Any feedback on the photos? I tried sephia for Smiley Face hill and a cartoon version of the supervisors signs. All were made really easy using Kodak easy share software.

The sepia was a nice touch. Gave the shot some class. I've been keeping the window open so its become almost a nostalgic screen saver.

But back to matters electoral. How would you imagine the voters of our House district would respond if they suddenly found out that Elton Gallegly has been living part time in Northen California and spending so much time there that he missed most of his House votes, was working with businessmen up there while securing contracts for them down here, and has been lying to his voters about it for years?

It seems to me that Gallegly's rock solid support may just melt away, no?

You asked how is Foy avoiding this mess? Easy, like his past experience in this realm, he's non-existent.

Look at the issues the guy is raising. Illegal Immigration? Great, we all agree that something needs to be done, but he is running for County Supervisor, not Congressman, not US Senator, and not President. Know what issues you can have an impact on and try to focus on those.

Second, he attacks Simi Valley's safety in his latest piece? Way to be in touch with the voters of this community who know this is a safe place to live. Perhaps Mr. Foy is confusing his time in Woodland Hills with Ventura County.

It's easy to avoid the fray when the only County issue that he's brought up had to do with the public funding of a parade. Well at least 1 of his 3 issues touched on a County issue. Mr. Foy could have been in the mix if he even knew what a Supervisor did.

What parade? Simi Valley Days?

Did anyone notice the impressive list of endorsements on Peter Foy's Supervisor website? Oh yeah, neither did I, there are none... Ouch!

Brian,
I think you put up the wrong mailer....the one you have doesn't show the postcard and the way to Mikels Arizona home. The one you are showing was the very first mailed we sent...You need to fix that.
Barbra

I saw the mailer as was pretty disgusted. That was as sleazy of a tactic as I've ever seen in a political campaign. Publishing a person's personal address is hitting below the belt and the Dantona campaign should be ashamed.

Furthermore, they offer no proof of this claim. That would be like me claiming that Jim Dantona is a child molester and demanding that he disprove the charge.

I wasn't sure who I was going to vote for in this election, but after receiving that mailer I know for sure I won't be voting for Jim Dantona.

No one hits below the belt better than Judy Mikels. She has whisper campaigns on everyone she has run against or had a disagreement with.

As for the mailer, I agree it raised eyebrows but I think the title paper and Mikels own words are pretty damning. Those words did not come from Dantona but from the news articles. I read the news articles and they are her own admission.

I also saw the ad from her former staffer - pretty damning as well. If she's not around then she is not around - whether it is Tucson or Alaska. But maybe whistle-blowing is considered sleazy as well.

Let's face it, Bubba. You were always gonna vote for Mikels anyway. You're so sure that Dantona's exposure of Mikels' own public record, in her own words is dirty play but do you REALLY not see something terribly wrong with an elected official spending so much time away from her desk? Let's forget about living out of state. Let's assume she misses 70% of those vital county meetings because she watches reruns of GOMER PYLE USMC. Wouldn't THAT be just as bad.

Mikels doesn't want to work overly hard at her job so let's give it to someone that does.

Truth is truth... If exposing Mikels and her "bald-faced lies" equals whistle-blowing, I'll gladly toot away until the cows come home!

Interesting responses to my post. I point out a sleazy tactic by the Dantona campaign and I get accused of being a Mikels supporter by gs. Funny how "gs" seems to be repeatedly posting Dantona propaganda in every thread on this topic. I'm curious to know your relationship to Jim Dantona. Based on your obviously slanted views and attacks on anybody who says anything even remotely against Jim Dantona I'd say you must work for his campaign. Please explain your relationship to Mr. Dantona so we can all understand your purpose for posting on this forum.

FYI, I am simply a voter who has no affiliation or relationship with Dantona or Mikels. But I think gs needs to come clean about his real role in this blog.

Sure thing, Bubba! My group, CalUnion, has endorsed Jim Dantona and is actively supporting his campaign for Supervisor. CalUnion (or precicely, California neighborhood Union) was formed in response to Mikels' attempts to have nine three story apartment buildings built at the intersection of the Knolls' only exit during an emergency. The proposed project would have almost doubled the number of vehicles fleeing a fire, like we had last October. During that fire some Knolls rsidents had to wait over an hour to evacuate the area. Mikels' support for the project could well have cost a lot of lives during the next fire. But we organized and fought the project, bringing it to a standstill and demanded that the County address the safety hazards of the project BEFORE it was allowed to proceed through planning departments. Mikels refused and publicly stated that the safety issues had to be addressed ONLY after the project was a done deal AND it is her job to protect the rights of developers.

Well, the safety of our community and our families comes first, no matter what Mikels has to say, so when she said to us in Jan 2006 (para) "If you don't like the way I do my job then vote me out of office." I looked her in the eye and said, "We will!".

THAT's one of the reasons I support Jim Dantona. The other is he's got real plans. For the Knolls and other unincorporated areas he's pledged to support the creation of neighborhood councils, where the community gets the first look at a developer's proposal and advises the County BEFORE it goes into the planning process. He's willing to make safety the FIRST priority issue for all new development proposals. And he's guaranteed an Open Door policy for his constituents, not just for Mikels' Arizona developer friends.

Vote for the best guy, Bubba. If you think its still Mikels then I respect your decision. But don't get anxious if I fight tooth and nail to make sure that Jim Dantona's replaces her Jan 2007.

Give us a break Bubba - there's no conspiracy on this blog. Most of the "slanted" views on expressed here are fromsupporters of Mikels, Foy or Dantona. People can support whomever they like. This is their opportunity to explain why and I think GS has done a pretty good job. Those of us who have had witnessed first hand the bad experiences that have colored Mikels reign as queen are supporting other candidates. Welcome to Democracy.

And Mr. Oliver - keep tooting!

Okay, Bubba. It's your turn to ante up. Who are you supporting and why?

Like I said, I was undecided until I received that mailer from the Dantona campaign. Publishing a person's personal address is SLEAZY and uncalled for. If Jim Dantona wants my respect and my vote then he needs to run a clean campaign. He is the one who seems to be resorting to dirty campaign tactics. Just stick to the issues. If Judy Mikels is absent from critical meetings that is a legitimate issue that should be raised and she should have to answer for that. But accusing her of not really living in Ventura County is a serious charge and I've yet to see any real evidence to back it up. The burden of proof in on Jim Dantona if he wants to raise that issue. Just because she has a 2nd home and just because she misses meetings is not proof of anything. If he has better evidence he should present it, if not he should apologize.

Bottom line, I don't like feeling like I'm being manipulated. That latest flyer was way over the line and inexcusable. I don't think anyone here would appreciate having their personal information disseminated to thousands of people.

So Gary, wouldn't you agree that sending out Judy Mikel's personal address was unnecessary and sleazy? (And please just address that specific point without trying to divert the topic to something else)

Bubba-

I respect Mr. Dantona giving me proof, backing up his claim with facts. Unlike most politicians who go out and make false claims and never back it up with anything.

In this case, we are shown the title report with the address on it. First, that information can be pulled from any title company -- it's public record. I am just not going to go through all that work to track it down and neither is any other voter. So I appreciate the fact that he says here is the information, to prove I am basing my comments on fact.

Let us not forget that Ms. Mikels held an entire press conference to refute these statements by her competitors. Now people answer back and refute her denial, and that is hitting below the belt? I whole-heartedly disagree.

To me the press conference by Ms. Mikels was a copy of President Clinton talking to the press and saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." That was a lie that was exposed and now Ms. Mikels lie has been exposed. I am thankful for those who back up their arguments with proof. If you truly are a voter without an agenda Bubba, don't you think that providing proof deserves commendation not scorn?

No. I don't agree. Every elected offical's address is part of the public record. Because the issue being questioned is WHERE Mikels is spending all the time missing from her weekly schedule AND we know that much of it has been spent at dubious job-related trips to Arizona, her AZ address is a legitimate part of that record and fair territory.

I'll repeat: I am not concerned that Mikels has a home in AZ. God bless her. She's done well. But I am concerned that an elected official who can't find the time to meet with her constituents nor respond to their concerns has been doing so because she's working on other business or goofing off, in another state.

GS - I hope you are also concerned that Mikels has zero credibility on the issue of trust and integrity, going out of her way to host a press conference and lying about the time she spends in Tuscon.

If she was proud of her work and how much time she spends representing the people of the 4th District, why did she feel the need to lie? I am also concerned by the ever growing evidence of misconduct surrounding her office's action and her financial relationship with Waste Management.

Steve Frank brought forward some very interesting and some very damning documents which in my view warrant a District Attorney or Grand Jury Investigation into Mikels, certain former staff members and Waste Managment, Inc.

When will the Star wake up and start to print stories? This is possibly going to become the worst government corruption scandal Ventura County has ever scene.

I am ashamed to have ever worked for someone who is capable of just 5% of what I am hearing Mikels is guilty of doing for her masters at Waste Management. Her ethics have clearly gone to the dumpster.

You're preaching to the choir! Of all the dirty sleaze associated with this election, the WMI scandal comes in 2nd only to the failure to look into this important issue. If Frank's piece about the Mikels-WMI relationship is half right then failure to examine it BEFORE the election is worse than tampering with a Diebold Voting Machine. It would mean that those that know about that relationship are deliberately keeping voters in the dark...until AFTER the election. That's a corruption of democracy and a tragedy for this community1

By the way, Jason. My applaud for your rebuttal to Mikels' crocodile tears defense.

