5th District Supervisor Race 2016: Noreen Evans vs Lynda Hopkins

[cw707]

Someone across from Harmony on 116 has had signs posted for months about Hillary Clinton being so awful, being a "liar". When I saw their sign saying "Noreen is a traitor", after trying to decide between Noreen and Lynda and reading all the differing comments from both sides for weeks, this sign was the deciding factor for me.

I just want to drive home on beautiful tree-lined 116 with deep breaths of appreciation for the beauty we live in. I respect everyone's right to their opinion and vote, but being blasted with what has felt like venom, for months on end, has been too much for me.

These signs certainly haven't changed my opinion or vote, yet every day I have to be look at them as I go by. I've thought of stopping, and trying to speak with the owner, just to ask if he/she might look at why they are doing this. If they really want people to change their opinion, this isn't the way.

Instead, I voted for Noreen, not knowing if she's really the best candidate or not, but hoping for a future vision that might include us listening to one another, trying to come together. So to whoever has forced us all to look at their opinions repeatedly for months, thanks for helping me to decide who to vote for.

[O.W.]

I cancelled my subscription days ago [Sonoma West Times and News]. They are easily as biased as the wine/real estate owners of the PD. They are next.

..."DATING DEBACLE" ! No words can express my disgust at your choice of words....

[scamperwillow]

Excellent Close to Home piece today in response to Lynda and Herman's fluff piece:


Close to Home: Let’s get real about the 5th District campaigning
BY JAZMIN GUDINO AND DENNIS ROSATTI | November 4, 2016, 12:07AM

DENNIS ROSATTI &JAZMIN GUDINO

As a young Latina leader from Roseland (Jazmin Guidino) and a young environmental leader from west county (Denny Rosatti), we’ve been working for Noreen Evans’ campaign for the past year. We’ve knocked on hundreds of doors and talked to thousands of voters. It’s obvious that many people in Sonoma County are hurting and need help.

This week, the opinion page of this newspaper and Evans’ opponent in the 5th District supervisorial race called for an end to long-standing divisions in our community and for a more “civil” community discourse (“Seeking a more civil public discourse,” Close to Home, Wednesday).

While this sounds like a noble goal, it is not reflective of reality. The call for “civility” is too often used to shut out the voices of the powerless. An open, honest discussion of our community’s challenges can be uncomfortable, especially for those with a vested interest in the status quo. We have a responsibility to speak up and share what’s really happening in our community.

Today we are seeing powerful outside interests, such as the California Apartment Association and New York billionaire John Dyson, pouring vast amounts of money into our local campaigns for and against their favored candidates. They are funding a ruthless barrage of attack ads against Evans, including costly full-page ads in this paper, smearing decades of public service to advance their own agendas.

The man designing the attack ads against Evans is a consultant for some of the wealthiest corporate interests in our community, and he has solicited two donors who have provided more than $70,000 to his campaign.

The California Apartment Association recently funded a campaign to gather signatures to overturn Santa Rosa’s new rent stabilization ordinance that was so deceptive that more than 150 Santa Rosans filed paperwork to remove their signatures. Voters need to know about these interests attempting to buy influence.

Money speaks loudly in politics. Special interest spending in local campaigns is always an issue for voters. The Political Reform Act creates a public disclosure pathway before the election takes place, and voters deserve access and attention to this financing. Access to financial support information of a candidate is critical to having a “civil” discourse. Without public discussion, voters are left to wade through fake charges instead of real records.

The reality is most of the economic gains in Sonoma County have gone to the 1 percent wealthiest for the past 20 years. Sonoma County’s rivers, hillsides and forests are vulnerable to exploitation to extract immense profit. Many people have lost their homes and live along creeks and rivers or under overpasses. Others face eviction because they cannot afford ever-rising rents. Still others are forced to leave the area to buy a home. These challenges threaten to destabilize our communities.

Reality is not a personal attack. We cannot solve our problems by blithely declaring an end to divisions or by avoiding debate because it reveals divisions in our community. The challenge we have is to work through those debates and forge a pathway forward, one that makes the most sense for the most people using values, experience, economics and public sentiment as our guide.

