Jim Dantona has been attacking Judy Mikels for being a part-time supervisor with full-time pay. He has been attacking her record of attendance at transportation meetings which has been as low as 30 percent ( That is even lower than Bush's approval ratings!).
Judy Mikels has fired back by inviting reporters to her Simi Valley home. To read her full response read this article.
Jim Dantona has issued a response to the article and his full response is posted in the extended comments.
Now, before you post any comments.
1. I want a clean fight.
2. Keep all punches above the belt.
3. Fighters to your corners...
If you feel like you have been unfairly attacked, see highly offensive language, or other disturbing posts, please e-mail me so I can remove it.
The Ventura County Star article:
Supervisor Judy Mikels looked right at home. Because she was.
In an effort to deflect criticism that she spends most of her time at a second home in Tucson, the supervisor held a news conference Thursday at her suburban Simi Valley residence.
"It's one of those nasty-type lies," she told reporters who gathered around her dining room table. "It frustrates the stew out of me because it's not true. I don't know how to counter a bald-faced lie."
For proof, she stacked up handwritten appointment calendars from 2003, 2004 and 2005, and copies of her appointments in 2006.
The three-term supervisor seeking re-election in June said the allegation has come up before, but this time it became something she couldn't ignore.
Several months ago, she said, top county officials told her that they'd heard this story: Mikels was living full time in Tucson, came back to Ventura County on Tuesdays to make the Board of Supervisors' regular meetings, and had her calls forwarded from Arizona. Then, Mikels said, she heard the complaint that she was "a part-time supervisor on full-time pay."
She said the last straw came when her husband went to the gym before Easter dinner.
"One of the guys said, Judy lives in Tucson,' "she said.
Residency is no trivial matter for candidates for office. In fact, it's one of the few requirements needed to run for the Ventura County Board of Supervisors.
Assistant Registrar of Voters Gene Browning said candidates must live in the district they represent during their incumbencies, and be registered voters there at least 30 days prior to the deadline for filing to run.
No one has publicly alleged that Mikels isn't qualified to run for office. But one of her opponents, Jim Dantona, says she only lives in Simi Valley half the time.
"Her husband lives and works in Tucson," he said. "She lives and works in Tucson."
Mikels said she and her husband, John "Mike" Mikels, bought a second home in Tucson 11 years ago. She said her husband, a retired Air Force colonel, needed a place to live because he works for the Raytheon Missile Systems Division there.
Mikels estimates that she only visits the two-bedroom, two-bathroom home once every three months, usually for a weekend. Her husband lives there during the week and commutes home to Simi Valley on weekends, she said.
The couple has lived in Simi Valley since 1982, renting for a year, then buying their current home, she said.
Dantona bases his criticism in part on Mikels' attendance at local commissions and boards on which she serves, naming the Ventura County Transportation Commission as an example. She should be there representing the 4th District, he said.
Mikels estimates that she has only made the commission's meetings about 30 percent of the time, but says she will be there for critical votes and follows the action.
"I miss the meetings, but I certainly don't miss the information," she said.
Mikels said she can't always attend because she's out of town representing the board at regional and national meetings devoted to issues such as planning, transportation and protecting the interests of the area's military installations.
She said they include the Southern California Association of Governments, the Southwest Defense Alliance, the California Council of Governments and the National Association of Regional Councils.
Mikels' other opponent in the campaign, Peter Foy, said he is not making an issue out of her second home in Tucson.
Jim Dantona's response:
Jim Dantona today called Judy Mikels contention that she resides in Simi Valley and not Tucson, Arizona and that scheduling conflicts caused her to miss nearly 70% of her Ventura County Transportation Commission meetings “laughable.”
Public records from 2005 show that Supervisor Mikels was absent for seven of eleven meetings; meetings that included crucial votes on funding for Highways 118 and 23 widening projects. Additionally, on March 9th, when a contingent of elected officials from the Ventura County Transportation Commission spoke before the California Transportation Commission to urge that Highway 118 widening project begin immediately, Supervisor Mikels did not attend.
Her attendance for the County Retirement Board, which she chairs, has been no better. Dantona calls her absentee record “completely unacceptable for an elected representative making over $100,000.00 per year.”
Mikels claimed in a press conference held at her Simi Valley residence that she is still a full-time resident here and that her reasons for missing meetings involved other conflicts in her schedule. Dantona asks, “What could be so important that when crucial votes were taken on Highway 118 and Highway 23 – in her own district - that she could not attend? If any workingman or woman missed nearly 70% of meetings for which they are responsible, they would not keep their job. The fact that she does this on the taxpayer’s dime makes it all the more deplorable.”