This is a response to Tony and Gary Selvaggio -

You keep saying that Dantona has backed up his claims with facts. What facts are you talking about? Dantona is asserting that Mikels is not really a resident of Ventura County. That is a serious charge since it means she is not even qualified to be on the ballot. Proving that she has missed meetings and that she has an Arizona residence is not proof that she is therefore spending most of her time in Arizona. All I'm saying is that there hasn't been sufficient proof to back up the charge that she is not a Ventura County resident. I happen to be a Ventura County resident AND I also own property out of state. Just because I own out-of-state proprerty is that proof I live out of state? I don't think so. You have yet to directly address this simple point.

My second point was that it is sleazy for Dantona to publish Mikels personal address on a political flyer. Yes, it is public information, but that still doesn't make it ethical. How would you feel if someone made accusations against you while simultaneously publishing your home address to thousands of people? I could easily look up your address, telephone number, and other information about you and publish it, but I don't think you would consider that ethical behavior.

The whole point of this particular thread is the contents of the latest Dantona flyer. I've raised what I believe is a legitimate concern about Dantona's tactics. You may indeed have good cause to support him as a candidate, but in fairness you must certainly acknowledge that Dantona crossed the line in publishing personal information about his opponent. I'm pretty sure that if Mikels had published Dantona's home address in a political flyer you'd both be screaming about it at the top of your lungs.

Hi, Bubba! Actually, I never claimed that Dantona's info was indeed fact. If I've written anything that implies that I apologize to all. But I have made it clear on several instances that Mikels' home in AZ is NOT the issue: her absences from the job (which she herself has admitted) IS the issue, whether she's spending that missing time in AZ, Aruba or Anaheim.

As for the "address" non-issue. Mikels is a public figure, running a very public campaign and involved in a very public controversy. She has, by law and tradition, given up virtualy all claims to privacy. I, as a private individual, maintain certain legal and traditional claims to privacy. You see, there IS indeed a double standard in effect here but one that clearly and legitimately places the greater burden on public officials. Having said that, if I ever run for public office I will keep this burden in mind.

Mikels was approached after the Knolls' July 2004 victory at the Board of Supervisors meeting. The person in question introduced himself and assured the Supervisor that the community was willing to work with her and the developer to reach a compromise. Mikels' response was (para) "I dont respond to personal attack and threats of a recall!" His rebuttal was, (para) "Welcome to Democracy, Ms Mikels." That little vignette pretty much sums up most folks' perceptions of the Queren Bee of the County Board: she wants it all her way or not at all and she takes any difference of opinion as a personal affront.

Mikels and her team are dishonest and desperate. I sure hope the voters clobber them on election day!

Thanks for the response Gary. Looking at the earlier posts it was Tony who was insisting that Dantona was publishing facts, not you. I appreciate you being clear about your position on this.

I do agree that public officials (and celebrities for that matter) do forgo a certain amount of privacy as a consequence of their profession. However, in this case we are dealing with information that is public anyway. I'm just concerned about the tactics employed by the Dantona campaign. While that information may be public and technically legal to use, that doesn't mean that it is right to use it. Since you head up a PAC I could see someone use the same line of reasoning to publish your personal information, which is something I don't think you would appreciate. Sometimes there are things that just shouldn't be done, even if it is technically legal to do so.

As an example, I know that Jim Dantona filed for bankruptcy. His bankruptcy file is public record. Bankruptcy records include detailed information on employment history, bank records, assets, creditors, personal address, social security number, date of birth, etc. Legally this information is public information. However, I still don't think it would be ethical for a political opponent to print up detailed copies of his file and mail it out to thousands of people.

I have no problem with Dantona disclosing that Mikels owns property in Arizona, but publishing the acual address is dirty politics. In the same way, brining up Dantona's bankruptcy would be fair game for Mikels, but mailing out his detailed credit history would be underhanded.

I know that you are passionate about your support for Dantona, and I respect that. You do bring up many good points, however the topic for this particular thread is the content of the recent Dantona flyer, which I still believe was inappropriate. I realize that politics can be messy, but I have a real hard time supporting any candidate that I think is behaving in an unethical manner.

So, we're in sync on all the issues other than the appropriateness of publishing Mikels' AZ address, right?

Let me pose this hypothetical situation: George accuses his neighbor, Bill, of robbery. Bill claims innocence because there's no evidence that he has any of the loot and invites everyone to his hideout to search. There is no evidence and Bill accuses George of being treated unfairly. Everyone is convinced Bill is innocent and that George is just plain mean-spirited. George then discovers that Bill has another hideout and gives the address to everyone, asking them to search it for evidence.

Has George done something wrong by disclosing the whereabouts of Bill's hidden hideout?

I can't say whether we are in sync on all other issues since I've been trying to stick to the topic of this thread, which is the content of the Dantona flyer. I'm sure there are dozens of other campaign issues that could be debated but I don't see the relevence to this particular thread. Otherwise this discussion would end up going in multiple directions without any real focus on the subject at hand. The reason I posted here in the first place was that the topic caught my eye and I had in fact recently received Dantona's mailer and I had a strong opinion about the content.

Regarding your hypothetical example, I think the correct course of action would be for “George” to forward the information to the appropriate law enforcement agency so that they can properly investigate the alleged crime. If evidence turns up that a crime was committed then “George” will be vindicated and his claim of being robbed by “Bill” will be proven true. Conversely, stirring up people against “Bill” and distributing his personal address to an angry mob would not be a very reasonable or responsible since it has yet to be proven that “Bill” has committed any crime. Perhaps “Bill” is indeed innocent, but his reputation has now been smeared by unfounded allegations and his personal safety might be in danger from people who now know where he lives.

If Jim Dantona believes that Judy Mikels is in violation of the residency requirements for her elected office he should contact the District Attorney’s office and forward to them any information he has so that they can conduct an investigation. If the charges are true then the facts will eventually come out and she would most likely be forced to resign from her position and/or face the wrath of the voters. But publishing unproven allegations and sending out her personal information to thousands of people is just plain wrong.

Somehow I think you would feed differently if this situation were reversed. Furthermore, I believe you would be outraged if something like this were to happen to you. It’s hard to take seriously your claims of unethical behavior on the part of Judy Mikels when you seem to be giving a free pass to your buddy Jim Dantona. If ethics and principles don’t apply both ways then they don’t really apply at all.

Frankly, these issues WERE taken to authorities and to THE STAR, both declined to look into them. With an election coming up in three weeks there's no hope that the voters would know whether or not they're electing an ethical public servant or a corrupt poltician. Under the circumstance those that feel the voters are being set up for a fleecing by the latter have a duty to ask hard questions and point the way to the scene of what could be a crime. that's not only ethical, its a moral duty to the community.

So then, you took these allegations to the authorities and to the Star and both found them without merit. You have your answer. It seems that there just isn't enough evidence to prove that Judy Mikels resides in Arizona. That should then be the end of it. What proof did Dantona offer other than the fact that Mikels owns property in Arizona and has missed a lot of meetings? The only thing it seems to prove is that Judy Mikels misses a lot of meetings and nothing more.

Saying that you have a “moral duty to the community” to continue to press unproven allegations is a bit disingenuous, don't you think? If I accused you of burglarizing my home and the authorities looked into it and decided that there wasn’t enough evidence to merit an investigation, would it now by my “moral duty” to tell thousands of people in town that you are a burglar? Would the local paper be willing to print my allegations without proof? Exactly what part of UNPROVEN don’t you get? It is pretty dangerous thinking to believe that people in this country should be assumed guilty without real evidence and due process. Gee, I recall reading something in the U.S. Constitution that covered that topic.

Jim Dantona claims that he is pro-law enforcement, so I find it curious that he refuses to accept the outcome of a decision that there isn’t enough evidence to proceed with an investigation. And FYI, just because you believe something is true or really want something to be true, doesn’t actually make it true. I think you’ve become somewhat blinded by your obvious hatred of Judy Mikels and blind loyalty to Jim Dantona.

Personally, I don’t think these kind of smear tactics really work anyway. I know I was really turned off by the Dantona flyer. I think the Dantona campaign would be better served by sticking to the facts and to real issues instead of trying to dig up dirt that might not really exist. Who knows, maybe the charges are true. But then again, maybe they are not. I would certainly hope that Jim Dantona would have enough character to want to win with a clean campaign instead of resorting to dirty tricks and false accusations. The bottom line is then you don’t have enough evidence to know either way, which makes it UNETHICAL to press these charges unless you come up with real proof. Otherwise you are simply rationalizing your desire to run a political smear campaign.

Your circular logic works, up until a point that YOU keep ignoring: by Mikel's own admission she has missed an awful lot of her work while being "somewhere else". The only questions remaining are WHERE this "somewhere else" is and WHAT it is she's doing there and Mikels has NOT responded to those questions. Since the original allegations were that she lives in Tucson the location of the "somewhere" in Tucson is fair game in an attempt to answer those questions. You say that location is NOT a salient issue. I say it is.

Okay, how about for proof, a former staff member comes forward and says it is absolutely true about her time in Arizona?

It certainly must have been pretty on target as someone has gone to a lot of trouble to smear Mr. Oliver's name on this blog. I am guessing it isn't just some random person, I'm guessing it just might be from the Mikels campaign.

Mr. Dantona's issue at least relates to the campaign and had the courtesy to remove Ms. Mikels phone number from the mailing. What was posted here about Mr. Oliver was just bottom-of-the-barrel sleaze and apparently standard operating procedure from Mikels and her staff.

Gary, you are still rationalizing bad behavior. Just because Mikels was "somewhere else" is not proof that she resides in Arizona. That she has flatly denied. If she says that she doesn't live in Tucson and you have no real evidence that proves otherwise then you are simply trying to manufacture an issue that, as far as I can tell, doesn't really exist. Why can't you just stick to the real issues of this campaign? Is it really so necessary to sling mud with an allegation you obviously can't prove? That, my friend, is not circular logic it is simply logic.