We want representatives who stand up for ordinary people. Our community hungers for an honest discussion of the challenges we face, including the wealthy and powerful interests trying to buy control of our local government. We cannot sweep them under the rug by pretending they don’t exist. It’s time to get real.

[applefan]

Lots of good reasons to vote FOR Noreen, but even if there weren't, the quantity and venal quality of Linda's mailers would turn me away. I know she is a good human being who is a good farmer, but why does she allowed these nasty mailers to represent her? A bad mistake.

Excellent Close to Home piece today in response to Lynda and Herman's fluff piece:

Close to Home: Let’s get real about the 5th District campaigning

[podfish]

I cancelled my subscription days ago [Sonoma West Times and News]. They are easily as biased as the wine/real estate owners of the PD. They are next.

you know, you don't have to believe everything you read (except on the internet, of course) so you're free to read publications that you think are biased.

seriously, I'm having a hard time finding enough variety in sources these days. I tend to use google news as a front end to the media, and they are doing their best to find out what I'm like and what I want to hear. So it's really tough to force them to give me a variety. I have to resort to logging off gmail (which I like to keep open in another browser window, dammit) sometimes, and to make sure I do click on articles sourced by Brietbart or CharismaNews, or some local paper in Texas. Even so, I think their algorithms are figuring out my ploys.

[mouse]

Thanks for sharing this. It's a breath of fresh air to read, especially after that last piece in the PD.

In that earlier piece, one candidate suggested that if she wasn't elected, young people would feel somehow disenfranchised and unwelcome, and not participate in the democratic process.

It's gratifying to see that there are young people who are passionate and are doing the work, to participate in the process, even as they begin at the beginning. I respect their work ethic and I hope they continue.

Excellent Close to Home piece today in response to Lynda and Herman's fluff piece:
As a young Latina leader from Roseland (Jazmin Guidino) and a young environmental leader from west county (Denny Rosatti), we’ve been working for Noreen Evans’ campaign for the past year. We’ve knocked on hundreds of doors and talked to thousands of voters. It’s obvious that many people in Sonoma County are hurting and need help...

[Barry]

Lots of good reasons to vote FOR Noreen, but even if there weren't, the quantity and venal quality of Linda's mailers would turn me away. I know she is a good human being who is a good farmer, but why does she allowed these nasty mailers to represent her? A bad mistake.

See Lynda's comments about the negative campaign on her behalf here.

[Barry]

She certainly cannot have any say in how the money is used. But she certainly could make a public statement about the false and misleading content being put out and the positioning online.

She has done so here (particularly in the second post)

[sohemi]

My computer lets me open a separate Private Browser, so this will not happen. Check to see if yours does the same.

you know, you don't have to believe everything you read (except on the internet, of course) so you're free to read publications that you think are biased.

seriously, I'm having a hard time finding enough variety in sources these days. I tend to use google news as a front end to the media, and they are doing their best to find out what I'm like and what I want to hear. So it's really tough to force them to give me a variety. I have to resort to logging off gmail (which I like to keep open in another browser window, dammit) sometimes, and to make sure I do click on articles sourced by Brietbart or CharismaNews, or some local paper in Texas. Even so, I think their algorithms are figuring out my ploys.

[mouse]

"To be perfectly honest, there are things about Noreen's record at State that bother me. Things that bothered me as a voter, back in the day, and things that bother me as someone running against her now. I could have put out factual compare-and-contrast pieces -- pieces consisting entirely of excerpted press coverage -- that would have cast me in a favorable light, and cast her in a negative light. But I didn't."

Could this candidate be more of a simpering whiner? "Things" bother her. "Things." Way to go Stanford, spoken like a true politician.

She tries to put distance between herself and her supporters whose methods are 'negative,' but she really wants that misinformation out there. She denounces the negativity, but not the lies. She made no effort to counter them. She is one and at peace with that negative message. Don't be fooled.

And if she is the leader they want, and 'they' are going negative, but she is against negativity, why can't she 'lead' them in a positive direction? She claims she wants to.

She doesn't even have the leadership ability to stop her own backers from going negative.