Dantona adds, “Judy Mikels is on record discussing her private pilot’s license at VCTC meetings, though she now denies having one. Sources close to Mikels also revealed she regularly flew to Tucson, Arizona where she and her husband own a home and other property. Now in an election year, she is nervous that the secret is out so she invents schedule conflicts to defend herself.”
Dantona has been walking precincts since November of 2005. When walking in Mikels own Simi Valley Brower Street neighborhood, residents told walkers, “she used to live in the neighborhood” but that they had “rarely seen in her recent years.”
“I stand by my contention,” concludes Dantona, “she missed the meetings – it is up to her to explain to her constituents as to why.”
So lets give Mikels the benefit of a doubt and maybe she DOESNT spend half her time in Tuscon or Phoenix or Sedona or any number of places that require her many trips away from Ventura County to attend her "regional committee" meetings...seemingly every Thursday thru Monday! Then how the heck does she explain missing so many meetings and how does she deny staffer reports that she's never available? Whether she lives in Tuscon or not really isnt the issue. What's darned important is WHY IS MIKELS ACTING LIKE A PART TIME SUPERVISORS??? Anyone?
My thanks to Ms Mikels for maybe crediting me with the "nasty-type" rumor that she's dealing with but I'm far from the first to bring her lack of on-the-job focus to anyone's attention. Apparently the rumors have been around Victoria Ave for a long time now and certain county administrators had been questioning the Supervisor about how often she actually does the job we're paying her to do. If Ms Mikels feels that pointing to her job performance is personal, well....welcome to an Open Democracy!
I can't believe that Ventura County is paying Judy Mikels over $100,000.00 a year to miss over 70% of her duties as a County Supervisor.
If any one of us were to miss that much work we would be fired.
I have an idea since the county can't fire her why don't we first have 70% of her salary deducted by the county and then we the voters can
vote her out on June 6th so she can live 100% of her time in Tucson.
When you have no clue about how county government operates, your comments are useless. VCTC has 15 members, five of which are all the supervisors. (All 10 cities also have one representative, too, thanks to a bad Assembly bill back in 2003 that expanded VCTC to way too many members). County government has plenty of representation on VCTC. Two supervisors could miss every meeting and the county STILL would have a majority of the Board of Supervisors representing the county. Judy Mikels goes to the meetings that matter, and casts the votes that need to be cast. Most VCTC meetings are bureaucratic exercises in nothingness -- which you would learn if you ever attended one. And Judy Mikels attends every Board meeting every Tuesday, as well as regular weekly or monthly meetings of a variety of government committees. If you want to look at something with consistency, every 7 years, on the button, Jim Dantona declares bankruptcy. It's been six years since the last one, so #3 is on the horizon ... And don't even get started about DA or FBI investigations ...
Mikels was elected to represent the voters of District 4, NOT the other four Supervisors. If she cant find the time to do that job then she should look for work elsewhere. Oh, that's right...she CAN'T find time to do her job, so maybe in June the voters will give her an incentive to look elsewhere.
I want to know about the DA and FBI investigations. Don't tease us like this...
Joe! Your post is a classic example of what's wrong with America today: when pundits& politicians run out of rational defense, they resort to personal character attacks. If you have something to say about Jim Dantona's personal life (which we know has been made an open book for all of us to view) then just come out and say it, rather than let it drip from the fangs as you slither away. Mikel's is being challenged on her performance as an elected official, not with regards to the content of her personal life. Your attempts to change the dialogue otherwise is craven, at best.
Mr. Strummer?????
I am one of those elected officials that sit on the VCTC Board,and I can tell you for certain Ms. Mikels has MISSED very important votes regarding the 118 freeway and the 23....so don't discount the importance of her representing the 4th district at VCTC. Thank you
Barbra Williamson
The Daily News of Los Angeles, May 15, 2000
SECTION: NEWS
HEADLINE: EXTORTION CLAIMED IN UNUSUAL LAWSUIT
BYLINE: Joseph Giordono Staff Writer
SIMI VALLEY - Armed with what he claims is evidence of official corruption but unable to persuade authorities to prosecute, a Simi Valley businessman has taken the unusual step of filing a civil lawsuit accusing local officials of extortion and racketeering.
Legal experts say the $5 million lawsuit filed by James Erhardt is an uncommon way to pursue suspected violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which are typically prosecuted in U.S. District Court.
Erhardt's suit, filed April 28, claims that city officials imposed onerous and unfair conditions on his businesses, then extorted $7,000 and drove him to the brink of bankruptcy.