Let me give you some free advice, and afterward you can choose to ignore me or continue to go down this path if you like. In my observation of the last presidential election it was to the detriment of the Kerry campaign to focus on attacking president Bush instead of making a case for Kerry's qualifications and defining himself on the issues. If Dantona insists on running a smear campaign against Mikels don't be surprised if he get trounced in this election. Your arguments about her living in Arizona are not that persuasive, and in fact will likely turn a lot of undecided voters off. Worst of all, it distracts people from the real issues that should be discussed. If you really believe so strongly in your candidate and you really think his position on critical issues will resonate with voters, then you need to focus on that message, not on some wacky, unproven charges against the incumbent. That is a guaranteed losing strategy.

I also think you should take a moment to seriously evaluate your objectivity on this issue. This is clearly an emotional topic for you, but I think you're letting your emotions get the best of you and you're not discussing this very rationally. I'm certain if this situation were reversed you would see it in a very different way. And that is what I'm trying to point out. When you talk to other Dantona supporters or those that already dislike Judy Mikels I?m sure you are all on the same page. But what you are trying to do is reach out to the undecided voters, not people whose vote you already have in the bag. Kerry supporters made the mistake of continually bashing president Bush, but all they were doing is bashing him to each other and turning everybody else off. I?m sure that people like Barbra Williamson, Arleigh Kidd, Glen Kitzmann and Jason Oliver all agree with you, but those aren?t the people you need to convince. It?s people like me you need to convince, and I?m telling you that this smear campaign is a real turnoff. Listen to me before its too late, otherwise its at your own peril.

Wow Gary...I have known you for over 25 years. I hear your passion Gary. I understand your concern for the Knolls, and I appreciate that. However, you need to be careful. Have you done your research on this Dantona guy? Anyone who has lived in Simi Valley for more than 10 years could tell you the horror stories about his ethics. Be careful..you know that saying about making a deal with the devil? There are other ways to deal with the issues that you bring up about Mikels, but throwing your support to Dantona will not bring the results you so desire. I am so surprised to see you supporting someone with his ethics and reputation.

Tony,

I'm sorry to say, but a disgruntled former employee like Jason Oliver isn't going to carry much weight with public opinion. People are going to immediately recognize that he has some credibility problems. If these claims against Mikels hang on Oliver's testimony then you've got a weak case. It doesn't matter if he's telling the truth or not, he has an obvious ulterior motive and his statements about Mikels are therefore tainted. Barbra Williamson has a lot more credibility than Oliver since she is a respected local community leader and a Republican. Be careful who you hitch your wagon to.

I have no idea who made the post in this blog regarding Jason Oliver, however I also don't subscribe to conspiracy theories that this is some sinister plot by some Mikels staffer. More than likely its just some yo-yo out there who has lots of time on his hands. Though I will point out that the accusations I read on this thread (and on the Dantona flyer) against Mikels aren't much different then what I read against Oliver in this blog. If you found that smear job offensive then perhaps you should take a step back and re-examine your own behavior. I don't really see the difference.

By the way, I'm curious to know your relationship to the Dantona campaign.

Bubba -

Get a clue. I am not a disgruntled former employee under any circumstance. When I left Mikels office to work on behalf of people with HIV/AIDS, Mikels expressed dissappointment. In addition, I was granted merit raises while with Mikels, which to me indicate confidence in my performance.

Ms. Mikels and I had a friendly relationship even after I left her office, in fact during her last campaign I offered a spirited defense on her behalf in the face of attacks from the Deputy Sheriffs Association which at the time I felt were unfair.

My motivation for wanting to see new leadership on the Ventura County Board of Supervisors stems from my disappointment in the way in which Mikels and her team seem to have completely disregarded the needs of the community in exchange for campaign money and God only knows what other political carrots.

I am also not suprised by the personal attacks against me, as Mikels and her team have nothing left to run on.

Her time is up and she knows it, otherwise, why launch attacks aimed at damaging my credibility. Nobody from her camp denies the truth behind my remarks, they simply cannot do so because they know as well as I, that other people will emerge who will defend the truth behind what I stated in my letter.

I have no motive other than to make sure Judy Mikels does not get away with lying to the community. I have an incredible job and frankly I am quite proud of my career - which has taken me to Washington DC, Sacramento and Los Angeles. I have worked for some incredble officials and causes, not the least of which being 3 years as an advocate on behalf of people with HIV/AIDS.

As for other attacks, I am proud of the man I am today and have no regrets about the path I have taken to get to who I am. I have never spent one minute in a jail, never beaten anyone up, never stolen and never abandoned my family. I pay my taxes, work hard and try my best to treat others the way I want to be treated.

I am not perfect, and thankfully, I do not have to be. God made me who I am and I am greatful everyday. I am not the one running for office and I am not the important issue. The important people are the candidates for County Supervisor.

Clearly, Mikels lacks ideas or she would offer more than her trademark whisper campaigns attacking others who dare not follow her dictates. I am proud to back Jim Dantona and hope my community will do so as well.

I love how pointing out that someone is not doing there job because they are somewhere else is mudslinging. In my line of work it's called grounds for termination.

The only people who are going to feel like it is mudslinging are those who back Ms. Mikels and can't see the end of the bottomless pit their candidate is falling down, because the issue has serious traction and voters, like myself, are seeing the truth.

Jason, for a guy who claims to not be a disgruntled former employee you sure act like one. In just this thread alone you have accused Mikels of "bald-faced lies", of lacking integrity, of lying about the time she spends in Tucson, of misconduct so severe that it should warrant a DA or grand jury investigation. You stated that she had an inappropriate financial relationship with Waste Management and that any investigation into her office would reveal with worst corruption scandal in the history of Ventura County.

Those are some pretty serious charges. I certainly hope you have some actual EVIDENCE to back up those claims. I haven't seen anything in your posts that provides any proof of the above except for just your word. Curiously, neither the Star nor local authorities seem to want to waste their time talking to you. Why do you suppose that is? Another conspiracy?

None of this bodes very well for your credibility. Remember, the burden of proof is on the accuser. Rather than continue to make your outrageous allegations, how about presenting some actual information to back it up. Please be specific.

Bubba-

Jason doesn't run the California Political News website, http://www.capoliticalnews.com, that was mentioned on another thread that links Ms. Mikels to shady dealings between Waste Management and Ms. Mikels. Seems like more than 1 person is claiming Ms. Mikels does not operate on the level. The smoke surrounding Ms. Mikels starts to signal that a fire exists.

You have spent a lot of time trying to discredit Mr. Oliver. You're starting to show your cards that you are not just some average voter. You seem to be playing for one of the teams in the game and that discredits you.

If you were an average voter who wasn't sure who you were going to vote for, you would see the problem of Ms. Mikels attendance, as I did. Instead you dismiss that she misses a lot of meetings (by her own account) and then buy into the smearing of a whistle-blower who bravely signed his name to his comments?

You may disagree with using the address, but if you were an average voter, the bigger concern would be her attendance, since none of us is planning on visiting her in her Tucson home. We're more concerned with growth and traffic in Ventura County for which Ms. Mikels apparently has been AWOL (Absent Without Leave).

Everyone should give more credit to those that attach their full names to their posts instead of nicknames, pen names, etc.

Glenn, I am simply trying to stay on topic. The topic of this thread is the content of the Dantona flyer, which included a claim that Mikels lives in Tucson. That is what I have been talking about from the beginning. You and some others around here who are clearly affiliated with the Dantona campaign seem to be going out of your way to launch into unsubstantiated attacks on Mikels that have nothing to do with the subject. Is it too much to ask that someone making these allegations present some actual information to back it up? If you, Gary, Jason, or Tony state that Mikels is corrupt am I suppose to automatically believe you because you say it is so? Gee whiz, how about some facts. Just slinging more mud around doesn't support your arguments or improve your credibility.

Of course it was only a matter of time that one of you turned your attacks on me to accuse me of being somehow on one of the other "teams". You should note that I haven't said anything negative about Dantona other than my disagreement with the content of his latest flyer. In fact I acknowledged to Gary that Mikels poor attendance record is a legitimate issue. All I have done is argue for a clean campaign that doesn't include false allegations and dirty tricks. And for that I get accused by you of being on the other "team". But I will say it again... I am not in any way affiliated with the Mikels, Dantona, or Foy campaigns, nor do I belong to a PAC, union or any other group that has a vested interest in the outcome of this election.

What I know so far is that Gary belongs to a PAC that actively supports Jim Dantona and Jason Oliver is a disgruntled former employee who supports Jim Dantona. Clearly those guys are on one of the "teams" and you don't seem to have a problem with that. Apparently being on Dantona's team is OK, but anyone who might be on Mikels team is suspect. So where do you fit in this puzzle? What team do you play for? Please explain your relationship to Jim Dantona so we can all understand where you fit in.

Dear Full Name (AKA "Glen") I see you posted something at 11:15pm and then "Full Name" posted at 11:18pm. So, I am sure that you are "Full Name". So, let's not be a hypocrite...what is YOUR full name.

This blog is very interesting. "Bubba" is trying to stay on TOPIC, but "Glen" keeps going onto tangents. Just like the Dantona Gang...throw mud, make accussations, ignore the important ISSUES. Sounds like typical dirty politics to me. Typical lobbysist Politics!! This is what I am talking about Gary. How can you support this?

Welcome to Democracy! Do I wish the System were different? Absolutely! But I don't agree that pointing out a candidates' job attendence record, nor their voting record, nor their insider relationships with corporate donors looking for favors, nor their poor relationship with their constituents is "mud slinging". When the public record gets too hot to handle the candidate should get out of the office. I'm certain that Jim Dantona's got his fair share of character flaws, dicey episodes and embarrassing events but there are none of us that DON'T.