She has done so here (particularly in the second post)

[John Eder]

Barry,

I have sat out this firefight, but I am compelled to comment about your participation in favor of a candidate even as you act as "moderator" of this forum. It's not like Hopkins needs another apologist. Really disappointing.

Perhaps this venue should be renamed "BoscoBB.net"...

John Eder

[larryjhanson]

Regarding making an issue out of pensions, pensions is part of a public trust like Social Security, Medicare protection and protecting our natural resources. Has there been abuse? Certainly but not to the extent from the wine, real estate, extraction industries have had and continue to have on all of us. This sounds to me like how Clinton's storing emails inappropriately are made out to be on par with Trump's fomenting hate in America among other deep concerning problems.

I like Lynda Hopkins but we are not electing someone that is likable but someone in this county who can be effective for standing up to the public interest which has been undercut for decades by supervisors who don't have the will or gumption or experience to stand up to the aforementioned industries who attend every meeting and hearing. You've got to be there to know this, believe me.

[Barry]

I have sat out this firefight, but I am compelled to comment about your participation in favor of a candidate even as you act as "moderator" of this forum. It's not like Hopkins needs another apologist. Really disappointing.

I feel I moderate very fairly. You'll notice I have selected many, many pro-Noreen posts as Barry's Picks. However, I also get to participate as a user and express my opinion using the same facilities that all users have access to.

[sambacat]

Thank you, John. I have found Barry's position very frustrating as well. He is obviously smitten with Lynda, but I believe it is shamefully inappropriate to use his "power" as the Moderator of WACCO to influence voters in a democratic election. He is obviously looked up to as a rational and reasonable person (as I once did), so his opinion has, unfairly I feel, secured many votes for Lynda. And, I would have been just as uncomfortable with his efforts had he been in favor of Noreen Evans. He should have remained neutral.

I have sat out this firefight, but I am compelled to comment about your participation in favor of a candidate even as you act as "moderator" of this forum. It's not like Hopkins needs another apologist. Really disappointing....

[occihoff]

Well said, Mouse. And what does Lynda think is wrong about putting out "factual compare-and-contrast pieces excerpted from press coverage?" Sounds to me like that's what should be happening, as long as quotes aren't taken out of context in a misleading way! It would sure be better than the misleading screed I've been getting from Lynda's backers, and I must say Noreen's mailers have been much more factual and straightforward. I don't see the mass media stuff, only the mailers.

Again, we should not take our eyes off the ball: why is Lynda supported by the big money anti-environmental interests? Supported to the point where I am getting three or four times as many mailers ( often expensive ) backed and paid for by them as from Noreen's backers such as the Public Employee's Union, Sierra Club, Sonoma County Conservation Action, etc? These mailers may be convincing to voters who are not that up on the issues, but they really make Lynda look bad to the rest of us. Lynda may actually be a wonderful person, but she should realize that she doesn't look wonderful to environmentalists when backed by supporters like hers.

///Could this candidate be more of a simpering whiner? "Things" bother her....

[occihoff]

Actually, I think Barry has a perfect right to express his opinion here like anyone else. He is a valued member of the community like the rest of us, and as moderator he never suppresses our expressions of opinion.

Thank you, John. I have found Barry's position very frustrating as well. ...

[mouse]

Jeez, today the packet of seed$ with instructions for how to plant them. A last ditch effort to return to the prairie dress sweet pea approach that she started with last Thanksgiving. That's how long she and her $500,000.00 friends have been bombarding us with this expensive media blitz. That's quite an investment.

[scamperwillow]

We have updated our web site with some corrections to the misinformation being spread by the opposition - some of it really egregious. Please go here to see some Fifth District True Facts.
5thdistricttruefacts.com/

Here is one example:
A recent attack ad accuses Noreen of a “multi-billion dollar giveaway” without much in the way of specifics. The truth is that in 2005 Noreen took over a bill regarding public safety pensions that had been introduced by someone else. At the first procedural opportunity, she removed language from the bill that would have done the things that were the subject of the hit piece. In other words, she made the legislation better for taxpayers. Later, when she was unable to resolve additional issues with the legislation, she held it in committee so it would never become law.

