceless.
Maybe she’s not sharing with Dan? He sounds rather bitter…
And yes indeed this means he has a HUGE conflict of interest. That figures!
After reading these threads one can only conclude Dan is unbalanced!!!
Spirit.
Everyone adding comments has their own opinion. That being said, your remark has zero to do with my Nov interview of Dale Tyler. Some day, way out in the future, some of our newer readers will understand the rules and stay on our threads.
Considering all of our coverage of the MV recall election, while its impossible to satisfy every reader, has surely provided multiple posts for which your comments are welcome.