The difference for me is I've had to spend the past several years in a constant battle with our present Supervisor over the safety of my community. I'm fed up and I'm damned well going to do something to change things.

Gary----

Democracy? Pointing out a candiates' job attendance record? Let's see, Dantona points out that Mikels misses 70% (or something like that) of her meetings. What meetings? VCTC meetings? That's like saying that I am a bad parent because I miss 70% of my sons PTA meetings. Come on.

Voting record? Okay, that would be a good thing for a candidate to focus on. What voting record has Dantona's campaign discussed? The mailers I have received haven't mentioned voting records. All I hear is how she doesn't live in Simi Valley. Then why do I see her everywhere?

Insider relationships? Favors? Dantona has some of the same "relationships" as Mikels, but he is a highly paid lobbyist for them! Check out his website and see who his "relationships" are www.govimpact.com.

I hear your frustration with Mikels and I am not disputing that Gary. I am simply stating that Simi Valley should not put up with dirty sleazy politics! Especially from a man with Dantona's reputation. Embarassing events are very different from corruption.

So Jason, are you accusing me of actually being Judy Mikels in disguise? OMG, you are totally paranoid! That is just laughable. And you wonder why people on this blog question your credibility? Do you really think that Mikels and her minions are lurking around every corner? Do you really believe that she wastes her time reponsing to your rants in obscure blog sites?

I can assure you that I am not Judy Mikels, nor do I personally know her or any members of her staff. But I'm sure you don't accept that Jason, since those voices in your head must be telling you otherwise. ROFL!!

As far as giving out my real name, I think I'd prefer to remain anonymous. Given the hatred and venom being spewed out by people like you, the last thing I want to do is become the next target of your smear campaign. I've lived in this community too long to risk my reputation dealing with a headcase like you.

All of which begs the question as to why any Dantona supporter would want their candidate to be publically supported by someone like Jason. Do you people really believe this guy, or is he just your attack dog? I've said before that I don't believe these smear campaigns work in local politics, but I guess you guys are so determined that you just might have to learn that lesson the hard way.

One more thing Jason, I don't care about your employment history with Mikels or the slimey details of backroom politics that go on in that inner circle. Personally I could care less. If anything I have been trying to offer advice to the Dantona supporters on this blog. My advice has consistently been to run a clean campaign and stick to the issues. You, on the other hand, represent the opposite extreme. The best thing they can do is distance themselves from people like you as quickly as possible. I said it before and I'll say it again, be careful to which horse you hitch your cart.

And one more thing, please don't lecture others about moral courage since you seem to lack both.

Gary, we agree on things more than we disagree. I agree wholeheartedly that a candidate's job attendance record, voting record, insider relationships, and relationship with consituents are all relevent. I've never disputed that. All along I've been saying that Dantona supporters should stick to the issues, which includes all of the above. What troubles me is this need by some Dantona supporters to turn this campaign into a smear job against Judy Mikels. It is a counterproductive strategy that will backfire.

Am I giving you bad advice? Are you going to listen to a guy who is only advocating a clean campaign, or are you instead going to follow a guy like Jason who seems to be exibiting occasional episodes of delusional paranoia? You decide.

Keep in mind that I have never once told you not to support Jim Dantona. I have not posted one thing supporting Judy Mikels. I've been very sympathetic to your situation and your passion for your cause. I'm just trying to get you to open your eyes to some of the people you are associating yourself with. If you want to support Dantona then God bless you, but do it in a way that is fighting the good fight. In my life I've seen too many good people rationalize themselves into doing terrible things.

With all the fake names on this blog all of whom seem to have all sorts of "insider" information, yet few are willing to put their own names behind their actions, I guess one would wonder who is behind these blogs. Frankly, I could care less at this point.

I've spoken the truth and put my own name on my statements. Say what you will about me on the blog, I am not a candidate and I do not need to justify myself to people who are too cowardly to sign their own names to their statements. Go back and forth as much as you'd like, I am proud of where my life has taken me today and I have zero qualms supporting Jim Dantona as he is the best candidate to represent the Fourth District on the Board of Supervisors.

Bye Jason. Sorry to see you go since I was curious to know what kind of "insider" information you think I have. I know you won't believe me, but I assure you that I am not part of some grand conspiracy to smear your name. I'm just a private citizen trying to take a stand in my community against sleazy politics and false accusations. I hope you understand that I have nothing against you personally, though I do feel compelled to speak out against what I see as a ongoing political smear campaign of which you seem to be directly involved.

If you ever decide to discuss the merits of your candidate in a positive way then I would be more than happy to listen to what you have to say. But these nasty, unsubstandiated attacks against Mikels are nothing more than a distraction and will only turn off the people you are trying to persuade. Seriously, you need to learn to let go of this anger that seems to be consuming you. Take to heart what I'm trying to say and maybe some day you'll realize that just because somebody disagrees with you doesn't make them your enemy.

Again Bubba, I do not believe you are part of a grand scheme to discredit me, I am not that self absorbed to think I am that important. I wish everyone on this blog felt as dedicated as you seem to be to having a race based on issues and not innuendo (See blogger Madison and a few others)

Thank you so much for your words of wisdom. I believe the whole point of my letter and blog entries were quite clear. I believe Ms. Mikels is a failed politician and further beleive she has not lived up the ethical standard the voters deserve. I have not declared Mikels or anyone else on this blog my enemy. I have simply sought to clarify Mikels' and some of her team's inaccurate comments regarding Mikels record.

If you view my letter contradicting Mikels statements at her press conference or my complaints about the percieved impropriety of her official actions surrounding Waste Managment as personal attacks, I'd love to know what you think are fair game issues in this race. Mikels thought they were important enough for a press conference. And any allegation of official impropriety is of concern to me.

The problem with the Waste Management issue was addressed at the Board of Supervisor's meeting by Steve Frank who presented documents and requested additional materials. There is no final conclusion regarding Mikels dealings with Waste Management because they are not yet being investigated by the media or proper legal authorities... I hope that will change soon.

As for the merits of Jim Dantona - They are obvious. Mr. Dantona has been involved in our community for decades. He has worked with youth to help them avoid turning to drugs, a mission I, as a sober man am particulary pleased about. In addition he has been a strong advocate for numerous excellent causes through his professional activities as a Public Affiars professional.

Dantona does more than just talk issues, he works with others to find consensus. Anyone who has been involved with Mr. Dantona in our community would agree. Whether you like him or not on a personal level, he is in the race for the right reasons.

So Bubba - I am not your enemy, I am not Mikels enemy. I don't respect Judy Mikels for the reasons I have outlined and as such beleive she sould be defeated in her bid for reelection.

So if you believe what you write, ask your fellow bloggers to refrain from attacks which attempt to discredit rather than address valid questions about Mikels, Dantona or Foy.

In addition, if you had the courage of your convictions the "secret-blog" identity you write under would not be necesary would it?

OK then Jason, let's try to move past the dirt and get into the real issues here. I'm not interested in re-hashing arguments over Mikel's Arizona residence or even these claims about shady dealings with Waste Management Inc., mainly because they have not been proven. That, by the way, does not mean that these aren't potentially important issues. It means that I'm not going to participate in speculation about wrongdoing that may or may not have happened, since doing so would be nothing more that a dirt fishing expedition. And that applies both ways.

So if we are in agreement that we won't delve into unsubstantiated mud, let's talk about what really seperates these candidates. I'd like to be specific, so my preference would be to focus on one issue at a time.

Being a reader of my local paper I can't help but notice Dantona's has run several ads claiming that Judy Mikel's hasn't adequately funded public safety. Jim Dantona promises to "fully fund" public safety. So what exactly does that mean and how exactly does Dantona plan to increase public safety funding without busting the county budget? (e.g. How much additional money are we talking about? Where will the money come from? How will it be spent?)

Please give me your thoughts on that one.

Try as you may Jason, you are not going to get anywhere with some of the blogger hoodlums here. You can't make chicken-salad out of chicken sh*t. That's why I do not bother posting here anymore. As much as I like Brian Dennert's idea for discussion and debate - the personal attacks are disheartening.

You are brave to be this open and honest. If the Star had any guts - it would follow-up and investigate on your lead.

Judy has overstayed her welcome and it is time for a change. Since I know Jim Dantona from my child's involvement with Baseballers Against Drugs and the YMCA, I have seen first hand the kind of person he is and his involvement with the community.

I believe his questions about attendance for a job a Supervisor is paid for (PTA is voluntary Bubba) are valid questions. More importantly, the voters must think so as well or Mikels would not have felt compelled to hold a press conference at her her Simi Valley residence to offer an alibi.

Jason - you are OK in my book. I assume you or any of the individuals you mention would have to struggle to come clean the way you have after working so closely with Judy.

Keep the faith.

Jason,
My hat off to you for being so honest and strong to share with us the voters your first hand account of Judy Mikel's disfunctional office. For years now she has lied to the voters who elected her about so many different issues. 70% absentee record is reason enough for her to be removed from office let alone her special interest money that gets special treatment by a chosen few. Judy should have some pride and leave office asap. Again I am proud to know we have someone like you to let us the voters know the truth. Thank You Jason.

Jason, I admire your strength to come forward and talk about your experience with Judy. Even knowing that others would personally attack you simply to try and discredit your statement.

Bubba, in the mail I have received from the candidates Jim Dantona's mail talking about the difference between Jim and Judy on growth is what converted me. Mikels' support of Moorpark's North Park development versus Jim's work against North Park shows that Jim knows how to look at growth in Ventura County. You only need to look at her comments regarding Ahmanson to see that Ms. Mikels will support any over-development that comes down the pike. To top it off the founder of SOAR, which we the voters approved, endorsed Dantona. This to me speaks volumes about his positive stance on on preserving our way of life.