Although the suit says the FBI monitored meetings where cash changed hands, no criminal charges have ever been filed, and city officials named in the suit all have denied wrongdoing.
''This scenario of bribery and an investigation is certainly not out of the realm of possibility, but this civil suit is pretty much this man's last redress,'' said Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at Loyola Law School.
''The one plausible scenario is that there was some sort of investigation that did not produce anything compelling enough for the FBI or the district attorney to pursue.''
According to Erhardt's suit, his ordeal began in early 1997, when he received city approval to operate a fruit stand at Los Angeles Avenue and Madera Road. Officials, however, later ordered him to build a concrete foundation and make other improvements, and he wound up spending $82,000 to build a 400-square-foot stand, he said.
City officials declined comment on the specific allegations but said that Erhardt was treated the same as any other applicant.
Later that year, Erhardt's suit said, officials gave the go-ahead for a haunted house and a robotic dinosaur exhibit, but then ordered him to install a sprinkler system and imposed other restrictions.
After complaining to the city, the suit said, Erhardt was approached by Jim Dantona, a local consultant who told the plaintiff he could ''fix'' Erhardt's problems for a price, said the suit.
Erhardt then went to the FBI, who wired him and provided cash for the bribe, the suit said.
Dantona, who runs a consulting firm called Governmental Impact, refuted Erhardt's claims, saying that he was approached by Erhardt, and that any money paid him was for consulting fees.
''I deal with big-time clients, and the only reason that I decided to help Mr. Erhardt was the fact that I felt a little sorry for him,'' said Dantona, who is named as a defendant.
''This was not a bribe or extortion or anything of that sort. It is one of the most ludicrous, fantasized stories that I have ever heard.''
Erhardt's suit also claims the FBI urged him to set up another meeting, this time between Erhardt, Dantona and Councilwoman Barbra Williamson, at the Elephant Bar in Simi Valley.
The lawsuit says FBI agents saw and recorded Erhardt paying cash to Dantona, who passed the money to Williamson.
Williamson and Dantona deny the allegations.
''I never took one red cent - not from this man or anyone else. I will stake my reputation over Mr. Erhardt's any time,'' Williamson said.
Williamson said that she does not recall meeting with Erhardt at the Elephant Bar but added that they did meet at least once in her office.
According to the suit, Erhardt later met with City Manager Mike Sedell at City Hall and - again wired by the FBI - paid him $2,000 for favorable treatment.
Sedell, another defendant in the suit, called the allegations ''outrageous and irresponsible lies.''
But the suit said that the payments seemed to work, and city officials eased their demands on Erhardt. Eventually, however, city officials heard about the FBI probe and, the suit said, used their influence to order a police raid on Erhardt's home on Jan. 4, 1999.
Police officials named in the suit declined comment, saying it was department policy not to speak about pending litigation.
Court and police officials refused to release documents relating to the raid on Erhardt's house.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation office in Ventura would neither confirm nor deny a probe of city officials involving Erhardt. The Ventura County District Attorney's Office also refused comment.
Fred Rucker, Erhardt's attorney, said his client stands by the details in the lawsuit and doesn't understand why authorities have failed to pursue his client's case.
''I do not live in the mind of the FBI. You'll have to ask them or the district attorney why there was no criminal prosecution. We hope that, given what happened, that is unusual.
''The City Council essentially destroyed this young man's life, and this civil lawsuit is his final redress,'' Rucker said.
So what you're left with is an angry businessman that filed a complaint with the FBI, who investigated thoroughly and found no evidence of wrong doing. Is that it Joe? I followed this story when it happened and there was NO basis to Erhardt's claims. In fact, it appeared to me, though I dont have access to the full invesigative reports, that Erhardt may have been trying to get a few elected officials into compromising situations so he could shake them down. If so, his plan failed.
Let me ask you, Joe! Do you still think Ken Starr needed more time to investigate the Clintons? Or is it true you beat your wife and work for the Mikels' campaign at the same time? Don't worry, I'm not judging, I'm just asking.
Ah yes, the sweet sound of the Mikels whisper campaign continues with this old laid-to-rest conspiracy scenario... Local consultant, city officials and Simi Valley Police Dept. all involved together against one angry man with a fruit stand. I wonder if Jack Ruby, Vince Foster and Nigerian uranium are mentioned in the investigation.
For the record "Mr Strummer" (very cute alias for punk aficionado Keith Jajko) - The Clash is overrated and has been absent from the scene for years - just like Ms. Mikels.