Further, Noreen worked hard on reforming public pensions while a state legislator, including reducing state employee pay and benefits during the Great Recession and voting for the Public Employee Pension Reform Act of 2012, which capped pension benefits and eliminated spiking and other abuses. As a City Councilmember, Noreen voted to increase public safety pensions but at the same time, the Council provided funding for their pensions by asking Santa Rosa taxpayers to tax themselves to pay for public safety costs. Measure O is on this year’s ballot for renewal.

Not only does this attack ad deceive voters about Noreen’s record, but it also tries to alarm voters by claiming that Noreen would have “bankrupted Sonoma County...leaving little for roads, parks, libraries, public safety and other local services.” Nothing in the legislation would have forced increased costs on Sonoma County. Further, the County does not fund libraries--our libraries have a dedicated funding source which voters are being asked to increase in this election.

[Lisa Maldonado]

Kitty I think your mask as a 'nuetral observer' has slipped (just like Barry's). Both of you have made constant references to "pensions, spiking, sweet deals and public employees union lunches" narrative that are pretty obviously right out of the right wing play book. As is your baseless and evidence lacking statement that Noreen is "Queen of Pensions". What does that even mean? I don't know why you two call youselves progressives and Bernie supporters and then attack unions (one of the only organizations left fighting against corporate oligarchy) but I am tired of arguing it with you. I am glad that others have noticed and commented about it as well.

The average SEIULocal1021 pension is 33 thousand a year. The majority of huge six figure pensions and pension spiking is done not by our union members but by Directors, Administrators and Supervisors- like Valerie Brown and Paul Kelly and Tim Smith- you know, Lynda Hopkins supporters.

The only reason people like you attack SEIU is because you don't like our progressive politics. You havent 'been wondering' who to vote for at all. Thats fine- but its fairly obvious you are shilling for Lynda. I thnk 5th District voters are smart enought to see the Eric Koenigshofer/ John Dyson machinations- obviously big east coast wine barons who work for Rudy Giuliani don't usually give a quarter million to a political race because they love organic veggies and bio compost toilets. You and Lynda think the voters are naive or blind or stupid and if you wave the big bad "union' flag they will vote for anything in opposition.

I think a lot of us from the working class have families in unions and we see how thy have lifted many of us out of poverty. And many a carpenters pension paid for someone's grandparents to live to a dignified old age- so you can't scare us by playing the "pension" card. Everyone who works deserves a stable and dignified retirement.

I've been wondering why the SEIU and unions are throwing such vast sums of money at Noreen. They are painting Lynda as the devil incarnate, the ultimate environmental apocalypse candidate.

and then it hit me...

PENSIONS. ...

[John Eder]

I feel I moderate very fairly. You'll notice I have selected many, many pro-Noreen posts as Barry's Picks. However, I also get to participate as a user and express my opinion using the same facilities that all users have access to.

“Let’s welcome our moderators, Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz.”

Anderson Cooper: “Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the second 2016 Presidential Debate. As a result of a coin toss, Donald Trump, the lying, narcissistic moron that he is, will go first.”

Martha Raddatz: “You forgot womanizing…”

Anderson Cooper: “Here is your first question, Mr. Trump. How do you explain the fact that your IQ is the same as Hillary’s shoe size?”

[Barry]

“Let’s welcome our moderators, Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz.”

LOL!

But it make my point. I don't have the same role here as Anderson and Martha did at the debate. Here, we can all ask and answer questions.

[pbrinton]

and then it hit me...

PENSIONS.

May I congratulate you on stumbling across what has been one of the most exhaustively discussed issues on this very thread. But I am very happy to hear that you have done exhaustive research on the subject and discovered the true extent of Noreen's culpability in the issue. So many people sound off about without having actually investigated the matter. Could you please elaborate on the specifics of what you found, along with links to your source materials?

Patrick Brinton

[farmerdan]

My vote for fifth district supervisor is for Barry!
Only Barry has treated both sides fairly!
Only Barry has provided a forum for in depth discussion!
Only Barry has gotten candidates to respond to criticism of their supporters (at least Lynda, don't know about Noreen.)

Go Barry!