The fact that the Sheriff's, nor the Fire Department will endorse the incumbent, shows that she has not done her job to support our public safety personnel. If the people who protect me won't stand up to protect her, then I can't vote for her. If I have read the information right, I think this is the second straight time they have not endorsed her.

I have received numerous mailers from Dantona, and have received nearly nothing from Judy. I would think a politician in office that long (12 years?) would have a lot to tout, but it appears there isn't much to say. So yes, I am supporting Dantona for his issues, but Mikels has done a lot to lose the support of her constituency.

To end our conversation on Mr. Dantona's supposed attacks on Judy, I believe the information I have been provided on Judy meets the stink factor to convince me something is definitely rotten in the Mikels' camp. I am not going to wait for it to get to the point of a Gray Davis or a Tom DeLay to get rid of the official.

You guys are really amazing. All the Dantona supporters in this blog know how to do is run a smear campaign and nothing more. Why can't any of you articulate specific reasons why people should actually vote for Jim Dantona? Do you guys even know why your voting for him, or are you simply voting against Judy Mikels? Nobody has produced a single shred of evidence to back up the numerous allegations I've heard in this thread and read in the Dantona flyers, yet you guys keep repeating the same garbage over and over as if saying it enough times makes it true. Gee whiz, listen to yourselves.

And so my basic question remains unanswered. If Dantona claims that Mikels is not properly funding public safety, what is he going to do differently? How much more does he plan to spend? Where is the additional money going to come from? How is the money going to be spent?

Why can't you guys seem to answer a simple question. The public safety issue is suppose to be the cornerstone of the Dantona campaign. I would hope that some of you Dantona supporters would have a better answer than saying over and over that Judy Mikels is corrupt. Forget about Mikels for a minute and tell me WHY I SHOULD VOTE FOR JIM DANTONA. It really shouldn't be that hard.

And by the way, saying that Dantona has the endorsement of the public safety unions does not answer my question. I repeat... How much additional funding does he think is required by public safety? Where is the money going to come from? How does he plan to spend that money?

I challenge any one of you to give me a straight answer. Personally I don't think any of you can. Instead you'll just resort to your typical smear attacks against Mikels and anybody who doesn't join your little cult. Go ahead, prove me right.

Anyone see the Foy mailer today, 5-11-06? Snippets:

"Jim Dantona is a Lberal Democrat"

"Jim Dantona worked for liberal Democrat Willie Brown"

"Jim Dantona spent years of his life working for liberal 'tax and spend' Democrat politicians"

"Jim Dantona spent years of his life working for liberal politicians who have opposed securing our border and opposed taking away welfare from illegal immigrants."

"As a lobbyist and 'consultant,' Jim Dantona has represented numerous land developers and builders, including Colton Lee Communities, Casden Development, Big Sky Ranch Development, Greenpark Developers, Griffin Developers, and Dale Poe Developers."

Ouch. Plus he's fat and bald.

Foy is funny. A comedic candidate. Look at the grin in the photos!

One thing is for certain: he is an INSURANCE SALESMAN. That falls in right behind attorney and just before auto repair shop manager in terms of who we can trust.

The guy sells INSURANCE.

Just like the Stricklands, Foy loves the insurance money.

Foy: Greeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed

Stricklands: Greeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed

Cut the waste in government Bubba. You are all for that aren't you? Government waste happens everywhere, including conservative Ventura County, and Republicans and Democrats both are to blame.

Cut the waste and put funding where it belongs - public safety. And put someone in office that actually has clout in Sacramento to get additional State funding to assist at the local level - yes that is JIM DANTONA.

The "little cult" comment is cute. Overly dramatic - but cute.

Ahhh- I see the NO SMEAR campaign of Saint Judy Mikels has posted again above.

Nice. Juvenile. Pathetic.

From Foy mailer:

Judy Mikels is a Liberal Republican.

Judy Mikels has supported raising our property taxes.

Judy Mikels supported the car tax.

Judy Mikels supported a 1.5 billion sales tax increase.

Judy Mikels votes against public safety meant we had to shut down 2 jails, let 3500 prisoners out early, and shut down our anti-gang unit.

Judy Mikels passed the buck on illegal immigartion for 12 years, saying it's someone elses problems.
(She also said "If they are good enogh to clean my house they are good enough to live near me.")

Judy Mikels campaign took over 81 million from developers and other special interests.

Judy Mikels has voted to build thousands of new homes.

Bubba,
Take a CHILL PILL.....You're going to break a blood vessel. You can't seem to handle Mikels is going down this time. "Follow the Smell" She is so bright she hired Keith (Northpark) Jacko who lost that race 75% to 25% to run her race....Good choice Judy. Can you say the word INCOMPETENT, because that's what Jacko is......
I'd suggest you take Political Science 101 at Moorpark College and then come back to the blog.
Sweet Dreams.......................

Thanks again for repeatedly proving my point. There isn't a single Dantona supporter here that can answer simple questions as to what Jim Dantona will differently about public safety. If he is going to cut government waste, then what waste is he going to cut and how is he going to do it? How much money will he be able to save? How much money does public safety need? How does he plan to spend this additional money?

Its pretty sad that you guys can't seem to articulate a positive campaign for your candidate, or build up your candidate without simultaneously smearing Judy Mikels and anyone that doesn't belong to your little cult. The truth is that you guys are just talking to yourselves and turning most voters off. I've warned you that this little smear campaign you are running is a losing strategy, but I guess you'll just have to learn that the hard way.

I'm still waiting for a single Dantona supporter to take my challenge to provide some straight answers. Is there even a single one of you that actually knows some details of what Jim Dantona would do if he were elected to office? I doubt it. And please don't insult my intelligence with these political sound bites that he will "cut government waste". Every politician says the same thing and that's not a real answer.

Bubba! You were trying so hard to be the Voice of Reason above the campaign chaos...but it doesnt work.
When people brought up legitimate issues against Mikels you ranted about "mudslinging". When people pointed out why these issues were fair play you ranted about "staying on topic". If anyone stayed on topic you ranted about their "hidden connection" to the Dantona campaign. When that didn't work you demand that all these laypeople and peripheral supporters of Dantona come up with his financial strategy for the County, and describe it in detail.

Play by your own rules or stop wasting everyone's time. Or better yet, start the dialogue by describing Mikels' financial plans. Or maybe Foy's. Bet you CAN'T!

Fact is, Mikels takes credit for being a fiscal conservative and putting county budgets in the black. She and her supporters forget to mention that virtually EVERY county across the Nation is enjoying balanced budgets due to a massive influx of real estate taxes. neither Mikels nor any other County administrator can take credit for a national economy that scares middle class investment away from the equities market and into real estate. So Mikels' ONLY positive issue is off the table now and she's left with a record of fiscal waste and one example is the relocation of County Fire Station 43. Look into it. Mikels says she can't find the $450K needed to keep it in place. So she's willing to risk hundreds of millions of $$ of property losses in the next Rocky Peak to Malibu conflaguration when she could be insisting that everyone of the thousands of new homes planned north of the 118 Frwy pay for a new station in their area...a per home cost of about $150 each. THAT's good fiscal conservatism??? Give me a break.

So come on, Bubba. Start the dialogue and tell us how Mikels or Foy intend to deliver on their fiscal pladges. Oh, that's right...you'll now post back a rebuttal saying I'm off toppic.

WORST QUOTE BY A PUBLIC SERVANT: When commenting at the memorial service for the victims of a car accident in Rte 118, Mikels had this to say, (para) "Well, you can't legislate stupidity."

ANOTHER WORST QUOTE: Mikels, when asked why the potential for fire disaster can't be addressed BEFORE a new brush area development was put into the planning process, (para) "As Supervisor, its my job to protect the rights of developers." and "Safety comes last.)

ga & gs, once again the only responses I get are smear attacks against Mikels. To say that "legitimate" issues about Mikels have been brought up is hilarious. All I've read on this blog and in mailers is unproven accusations and nothing more. That is the very definition of mudslinging. Why is it that Dantona supporters cannot articulate a positive campaign that focuses on the qualities of their candidate without relying on attacks against others?

I'm simply trying to cut through all the political games and rhetoric to get you guys to answer some really basic questions about your candidate. Jim Dantona has made public safety the cornerstone of his campaign. Surely some of his supporters can answer simple questions regarding his position on this important issue. Why do you guys find this so difficult? Why do you feel the need to continually resort to smear tactics instead of just discussing the REAL issues?

C'mon guys, I'm tossing you softball questions. Is there not one of you that has the courage to stand up and give straight answers to direct questions? I'm still waiting...

Gary, I'm really surprised at your blind loyalty to this Dantona gang. Look at the behavior of his supporters and think about who you are associating with. Look at how they are treating others. I tried post on this blog with an open mind and ask some simple questions and look at how I've been treated. If anything it has re-affirmed my disgust with how Dantona is running his campaign.

Remember that the character of a man can often be measured by the company he keeps. You may not realize who I am, but I know you and your family. Think carefully about what you are doing.

Bubba, we need to change your moniker to "Wormtongue". I gave a pretty solid answer about one of the issues, you ignored it. You wont answer any queries of why anyone should suppport Foy or Mikels, only reasons why others shouldn't support Dantona. You're a waste of time.

Gary, I'm really surprised at you. You haven't answered any of my specific questions about Danton's position on public safety. I'm not going to participate in mudslinging against Mikels or Foy. The issue is Jim Dantona and why anybody should vote for him. You've yet to give me a good reason and instead keep trying to change the subject back to Mikels and Foy.

As a school teacher I can only hope that your wife sets a better example than you. I'm really disappointed.