Is THAT who it is?? If it is, let me ask him directly.... K.J: Are you or your friends the ones busting & uprooting all the JIM DANTONA signs? Given, its an honored old political tactic, like paying drunks for votes and registering the dead, but doesnt that detract from the real issues like our part time supervisor or the additional 3000 garbage trucks we'll be seeing parked along the 118 Fwy every morning? Anyway, just wondering if its you or maybe Mikels' campaign folk or just some local hooligans that can't read the writing on wall, let alone spell DANTONA.
Another thing....if Mikels thinks she's so popular with the voters, how come the only "MIKELS" election sign in her entire neighborhood is on her lawn? As of yesterday not a single home within four blocks had a Mikels sign. Curioser and curioser.
Well my good friends....not to worry...AFter tonight, there will be a
Resolution put in place that will allow NO political signs in the public right of way...
And Mr. Strummer...You didn't mention the fact that Mr. Erhart swindled hundred of high school kids out of their hard earned money they were suppose to be paid for working the halloween haunted house...why is that? Or the drug deals that Mr. Erhart was doing out of his house...gee how convenient is that??? Everyone knows that articles was written to sell newspapers....and if it has an elected official, a city manager, and a well known local citizen...well I guess it will sell....Well Mr. Strummer, I am still here, Mike Sedell is still the City Manager, and yup, Mr. Dantona is going to be the new supervisor of the 4th District come June....
Isn't truth grand?
Barbra
ACCORDING TO THE FAA Ms Mikels HAS NO PILOTS LICENSE...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAA REGISTRY
Name Inquiry - List Results
-----------------------------------
Total Names found for MIKELS in the country of UNITED STATES is 3
BRAD GORDON MIKELS
JOHN RICHARD MIKELS
MARK ROGER MIKELS
So forget appointment books... let's see airfare receipts!
Hi Barbra,
I just read the other topic (under campaign web sites) on this blog about the new sign ordiance. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend or watch the meeting on TV. When does the ordiance take effect and what will be done with all the signs currently posted?
In addition, as I posted on the other topic, was a compromise solution discussed for the local charitable organizations that depend heavily on street signage to promote their events? (The upcoming Street Fair and Cajun Festival just to name two.)
Thanks, Alan
Hi Alan,
The new ordiance won't take effect for probably 90 days or so. It will come back to the Council for some "clean" up stuff...As far as the charitable signs are concerned, we are hoping that the local businesses will allow them in their shops..for the most part they have always supported the non profits in our community anyway, and you can still place signs on "private" property...just not in the public right of way.
Thanks for asking
Barbra
And the purpose of the NO POLITICAL SIGNS ordinance would be.....? Because the only practical effect will be to make it that much more difficult for a relatively unknown challenger to face off against an incumbent. The City's trend towards limiting Speech & Political Involvement is a direct challenge of the People's Right and a troubling attack on Democracy.
Hi Gary,
The purpose of no political signs was to say "What's good for the goose...is good for the gander" How can I tell businesses and non profits that they can't place signs in the right of way, but say political signs are exempt..? I think it had to be straight across the board, and besides, they can still place them on private property. Perosnally I don't think signs get anyone elected. I think the most important thing a candidate can do is write a really good ballot statement, cause in the end that is the last thing the voter reads before actually voting.
Barbra
Somebody should ask Judy Mikels to sign a pledge not to move out of the area when she retires after this next term, which I hear will be her last if she wins.
That way, if she won't sign it just proves she doesn't care that much about all the building because she is moving.
Otherwise, she signs it and this whole issue will go away.
Mr. Pledge
What we can tell Business the same thing that England and America told business for the past millenia: the People's common grounds are reserved for uninfringed public discourse and not for trade, except by fee arrangement determined by the People. This has been part of this Nation's common law and a legacy confirmed over the past 235 years. Instead of banning all public speech the City has every right to license all profit-making businesses that post signs on common grounds, thus effectively solving the "clutter" problem.
Again, this limiting of public discussion is a growing trend. It started here when the City Council voted to take away the Knolls' participation in Neighborhood Council 4. Elsewhere municipalities routinely limit group protests to areas out of sight of their intended targets. Other locales have placed limits as to what can be posted even on one's own property.
This Nation has survived and prospered in large part because the People have always enjoyed a right to public discourse, including the use of signs, pamphlets and other low tech devices. Limiting this right in the name of expediency is just plain wrong.
By the way Barbara, will June 7th be casual or formal? I'll need to get some things to the cleaners in time for the celebration. (smilin!)
Hey Gary.
Casual or formal, heck come naked I don't care...but celebrate we will!!!!