[KittyW]

May I congratulate you on stumbling across what has been one of the most exhaustively discussed issues on this very thread. But I am very happy to hear that you have done exhaustive research on the subject and discovered the true extent of Noreen's culpability in the issue. So many people sound off about without having actually investigated the matter. Could you please elaborate on the specifics of what you found, along with links to your source materials?

Patrick Brinton

Hi Patrick, Sorry to inflict my independent "aha moment" on this thread! I was away in Hawaii for a few weeks and didn't follow the excitement back home. When I got back I watched the Lynda/Noreen debates more closely than reading the threads here.

Since you asked for my sources, below are the most cogent, with links.

You can probably skip 1-4 as these have likely been discussed pretty thoroughly.

Skip down to #5 -- some real history -- and #6 and #7, the guy who brought this info to light.

Based on this, I was pretty kind in my characterization of Noreen as the "Patron Saint of Pensions."

I could have gone all-out with "Fiscal Floozy" or "Labor Lapdog." But I don't like nasty name calling.

After all, she's done some good things in addition to her pension fiascos. I respect the work she's done for the environment and her record is multidimensional.

But she doesn't have my vote to carry forward on this mess.

1. This article outlines the alarming size of the current pension problem:
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/5...nds?artslide=0

2. This article talks about "sweet deals" and pension spiking:
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/2...ted&artslide=0

3. This article talks about SEIU spending on Noreen Evans’ behalf, signaling the union’s "bid to secure a pro-labor majority on the Board of Supervisors:"
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/5...een?artslide=0

4. This article talks about Noreen's track record to raise the cap on retirement benefits in a fiscally strapped time. To quote the article: "…the Sacramento Bee singled out Evans for rebuke, claiming she ignored local government officials who warned her the bill would levy massive costs on troubled local budgets.
"ABX1 6 would bestow huge new potential benefits at a time the state, counties and cities are borrowing money to pay current retirement costs. It is likely to create billions more in new liability, with no new revenue sources to pay for it. Pick your adjective: This measure is irresponsible, unconscionable, shameless, craven."
https://napavalleyregister.com/news/...2d724c165.html

5. This letter to the editor is the real capper. Written on 9/29/16 by Ken Churchill :
Thursday Sept 29, 2016

Ken Churchill • a month ago
Thomas, another one of Noreen's votes was to increase pensions in Santa Rosa when she was on the City Council. When she arrived in 2000 the pension cost that year was $1.5 million and the funding level of the pension plan was 122.6%. (See page 46 of the City's 2002 financial statement). Here is a link: https://srcity.org/departments/...

When she left the City Council in 2004 after approving retroactive increases in 2002, the pension costs were $7.5 million, a 500% increase in 4 her years. (See page 49 of the 2005 financial statement).But that is not all, she also voted to issue $50 million worth of non voter approved pension obligation bonds to pay for the unfunded liability created by the increase. This year, the City's pension cost is over $27 million and predicted by CalPERS to double to $50 million by 2023 in their actuarial report in large part due to the increase. (See page 5 of the City's 2015 CalPERS actuarial report downloadable from CalPERS site where they post their actuarial studies).

So she took a perfectly healthy pension system that was affordable and fully funded and increased the costs by 500% and added $50 million worth of new debt for the citizens of Santa Rosa to pay for and then left the City Council for the state legislature.

When she arrived at the state legislature she authored (actually the unions probably authored them and she submitted them) bill after bill that would have changed what pensions are based upon from base salary to salary plus benefits and the bill would apply to every city and county in the state, driving up their pension costs to even more unaffordable levels.

While a state senator she approved the state pension reform bill commonly called PEPRA, which was a watered down version of what Governor Brown wanted that only changed pension formulas for new hires so the savings is 30 years out.

To reform our County's pension system she in her ballot statement said she wants to take the entire $2.3 billion in pension assets and build affordable housing, something that is unconstitutional, violates the retirement association's investment policy and would triple the County's pension costs.

Please do not vote for Noreen. She is our worst nightmare.

READER COMMENTS:

Anthony Ross Ken Churchill • a month ago
Buying votes and having the taxpayers pick up the tab. Sheesh.

samisme Anthony Ross • a month ago
Paying off campaign bribes, I mean contributions, for an illusion of grandeur.
Noreen is despicable.