Why do you say that public safety is the cornerstone, as if it is the only issue? Certainly it is a part of it, but GROWTH is another major cornerstone. It looks like Glenn articulated the enormous desparity between Dantona and Mikels and you just skated right by it, as if it doesn't exist. Well it does exist and it has been articulated and Dantona is the clear winner of all the candidates on this issue.

Another cornerstone is that Mikels hasn't been around, no matter where she is, she has been absent. That is a campaign issue, not mudslinging. The 118 and 23 are major concerns to me (and I'm sure others in the community), and Dantona has said he will be at the meetings, to vote and work with the State to help this project move forward.

Bubba people have articulated points and if you want to debate, bring forward points. If not, people are going to dismiss you. Your choice.

Tony, nobody, including yourself, is answering direct questions. I bring up public safety because Dantona has gone to the trouble of running full-page ads in the local paper on that issue. If the issue is that important that surely his supporters must know the specifics of what he plans to do. Why then is getting a straight answer from you guys like pulling teeth?

Instead I get yet another post that brings up UNPROVEN allegations against Judy Mikels. Get real. Saying something over and over doesn't make it true. Why can't you just answer my questions? Why do you keep trying to change the subject and go off in tangents on other issues? Jim Dantona has made public safety his cornerstone issue and he has said that it should be the #1 priority in this county. If that is true then it why am I being given such a hard time for asking some really basic questions?

Who has the character and courage to answer my question?

I did. You chose to pretend I didn't. You're causing your own problems here, Bubba, not others. So for the record, here're a couple of specifics about Dantona's plans:

1) To mitigate safety concerns in the SE portion of the Valley he will establish a community council that will have a first look at all land use & zoning changes BEFORE they go into Planning. In addition Dantona will allow NO land use or zoning changes in the area, without the Council's approval, until the Council has assisted in creating an area plan.

2) Dantona will use every effort to keep Fire Station 43 where it is and find the monies to build a new Station to service the expected growth north of 118 Frwy, rather than take Mikels' desperate gamble of massive property loss by trying to make one station do the job of two or three.

If you know me and my family then you can testify that we have always supported community well-being, generosity to others and have surrounded ourselves with only the finest people. Despite whatever veiled suggestions, innuendoes and other mud YOU feel like slinging I have had a lot of time to sit and talk with Jim and he is, by far, the best candidate I've seen in a long time. And, Bubba, do yourself a favor and use your real name. It doesn't look good, talking about character flaws and then bring my wife into the discussion with some less-then-subtle insult, when you're hiding behind a phony label.

Speaking of myself & my family, Bubba. Because I dont know who you are your post of 10:55, earlier today now takes on a different possibility. You werent making some veiled threat against my family, were you?

Gary, you still haven't answered my questions. Let me spell it out to you once again...

Jim Dantona has stated that public safety is his #1 priority and he promises to "fully fund" public safety departments. If that is the case then how much additional funding does he plan on providing for public safety? Where is this money going to come from (and please don't resort to political jibberish like "cutting government waste")? And how does he think these additional resources should be spent? Since you mention Fire Station 43, where is the money going to come from to keep this station open? What other programs will be cut to provide this funding? Please be specific.

BTW, I didn't ask about zoning issues, I asked about public safety. Dantona says it is his #1 priority so I would assume it is a more important priority to him than any other issues you mention. Certainly you must realize that there are more issues at stake then just those that affect your particular neighborhood.

Why is it so difficult for you and the other Dantona supporters around here to answer these simple questions? Why are you so reluctant to go into specifics about the positions of your candidate? I'm not the one who made public safety the issue, it was Jim Dantona that has made this the central issue of his campaign. It is not unreasonable then for me to ask for some specifics. If you want to support him then you should be asking these same questions as well.

And if you are really that concerned about the well-being of our community I would hope you would take the time to give a meaningful and honest answer to the above questions without using smear tactics or going into additional tangents. I'll also remind you that you have never used your real name in this forum, I had to figure that one out on my own. If using real names was that important then I would expect the rest of the Dantona gang to be doing the same. With the exception of Jason Oliver I don't see anybody using their real name, so get over it.

Bubba, there you go, changing the rules to suit some twisted Mediator Complex. 1) I did answer your challenge with two examples, each of which are designed to mitigate safety concerns. You chose to pretend they're not there. 2) I dont care HOW you learned my name, which has been used frequently in this forum, but because you've also ignored my question I have to assume your 10:55A post WAS a veiled threat.

Give me a break Gary. You still refuse to answer direct questions but instead resort to generic campaign slogans. How much more specific can I be? Clearly you don't know anything about this Dantona guy or else you should know the answers to these basic questions.

On the issue of "veiled threats", I never threatened anybody and it certainly was not my intention to imply anything of the kind. If you took it that way then I apologize since it was not my intention.

But I will add that I find it curious why you and others around here didn't seem all that concerned when Jim Dantona published Judy Mikels personal address to thousands of people. I simply mention your wife's occupation and you suddenly felt "threatened". How would you have felt if somone had published your home address? How do you think Judy Mikels felt when it was done to her? Do you see what I'm getting at? Take an honest moment and think about what you are doing, who you are associating with, and how you are behaving. Stop being blinded by your hatred of Judy Mikels.

Bubba -

In my estimation, the answer to your question about why vote for Jim Dantona and your specific question regarding public safety are no-brainers. My opinion on the best answers to your questions are covered in the rest of my entry.

Dantona is the best choice to represent the entire community because of his ability to bring conservatives like former Senator Cathie Wright and liberals like SVUSD Trustee Rob Collins to the table unfied in their resolve to make our county better. Jim has the ability to bring people together and is the most pragmatic probelm solver in this race.

Mikels 12 years record of division speaks for itself and Foy is on the extreme end of the political spectrum. Dantona clearly represents the best opportunity to bring the best and the brightest in our communities together to seek commonsense answers to the problems we face.

Listen to Jim, read his mail, ask the Star to cover this race and maybe you would hear the answer in Jim's words.

Now, why should anyone vote for Judy Mikels or Mr. Foy? Please stick to the issues and refrain from attacking Jim when you answer.

Jason-
Not exactly an answer to my questions, but I do appreciate you at least making a positive case for your candidate without doing a smear job on the others. And I will give you credit for being the only guy here actually using your real name - in a forum like this that takes guts!

You are correct that Dantona seems to have bi-partisan support from a wide range of groups and individuals. That is certainly impressive. But endorsements are one thing and actions are another. I'm still trying to understand what Dantona will do differently than Mikels. The reason I keep bringing up public safety is because the Dantona campaign has harped on the issue so I figure he must have a real plan. But when I go to his site all I see are general statements and no specifics.

My concern with Dantona touches on several points...

#1 He says he is committed to fully funding public safety. That's a nice sound bite but I honestly don't know what that means. Given that public safety already consumes 51% of the general fund budget does that mean that we should be spending 60%, 90%, 100% of the money on public safety? How much more money does Jim Dantona think we need to spend to keep our communities safe? I think that is a fair question.

#2 If Jim Dantona indeed thinks that we should increase the allocation of scarce resources to public safety, where will the money come from? Will he be voting to cut back other programs, and if so which ones? Will he be looking to cut waste, and if so how and where? Will he be looking to increase revenues (i.e. taxes and fees), and if so on whom?

#3 If Jim Dantona were successful in finding more money for public safety where will this money be spent? How will the money be divided between various public safety departments? Will the money go toward specific programs (e.g. keeping open Fire Station 43) or just be rolled into their general budget? Will these resources be earmarked for non-operating expenses or will they instead be used to increased salaries and pensions benefits for public safety employees?

I think these are all reasonable questions to be asked and I would like somebody to answer them. If somebody from the Jim Dantona campaign is lurking on this site it would be nice for them to join the conversation. There is nothing in the Dantona literature that addresses these specific issues and I'd like to see some details. Even if you don't care about my opinion I would hope that you guys would want to answer these questions for the sake of undecided voters since it might provide enough information to persuade them to cast a vote for Jim Dantona.

And thanks again Jason for being a good sport!

Bubba,
I think that the questions you ask are certainly fair and indeed need to be asked....wouldn't it be nice if the current supervisor would agree to a debate so ALL of us can hear first hand why we should continue to support her. I would like to to have Judy Mikels answer the same questions that you put to Jim Dantona.....
She takes a lot of credit for things having been done in our community, but when all is said and done she has lent her name to champion someone else's ideas. I have a hard time calling that leadership.
Barbra Williamson

Thank you Barbra for adding your comments. I have to say that I've been one of your strongest supporters for many years and I have a great deal of respect for your opinion.

I agree that ALL candidates should be answering these questions. Please don't think that I'm only expecting Jim Dantona to be put on the spot while giving a free pass to Mikels and Foy. At the same time, given that Mikels is our existing Supervisor I think it is readily apparent where she stands on a number of issues; therefore there isn't much mystery in how she will cast her vote on those issues. What is less clear to me is how Jim Dantona (and Peter Foy) will vote on these important issues. Dantona has openly critisized Mikels on public safety funding so I only think it is fair to ask specifics on what he would do differently.

I’ve also been troubled by what I perceive to be a smear campaign against the incumbent. My only hope has been that everyone involved could get past the rhetoric and mudslinging and talk about the real issues of this campaign, while providing clarity on where each of the candidates stand. Everything else is just a distraction.

Even if I'm not entirely satisfied with the performance of an incumbent, I'm not inclined to vote for their opponent without first understanding their position on things that matter to me and to my community. That is why I will not automatically vote for somebody like Dantona until I'm certain that he is actually a better choice. Critisizing Mikels does not prove to me that Dantona will be a better supervisor. I believe that a positive campaign will be more effective at getting his message out. Am I wrong on that?