That's some blistering piece in today's LA TIMES! Mikels' own comment about the absentee issue being mere "silly season" grumbling just underlines the Queen Bee's arrogance and detachment to her hive.
Has Jim Dantona really ever said Judy Mikels lives in Arizona?
From all his materials, he just says a full-time supervisor. Judy Mikels might or might not love in Simi Valley. But the real issue is does she attend the meetings and advocate for the type of change we want.
Schim Schantona
Schim,
I have endorsed Judy Mikels for the last 12 years. There was a time when she worked for the residents of the east county, but now its far and few between. She has missed some important votes at VCTC regarding the funding, and from what I understand she has missed other meetings as well. So I decided I wanted someone else to fill that seat. I refuse to endorse just because it is the "Republican" thing to do..after all this is a non partisum seat.
Barbra Williamson
Barbra Williamson
Breaking or buried story?? Apparently someone with first hand info about Mikels absences has spoken at length with one of THE STAR's reporters and has offered evidence that Mikels lied when she denied what she said were "lies" about her Tuscon residency.
Anyone have any info or is this just more hearsay?
I haven't heard anything about this. Check your sources again and ask more questions.
Either way I expect you to update us instead of letting it linger.
Vote Foy!
If you saw the Jason Oliver piece in yesterday's STAR then you probably are wondering who's telling the truth. Now I have no way of knowing that but it seems to me Oliver's too experienced to make his charges without having evidence to back it up. On the other hand, Mikels offered documented evidence that these charges are untrue. So then the question now turns to: Which evidence is phony?
If Oliver's charges are untrue then he's just flat-out lied and should set the record straight.
If Mikels' documents are untrue, then our Supervisor's committed an act of fraud and malfeasance that deserves immediate removal from office.
What was the Jason Oliver piece? Do you have a link?
One thing I can tell you that is true in Jason's letter was the comment about how Keith hated working for Judy and complained about her always being in Phoenix..the reason why I know that to be factual is because Keith complained to EVERYONE, including me, so if Jason is on target about that, I am sure he's on target about the rest of the story...I mean he was there, he worked for the lady and supported her for 12 YEARS...It makes sense that the Mikels campaign is going to deny what he wrote....
What documents did Judy offer up? Standing in her kitchen like little Miss Betty Crocker???
Sorry, I am not biting!
Barbra
One thing I can tell you that is true in Jason's letter was the comment about how Keith hated working for Judy and complained about her always being in Phoenix..the reason why I know that to be factual is because Keith complained to EVERYONE, including me, so if Jason is on target about that, I am sure he's on target about the rest of the story...I mean he was there, he worked for the lady and supported her for 12 YEARS...It makes sense that the Mikels campaign is going to deny what he wrote....
What documents did Judy offer up? Standing in her kitchen like little Miss Betty Crocker???
Sorry, I am not biting!
Barbra
I have no problem with bringing up Judy Mikels attendance as an issue in this campaign. Our elected representatives have an obligation to their constituents to participate in critical meetings and other important functions as fully as possible. Bringing this up as an issue in this campaign is fair play as far as Im concerned.
However, what bothers me about this campaign is this charge that Judy Mikels does not actually reside in Ventura County, but instead spends most of her time in Tucson, Arizona. That is a very serious allegation since it is a direct challenge to her even being a qualified candidate for the office. What troubles me about this is that a serious accusation has been made without actual PROOF to back it up. If the Dantona campaign is going to advance this claim then they have the burden of proof to substantiate it, not the other way around. We all have to assume that Judy Mikels lives locally, unless someone presents evidence that proves otherwise. At this point all of this seems to be nothing more than an unsubstantiaed rumor. Although Judy Mikels appears to have missed many meetings, that alone is not proof that she resides out of state.
I was shocked this week when I received a Jim Dantona flyer that perpetuated this claim that Judy Mikels lives in Arizona. What really outraged me was the fact that the flyer actually wenta as far as to publish Judy Mikels personal address. As far as Im concerned that was about as sleazy as you can get. And even though that information public record, I dont think that Jim Dantona would appreciate somebody mailing out a flyer to thousands of people with his personal address. I was actually on the fence as far as which candidate I was going to vote for in this election, but that sleazeball tactic just cost Jim Dantona my vote.
Glad to see Mikels is gone from "public service" Her outrageous behavior at a Supervisor's Hearing on last October 10, 2006 was evidence that she has no place on that board. Mikels disallowed curcial evidence regarding a public street easement from being presented, and snorted at an eloquent presentation, saying "I'm offended by that statement. When the truth and facts "offend" a public official, it;s time for them to see the "door". Ventura County will greatly benefit from her EXIT!