Brian:

Let me get this straight. Mikels is the only one of the five Supervisors to vote against the County's Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance when it was introduced in March of 2003. Then, during the thirty days before the County's Ordinance took effect, she raised over $81,000 in large contributions from a small group of special interest contributors. And, a select group of these contributors have pending land-use and other permits before County officials. This sure looks and smells extremely fishy to me. And, as the old Italian saying goes, "...a fish rots from the head down.." Judy Mikels should be ashamed of herself. Her professional and political ethics are appalling, and have no place in Ventura County. By her actions, Judy Mikels has shown disregard for the law and disrespect for the voters in the 4th Supervisorial District. Jim Dantona is right, she must "Refuse or Recuse," immediately. Anything less confirms that she believes she can game the system and get away with it. She's clearly emeshed and entangled in a
"Culture of Corruption," of her own making. Come June 6th, voters like me are fixin to limit Judy Mikels' term on the Board of Supervisors once and for all.

IronFeliks

Brian:

Thanks for creating such a great blog site and giving Ventura County voters the chance to follow the ups and downs of local political campaigns. I'm really upset with Judy Mikels' handling of this issue. I don't see how she could vote against the Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance in the first place. Then, during the thirty days before that Ordinance took effect, blithely raise large sums of money from special interest contributors who have or will have projects before the County Board of Supervisors. And, now, during her 2006 reelection campaign, expect us to believe that she'll cast anything but a vote in favor of these large contributors' projects, regardless of any adverse impacts on local neighborhoods and communities. To me, Judy's behaviors and actions in this matter demonstrate a blatant conflict of interest between the public good and political gain. She needs to return these large contributions, and then recuse herself from voting on these projects when they come before the Board of Supervisors. If she doesn't, then she should take an early flight to Tuscon, stay there, and thereby do no more harm to the voters of the 4th Supervisorial District and Ventura County as a whole.

Victor Boyarsky

Maybe someone other than members of the Dantona campaign would like to comment on this blog? Three different comments within two hours of each other complaining about the same thing? Coincidence? If you think so, you should recuse yourself from this blog. Sic semper tyrannis, Feliks!

Jim Dantona's business clients as listed on his company website (http://www.govimpact.com/GOV/corporate.html):

Kaufman & Broad
Archstone Development
Greenpark Developers
Griffin Developers
Dale Poe Developers
Big Sky Ranch Developers
Colton Lee Communities
Casden Development (built Indian Hills in Simi)
Mel Simon & Associates (built most of Wood Ranch)
S & S Development
Ira Yellen Development

He is also a registered lobbyist with the state of California. Can't seem to get any work the past three years, but still registered. It seems his under-employment allows him plenty of time to write on blogs.

Dantona is walking into an oncoming train on this issue. His development and land use ties are extensive. He would have to recuse himself from so many land use matters, it would render him irrelevant.

Not to mention every time a union contract comes before the Board. How much $$$$$ does Dantona get from unions? You must recuse!

We're beginning to see hints of desperation from the JD camp. Hopefully after all this is done he won't have to declare bankruptcy. Again.

Its not the source of contributions its the quid pro quo that often comes as a dirty condition of those contributions. After meeting with Mikels, only to be told that her job is to protect developer's rights while her constituents' safety comes last, I can only assume that developers' contributions mean a lot more to our current Supervisor than the people she's sworn to protect. Its probable that Mikels & Dantona both take developer contributions but I'm betting that while Mikels see her constituents as a commodity, Dantona sees us as neighbors. (There ya go, Brian! A new slogan.)

Interesting how Joe compares a sitting elected Supervisor taking contributions from a developer with a pending land-use isssue for an unsafe, unplanned trailer park, to an independent consultant getting paid for providing PR, trouble-shooting, and community affairs to a client who hired him.

If our Supervisor is for hire by the highest bidder, then she should be fired by those who elected her. The fact that Dantona opposes Colton Lee's fire-trap development in Santa Susana, despite having represented the client on other projects, shows integrity and common sense.

FYI: Since "lobbyist" gets thrown around like a frisbee here - let's clarify: Lobbying involves bills or legal changes before the legislature. It does not involve community relations and mediating on behalf of a client to find common ground. But how would the Mikels' campaign know anything about relating to a community she never speaks to? Dictating the way things are going to be is not finding common ground. Threatening to "make things worse" if the press finds out is not mediating - it's blackmail.

Joe needs to get his facts straight about union contributions.

He asks the question, how much $$$$ does Jim Dantona get from unions? Well, the answer is that to date, Jim Dantona has received a total of $1,200 (two $600 contributions from two different United Food and Commercial Workers Locals) neither of which represent County employees. Check out the details at: http://elections.countyofventura.org/campaignfinance/view/search_summary.asp?id=54&mode=candidate

On the other hand, on April 1, 2003, Judy Mikels received $5,000 from SEIU-Local 998, the single largest union representing County employees.
So, Joe, by the logic of your question, would you agree that Judy Mikels is more "beholden" to the County employees union, cause she got FOUR TIMES THE CONTRIBUTION that Jim Dantona received??

Unfortunately Joe, you'll have to go all the way up to the Elections Division in the County Government Center in Ventura to check this fact out, cause Ms. Mikels has not posted her Form 460 Campaign Finance Report on the website for contributions she raised during the 2003, 2004 or 2005 calendar years.