Thanks for taking the time to respond to me since I know you're a very busy lady.

Bubba, you said you have been to his website. If you want direct answers from the candidate, rather than his supporters, why not just go to his website (http://www.jimdantona.com) and e-mail him from the "Contact" link.

Wouldn't that have been the easier way of getting your answers rather than asking people who support him what his plan is, because as you see we support him for different reasons. If you are TRULY interested in an answer, then you will do that. If you want to know why others are supporting him or you simply want to attack him, then feel free to keep posting here.

Gee, I would have thought that his strongest supporters and members of his campaign staff would already know the answers to these questions. I guess I was wrong. You're right, I'll ask Jim Dantona myself and see what he says. Maybe you guys should be asking him some of these questions as well. That way if anybody else asks you can explain why they should vote for Jim Dantona instead of why they shouldn't vote for someone else.

Good luck with your campaign.

Bubba,(Keith)
Why don't you give it a rest!!!!!!

Because I enjoy the pursuit of truth. It's really a shame that some others are bothered by that.

P.S. Wrong again, I am not Keith Jajko. You guys really need to get over your paranoia. I'm sure Judy Mikels and her staff have better things to do waste their time clowning around with you guys. On the other hand I really get a kick out of it.

Cheers.

Your right Bubba it couldn't be Judy she's on a plane coming back from Tucson to be at the street fair.

Bubba,
Since your in search of the truth and know so much about Judy's positions please answer me one question why did Judy author the resolution using public funds to host a Gay Pride Festival in Simi Valley.

I wouldn't know. As I've said many times before, I'm in no way associated with Judy Mikels or her campaign and I have no vested interest in the outcome of this election. Repeatedly accusing me of being somebody else doesn't make it true. That's kind of like thinking other people don't see you when you close your eyes. Kind of silly, don't you think?

If you want to know why she provided funds for a Gay Pride Festival why don't you ask her yourself? After all, you directed me to Jim Dantona's website to ask my questions. Try this: http://www.mikels.com/ (click on contacts)

Let us all know what you find out.

I think most of you guys have stuck to the facts rather well, and for the most part have discussed the issues.

So, to recap: Mikels doesn't support SOAR, Foy hasn't clearly answered, and Dantona does support SOAR?

Did the Gay Pride Resolution cost the county more than the paper it was copied on? I would hate to think people are gay baiting while gay members of the military are fighting for us right now in Iraq.

I don't relaly know these answers, if you guys do, please post.

Yeah, that jab against gays kind of bothered me too. Hey Don, while you're at it why don't you ask Jim Dantona his position on providing public funding for the Gay Pride Festival. I'd be curious to hear his answer.

http://www.jimdantonaforcountysupervisor.com/ (click on contact)

Gays have contributed greatly to our society, in or out of the military (though Peter Foy may disagree).

So let's forget the gay baiting and ask ourselves if ANY sexual pride festival should be funded by the tax dollars. I can't speak for Don above, but I believe that is the fundamental issue. And I believe that the responsible answer in "no."

Public funds should never be used for events designed specifically for the advancement of individual groups or agendas.

Mikels does deserve credit for her strong support for the equal rights of Gay and Lesbian members of our community. This is one issue I have no disagreement with Mikels stance.

As a former youth member of the Council for National Policy I have seen firsthand the hateful right-wing extremism represented by Mr. Foy. CNP, a group which Foy currently belongs advocates an extreme agenda which marginalizes women and minorities.

I am quite interested in hearing Foy's views on equality for women and minorities and his position on healthcare and HIV/AIDS issues. The County has a major role in these areas and we cannot afford to have people with extreme ideologies making our healthcare policy based on outdated dogma.

Jim Dantona deserves the vote of anyone who believes we need leaders who are not blinded by partisan or ideological extremism.

I emailed my questions to Jim Dantona but am still waiting for his reponse. I'm sure he was so busy with the Street Fair event that he simply hasn't had the time yet to respond to my email. Hopefully he will get back to me soon so I can let y'all know what he has to say.

The fair was good fun as usual. All the real estate agents were out in force and SVPD brought their little tank, which is always a real crowd pleaser. They also had their custom painted DARE pickup truck. I was looking at all their cool toys and wondering how much all that neat stuff cost us taxpayers. Nobody else seemed to mind though.

There were a lot of churches represented as well, all out in force trying to save our souls. I've never really thought of a street fair as a place to shop for a new religion, but if it works for some people then what the heck. Perhaps they should be checking out this blog, where they might find a few people in need of some moral guidance.

I also made it a point to go around speaking to all the various candidates for public office. Everyone was very pleasant. I hope they kept some of that anti-bacterial hand soap around with all that handshaking they were doing. Ick.

Also got a chance to check out the new voting machines. They seem simple enough, though I never really had any problems with the old punch card ballots. As long as it works and there is no controversy then I’ll be happy. I just want a clean election without any crazy allegations of voter fraud when this whole thing is over. We’ll know soon enough.

Did anybody else get a chance to make it out there?

To Jason and "Fiscally Responsible" -

I just wanted to say that I totally agree that we shouldn't be using public funds for specific groups or agendas.

At the same time I also want to say that there is no place for intolerance toward any group. On that point I think we are also in total agreement, and I'm glad to hear both of you speak up on that issue. Gays and Lesbians have every right to lead their lifestyle and put together their own events without harassment or predjudice against them. I've known and been friends with many gay people in my life and I am apalled at how so many of them have been discriminated against and mis-treated, sometimes even by their own family members.

Don, I can only hope that your concern about Mikels funding of the Gay Rights Festival was directed solely at an inappropriate use of tax dollars. But given how our tax dollars are wasted on numerous things I'd hate to think you were singling out gays in particular. Maybe you can clarify your position on this.

I also sent an email to Jim Dantona to ask him for his position on providing public funding for a Gay Rights Festival. We'll see what he has to say.

Good Evening one and all....
I too attended the Street Fair...I was in the First California Bank booth...
Mr. Bubba, (I assume you are a Mr?)..I spoke with Jim today about your inquiries and he will be more than happy to speak with you personally,(805) 583-1014 but he will not play games with people on this blog, who we all know have an agenda, and except for Jason and myself, never sign with their own name...
Thank you for the kind words of support. I love working for the residents of Simi Valley.
I can tell you that if Judy has a dislike for you, or doesn't agree with where you stand on a issue, she will not allow you to come to her office and discuss it. I know this first hand, and as an elected official I find that very offensive so I can only imagine how a resident must feel when turned away. Regardless of our personal feeling we should never shut out the very people we serve.
When we get to big for our britches, we need to pack it in, or the voters need to do it for us.
As far as the Resolution for the Gay Pride is concerned, if you do it for one group of people then you do it for ALL groups of people...not a select few.
Hapy Mothers Day everyone...
Barbra Williamson

Good Evening one and all....
I too attended the Street Fair...I was in the First California Bank booth...
Mr. Bubba, (I assume you are a Mr?)..I spoke with Jim today about your inquiries and he will be more than happy to speak with you personally,(805) 583-1014 but he will not play games with people on this blog, who we all know have an agenda, and except for Jason and myself, never sign with their own name...
Thank you for the kind words of support. I love working for the residents of Simi Valley.
I can tell you that if Judy has a dislike for you, or doesn't agree with where you stand on a issue, she will not allow you to come to her office and discuss it. I know this first hand, and as an elected official I find that very offensive so I can only imagine how a resident must feel when turned away. Regardless of our personal feeling we should never shut out the very people we serve.
When we get to big for our britches, we need to pack it in, or the voters need to do it for us.
As far as the Resolution for the Gay Pride Parade is concerned, if you do it for one group of people then you do it for ALL groups of people...not a select few.
Happy Mothers Day everyone...
Barbra Williamson

The Gay Pride Festival was not sponsered by tax payer dollars.

All the county did was provide a resolution. Kind of like when they say that the Simi Valley Kiwani's should get a pat on the back for raising money for charity.

It cost a few minutes of the supervisors time ( they are not paid by the hour) and a few pieces of paper.

So, unless you think the board should stop passing nice resolutions for local groups, stop gay baiting.

I don't think they are promoting the "Kiwanis lifestyle" or anything else, they are just representing local citizens.

Anyone that brings this issue up identifies themselves as divisive, opportunists, fundamentalsit wackos, or all three.

Tp quote the good book " WHATEVER YOU DID UNTO ONE OF THE LEAST,
YOU DID UNTO ME".

Hi Barbra.

Thanks again for taking time to add your comments. I do have to say that I'm somewhat disappointed when you say that I have an "agenda". From the beginning the only thing I have asked for is a clean campaign and for everybody involved resist the temptation to rely on smear tactics and unproven allegations. I'm so sorry that you believe that position constitutes having an agenda. I know that you are a supporter of Jim Dantona, and I respect that. But since you are a local community leader I would also appreciate seeing someone as respected as you taking a stand against negative campaigning. I believe voters in this community deserve to have a campaign that focuses on the real issues instead of personal attacks against a particular candidate. We all have an ethical responsibility to play fair, regardless of how much we want to win.

For those who continually accuse me of being a Mikels operative, please note that I have never said anything in support of Judy Mikels. I have only voiced my displeasure at some of the campaign tactics that have been employed by Dantona and some of his supporters. I believe a positive campaign would better serve this community and be more effective in getting Jim Dantona’s message out, ultimately improving his chances of winning this election. I don’t understand why so many people on this site find that idea so offensive.

As far as using real names is concerned, I believe the purpose of these blogs is for people to feel comfortable expressing their personal opinions without being afraid of reprisal. Still, under normal circumstances I wouldn’t mind disclosing my identity, but given the smear job that I’m witnessing against Judy Mikels I’m not inclined to become the next target of some of the more, shall I say, overzealous folks around here. Besides, other than Jason Oliver and yourself nobody else is using real names anyway, so I don’t really see the big deal.

