Fullerton California Campaign Central:
I Report, Fullerton Voters to Decide-By Barry Levinson
Rating the Council candidates websites for content and for accuracy.
Rating System: If the candidate does a good job identifying the major issues, I will give them a rating as high as a C.
If the candidate does a good job spelling out specific solutions to all the problems as well, the rating can go up to an A.
If the candidates’ websites are misleading in any way they are downgraded. I believe honesty is the “best” policy. No one running for office should be allowed to either misinform or mislead the public.
- Greg Sebourn: B minus for doing a good job of identifying the issues, but failing to give any specifics for solutions. I boosted his score from a C to a B- for not embellishing his record. I believe candidates should be recognized positively for accuracy and honesty and downgraded for the opposite.
- Rick Alvarez: D minus For identifying only a few of the issues (infrastructure, economic development and public safety) with no specifics on solving our many problems. Mr. Alvarez does not even mention the huge problem of unfunded pension and retiree health care liabilities.
- Jane Rands: D minus I like her opening statement about balance. Unfortunately Rands has not provided us with much else. I know where Ms. Rands stands on most issues but she must share that information on her website.
- Sean Paden: D minus Like Ms. Rands, I know where Mr. Paden stands on many of the issues however like Ms. Rands his website is silent on all but one narrow issue. His issues segment states “Coming Soon”.
- Larry Bennett: F He mentions pension reform but takes it no further. He does not state that today’s pensions are way to generous and need to be scaled back if the city is ever to get back on a good financial footing. I downgraded him to an F for failing to fully acknowledge his past close support of McKinley, Jones and Bankhead and for some misleading comments on his website under his caption Working Together. He first states that he is a consensus builder. He was campaign chairman for the NO on the FULLERTON RECALL in 2012, a very contentious and divisive issue. He also states he is for civic openness but has defended what Councilmember’s Whitaker and Sebourn call the Fullerton Counterfeit COIN ordinance.
- Doug Chaffee: F He mentions some of the problems but like the others does not provide specific solutions. He is downgraded from a D to an F for an important inaccuracy on his website. His website states that “ Chevron, which owns the land, will work to forge a deal to sell most or all of the land to The Trust for Public Land, a national land-conservation group, city official announced Tuesday evening”. Unfortunately, the Trust for Public Land has totally bowed out of any deal approximately a month and a half ago. This is a mistake at best or at worst an intentional factual inaccuracy.
- Bill Chaffee F He earns a failing grade for not having a website.
#1 by Barry Levinson on September 30, 2014 - 11:27 am
Crystal Ball attacks are void of any meaningful information or relevance. Please feel free to disagree with my analysis but please add something, anything to the election discussion.
Ladies and gentlemen I welcome different points of view. It is healthy for our nation. But insipid attacks totally void of any substance must be highlighted as what is truly wrong with our current political system.