Why do you think she chose to do that, Joe?? Could it be that she wanted to make it harder for voters in her district to find out that she raised nearly $81,000 in large contributions, including SEIU's $5,000 contribution, during a thirty day period before the new $600 limit on contributions took effect? Could it be that she didn't want voters to know that some of these large contributors, including Colton-Lee Communities, Waste Management, and 3 Large Rock and Gravel Mining Operations, all had and still have land-use permit applications pending before the County Board of Supervisors?? Or perhaps Joe, since Judy Mikels voted against the Campaign Finance Ordinance in the first place, she felt she was above it.

Well Joe, neither you nor Judy Mikels can have it both ways. Regardless of the source, individual, business, and/or unions, she should return any and all contributions over the $600 limit found in the Campaign Finance Ordinance. If she dosen't and that contributor's items come before the Board of Supervisors, she should recuse herself from voting. It's the right, fair, and ethical thing to do. The question is Joe, will she do it?? Care to put any money on the likely answer??

How about $600 to the Dantona campaign, Joe???

Brian,
There needs to be some clairfication here. Mel Simon did not build Wood Ranch......he is a mall builder, and in the mid 80's he did an EIR where the current mall sits. Mr. Simon was going to be the original builder, but the ecomoney took a dip and Mr. Simon said good-by. Casden did not build Indian Hills, a gentleman by the name of Evan Murphy (RIP) and his partner, name escapes me right now, but he is alive and actually lives in Thousand Oaks built Indian Hills. I sat on N eighborhood Councils at the time and remember it well. So if this information is incorrect, I can only imagine what other snake oil "Joe" is trying to sell?
Barbra Williamson

Los Angeles Times, January 11, 1992, Saturday, Ventura County Edition

HEADLINE: VENTURA COUNTY NEWS ROUNDUP: SIMI VALLEY; PLANNERS SUPPORT INDIAN HILLS PROJECT

By CARLOS V. LOZANO

The Simi Valley Planning Commission has voted to recommend City Council approval of a developer's plan to construct 235 houses to complete the Indian Hills subdivision.

The commission voted 3 to 2 Wednesday night to support the proposal by Beverly Hills-based Casden Properties. Commissioners Ron Lenfield and Barbara Williamson cast the dissenting votes, saying they were concerned that the developer had not provided a secondary access road to the site.

Casden has proposed building 97 houses clustered on 22 acres east of Yosemite Avenue and north of Flanagan Drive, planning officials said. The developer also wants to construct 138 houses on 34 acres south of Flanagan Drive.

The council is scheduled to review the proposal Feb. 3, said Wolf Ascher, city planning manager.

If approved, the development will bring the number of residences in the Indian Hills subdivision to 809. Work began on the subdivision in 1977. CARLOS V. LOZANO

Joe,
When Indian Hills was first being proposed, Evan Murphy and Ed Pickett were the developers. They did the majority of the planning and building. In the early 90's they sold to Casden, who promptley sued the city for the building of the homes which currently sit on the ridge line that you can see from the 118 Freeway.......so yes, you are partically correct...see, I can admit when I am sometimes wrong, but like I said, originally Evan Murphy and Ed were the original builders.
Barbra

IronFeliks,
Although you have made some very smart remarks about Supervisor Judy Mikels you forget one very important reason we need to keep her on the Board.
Judy has been a friend for many years and although I can't yet convince her to be a paying member of the ACLU, she supports most of our civil rights agenda of the ACLU.
2 years in a row she authored a resolution to publically fund a Gay Pride Festival in Simi Valley. Although not popular with everyone she had the courage to stand up to the Chritain Coalition and said she believes people who are gay have the right to celebrate their sexuality. We need more like Judy Mikels so that one day we to can celebrate our merging as one. That is why our Ventura Republican Gay Club has endorsed her for Supervisor.
We are looking forward after she is re-elected to having another Gay Pride Festival thanks to her. Keep up the good work JUDY!!!!!

The other day I got a mailer from the Dantona campaign. Brian, I'd like to know why you haven't you posted anything about it?

Hey Mitch,
I am glad you brought that subject up, I mean about Jim's mailer. Wasn't that great? He told the residents of the 4th District the truth. How refreshing is that???? Instead of having all those lies and half truths out there, Jim takes the high road and discloses all for everyone to see...I am impressed. Now MAYBE we can consentrated on ISSUES,instead of mugslinging...what do you think???
Oh, and yes, my REAL name is Barbra Williamson

For Mitch - here is another reaction to the mailing from yesterday's Star.

March 30, 2006 - Honest talk refreshing

I recently received campaign literature in the mail from Jim Dantona, candidate for the Ventura County Board of Supervisors. The piece was titled �We all have a path to choose.� In the mailer, Dantona talked about his family, illnesses and even bankruptcy.

I am 78 years of age, a retired elementary school teacher, and a Simi Valley homemaker. I have never filed bankruptcy and always pay my bills on time. Nevertheless, I found the Dantona piece to be very moving.

Politicians are usually arrogant, self absorbed and immune from fault. In the case of Jim Dantona, my husband and I see a man of integrity, a man who admits his faults, overcomes his weaknesses and tells the truth. Not many men can talk in public, to thousands of strangers, about his divorce, illnesses and financial pitfalls. Jim Dantona has those very traits that are missing in so many politicians these days.

Until I received this recent �path to choose� literature, I was still not sure whom I would vote for in the supervisorial race. I had voted for the incumbent lady in the past. Now, however, my husband and I will be supporting Jim Dantona for county supervisor.

Wouldn�t it be a better community if all politicians could come forward with their shortcomings as Jim Dantona has done? After all, haven�t we all had problems in our past that we have had to overcome? The choice is now clear to me: Dantona for supervisor!

� Marie Wilson, Simi Valley