So sorry to hear that Jim won’t respond to the questions in my email. I really was looking forward to hearing back from him.

Bubba if you believe this an issue worth discussing, I am curious as to why you would not ask Supervisor Mikels why she supported this festival? I would be much more interested in hearing her response.

After all, it was neither Jim Dantona nor Peter Foy who advocated this. It was Supervisor Mikels.

To "Fiscally Responsible",

That is a very good point. I did ask Don to contact Judy Mikels on her support for the Gay Pride Festival since he is the one who made this an issue. But for some reason Don has since gone mysteriously silent. I'll go ahead and contact Mikels myself. Hopefully she will be willing to respond to questions from a voter, even one who wishes to remain anonymous. I'll keep you posted.

Well you wouldn't have to remain anonymous to the candidate, would you? On this board fine, I certainly understand that, but when you e-mail the candidates you put your name right? Certainly they would want to know they are talking to a voter and not some other candidate's campaign trying to make hay....

To “Interested” -

Barbra Williamson did say that Jim Dantona would be happy to talk with me, but will not respond to someone who won't use their own name. That certainly sounds reasonable. But what concerned me about her response is that she has obviously been discussing this blog with Mr. Dantona himself, who no doubt will be expecting to hear from me. It is also clear that there are many Dantona supporters actively participating in this blog, many of whom are directly involved in his campaign. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that calling Jim Dantona and using my real name would expose me in this forum as well.

I've stated many times that I'm concerned about becoming the next target of smear attacks, or maybe worse. Considering how some Dantona supporters have behaved in this forum should give anyone pause in revealing their full name. Plus it seems a bit disingenuous for some to demand to know who I am while most other individuals participating in this forum, including yourself, remain anonymous.

So if Jim Dantona doesn't want to respond to my email then I guess that's his prerogative. Personally I don’t really see the harm since he is the one running for political office, not me. Maybe Judy Mikels will see fit to respond to my inquiry.

Gosh, you just can't learn this stuff in political science courses.

Bubba, you said earlier that you thought the Mikels campaign has better things to do than monitor this blog. Are you that naive to believe a 12-year incumbent wouldn't have someone monitoring and posting to this blog? If you have been alive long enough to watch any election you are certainly not naive enough to believe that people wouldn't try tricks like sending loaded e-mails to their competitors.

Yes, there are certainly Dantona supporters on here - quite a few apparently. Just as there are Foy supporters here monitoring and occasionally posting. Certainly some of the attacks against Jason Oliver and some posts that were pro-Mikels or anti-Foy or Dantona are from the Mikels' camp. Every campaign has to be monitoring this blog - it's the only place to constantly receive comments and post comments about the race.

I've never been involved heavily in a campaign, but common business sense tells you, you need to be aware of the environment. What would it serve the Dantona campaign, again assuming you are truly an interested voter, to slam you on the blog? If you are an interested voter wouldn't the Dantona camp, want to bring you into the fold and earn your vote, not smear you here?

In fact, the only person (non-candidate) who has been attacked personally on this blog is Jason Oliver and who might want to do that? Certainly not the Dantona and Foy campaigns, only one person benefitted from personal attacks on Jason Oliver, Judy Mikels.

So if you are interested in getting answers to your questions because you are concerned voter, then you need not worry about being dragged on to the blog. Of course, if you are a plant or are connected to one of the campaigns, then by all means feel free to keep your identity hidden.

Hey Tony, I noticed in your post that you didn't happen to mention your full name. By your own reasoning that must mean that you are a plant and somehow connected to one of the campaigns. So please share with us your full name and connection to the Dantona campaign, otherwise stop pestering people to do things that you clearly are not willing to do yourself.

Besides, why does anyone really care who I am anyway? If I were some Mikels covert operative (which I am not) then it would be best just to ignore me. But if I'm an average voter then maybe everyone should stop the rhetoric and mudslinging and talk about the issues. I'm actually giving you guys advise on how Jim Dantona could run a better campaign and reach out to undecided voters with a more positive approach. But for some reason that just seems to really piss a lot of you guys off. I'm thinking that after this election some of you guys should enroll in an anger management class.

As much as I'm enjoying this conversation I have to run so I can spend some time with my mom. Have a happy mother's day everyone.

Bubba,
No I am not gone just reading your ridiculous blasting of Jim Dantona. As you wrote it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see you are a Judy supporter....Fine, but she's a big girl who has berated, embarrassed and yelled at people publically from her throne in Ventura as well as in the newspaper and in person.
Anger management would have been great for Judy many years ago, but much to late now. For some reason you can't handle that Judy won't win...Sorry, but maybe some counciling would be helpful for you during these very embarrassing times for your candidate, yes your candidate I have not heard one good thing you have written about Dantona but a ton of nice things about Judy. So lets be honest on that issue. the truth of the matter is although I support Dantona and have voted in every election since I registered I have never been moved by a candidate like I have by Jim Dantona. Like or hate him he is a real person who I can identify with, so I decided he deserved my vote. he may even get a check from me this week. I am in my mid 40s and have voted only Republican since I registered but Dantona has earn my vote and respect. He is not affraid to talk to anyone and he will tell you his honest opinion (Not on a blog but in person)If you are so open and concerned about the truth you should meet him one on one and ask him your questions. You might be pleasantly surprised that he'll tell you the truth. Something we have not gotten from Judy for many years. I never met Jim Dantona before this race but I am deeply moved by his caring and straight forward personality. It's refreshing to have a real person as a candidate.

Bubba, my apologies if I wasn't clear in my previous post. I was only replying to your previous comment that you want to remain anonymous with your questions when you e-mail Dantona (or Mikels) direct. That you feared subsequently that you would be tarred and feathered on this blog because somehow your name would be leaked here by the candidate. Again, Dantona supporters have not gone after any non-candidate on this blog.

My whole post was referencing that when you e-mail them (the candidates direct), not post on this blog, you should use your name. Please re-read my post with that in mind.

Thanks.

Hey Don, go ahead and vote for whomever you like, why should I care? I just find it fascinating how I’ve eared the ire of so many Dantona supports simply because I spoke out against negative campaigning. But I guess your comments simply reinforce everything I’ve been saying all along, so there really isn’t much point in wasting my time responding to your rant.

I still am curious to know why you were so bothered about Judy’s support for the Gay Pride Festival. Was it simply out of concern about the use of taxpayer funds or do you have a problem with Gay and Lesbian groups in general? I’m still waiting for a response to that question.

Tony, thanks for clarifying your earlier post. I think you make a really good point and I agree that it makes sense for me to contact the candidates directly with my questions. I will do that.

This place is like being in the middle of Spy vs. Spy. Interesting how I have been repeatedly singled out and accused of being a covert political operative, yet I sometimes feel like I'm the only person here who doesn't have a direct affiliation with one of the campaigns.

I'm really getting tired of repeating myself on this, but I'll say it again. The only issue I have spoken out against is the use of smear tactics, unproven allegations and negative campaigning. Nothing less and nothing more. I have not endorsed any candidate, nor have I spoken out against any candidate unless it had to do specifically with their campaign tactics as stated above.

If some of you guys think I'm a political plant then I guess you have a really creative imagination. Perhaps those energies would be better spent getting out a positive message about your candidate, regardless of who you support.

I hope you guys all had a really nice mother's day. My mom is doing well and sends her love.

Bubba Brother please don't fall for the gay baiting trap. It ( the gay pride festival) was not sponsered by the county. They photocopied a resolution, nothing more.

So, don't confuse people by saying taxpayer dollars.

Bubba,
Sorry if you mis-understood my last comments...I wasn't referring to you when I mentioned people with an agenda...I actualy thnk you want to get to know all the candidates and then make the best choice for who you think will fill that bill...And if that is a correct statement, then I will continue to suggest that you make an effort to contact Jim and speak with him personally, after all, you said you were going to contact Judy, why not offer Jim the same courtesy? It's not important to me who you are, just that you have all the facts before you vote. I think once you speak with Jim, you will come away with a different perspective. And by the way, you didn't have a comment on Judy closing the door to residents in her district who she represents. That is not something I dreamed up..it is factual
Barbra

To Bubba:

Did you attend the street fair? All the candidates were there and were there ALL day to answer questions.

To The candidates and their staffs: Great Job!

To "Not Bubba and Not Using My Real Name"

I was only going by the comment left earlier by Don, who had alleged the use of taxpayer funds for the Gay Pride event. I don't want to be guilty of perpetuating a false rumor if that is not the case. Thank you for providing some additional information that should put the issue of taxpayer funding to rest.

I've also been hoping that Don will provide a straight answer to my earlier question. I have asked him a few times whether his comment about the Gay Pride Festival was directed toward a potential use of public funds (which has turned out to not be the case), or perhaps something else entirely. I'm trying very hard to give Don the benefit of the doubt.

I really want to tread very carefully here because I don't think the discussion in this blog should in any way rely on gay baiting. I'm confident that both Dantona and Mikels are united in their acceptance of Gay and Lesbian groups as being an asset to the community. Please don't read anything into my comments that accuses either candidate of being anything less than fully supportive of equal rights for all groups.

That being said, I would still appreciate it if Don would come forward and clarify his earlier comment. I don't really want to dwell on this or make accusations, but I am somewhat troubled by his lack of response to my earlier question. A quick one-sentence reply is all that is needed and we can all move on from this uncomfortable topic.

To Barbra Williamson -

Thanks again Barbra for adding your thoughts. You are absolutely right, I do owe both candidates the courtesy of talking to them directly. I will most certainly do that.

Bubba, did you or any other readers ask some good questions at the street fair?