NOTE: to access this letter, you have to click on the "Reader Comments" ner the bottom of the page:
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinio...ent-2924921743

6. Here's an article with some background on the writer of that letter. Sounds like a pretty solid guy: Ken Churchill, "owner of a solar energy company, an environmental consulting firm and a winery — and as a former board member of the Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation — Churchill also comes with extensive experience in business development, energy efficiency and environmental protection."

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/1...ll?ref=related

1. 7. Ken is a very knowledgeable guy. You can read an in-depth report he wrote: The Sonoma County Pension Crisis : How Retroactive Benefit Increases, Overly Generous Salaries, and Poor Financial Management Have Destroyed the County’s Finances

You can access a pdf of this report at:

https://sonomacountytaxpayers.org/category/public-employee-pensions/

[KittyW]

My oh my Lisa, how unfoundedly judgemental!

I had indeed been waffling over the candidates. But only after watching the debates, reading the candidates' statements, and reading between the lines of the acrimonious accusations, I made my selection: Lynda Hopkins.

For my issues with Noreen, pensions, and her proposed pension-funded housing, please see my reply to Patrick.

And for your information, I grew up on a subsistence farm in Southern Appalachia so I'm quite familiar with life below the poverty line. I have a very independent political outlook that is as far from right wing as it can be.

Kitty I think your mask as a 'nuetral observer' has slipped ...

[riverosprey]

From Sonoma West:

Agent of harmony

EDITOR: Most of my generation of Sonoma County’s political leaders have retired; leaving us saddled with massive unfunded retirement obligations, paid for with higher taxes and fees, along with major cuts in services and infrastructure. Present solutions for affordable housing are responsible for an exodus of workers and families from our rural communities. Social service cuts have created a zombie-land of homeless, shuffling our streets and draining large amounts of resources from our first responders and criminal justice system. Our leaders are failing to bring the disparate elements of our communities together toward common purpose, and some purposely sow division between environmentalists and labor, business and agriculture.

In order to restore services once provided for generations, we need to reinvent local government, as a convener enlisting and involving all the elements of our community toward innovative and creative solutions.
My wife Svetlana and I will vote for organic farmer Lynda Hopkins, to represent us as our next Fifth District Supervisor. We can no longer abide the failed policies of the past. We believe Lynda Hopkins has the courage and vision to be an agent of harmony, toward a sustainable future for Sonoma County.

Tom and Svetlana Lynch
Guerneville

[larryjhanson]

Well, I had to reply to this but please don't think this an attack on Tom Lynch, the person but instead a critique of Tom Lynch, the Planning Commissioner.

He is one of the majority who time after time approve winery/vineyard projects without sufficient information to know if these projects impact surface water for fish and groundwater for residents and the community. The county (PRMD) has not adequately assessed the water impacts, especially the cumulative water impacts. PRMD refused over our pleading to require a water study for a recent well ordinance. Moreover, there is no water budget as if the water availability was infinite.

Each project proponent before the Commission that Lynch sits on tells a story about how it is their dream to have this winery and the Commission apparently falls for it and approves away. No commission to my recollection has EVER asked public members about their dreams when they moved in to their residences and is it okay for one person's dream to usurp another persons or whole community's dream? That would not be a dream. That would be a nightmare.

The point I am trying to make is that Lynch's nebulous rhetoric about "higher taxes and fees", blaming homelessness on the local economy, and Hopkins as an "agent of harmony" only make sense in the context where the wine and other industries continue to get rubber stamped approval over natural resource impacts and community concerns. In other words, public members should stop fighting for their rights so certain money can be made without controversy.

Larry Hanson, Forestville

From Sonoma West:

Agent of harmony
...
Tom and Svetlana Lynch
Guerneville

[Shepherd]

I appreciate the content, information, and tone of Larry's post. It sticks to issues, rather than personalities. Water and wine issues should be at the forefront of this 5th district discussion, in my opinion.

No matter who wins on Nov. 8, those of us who really love Sonoma County and live here will have to work together on many issues, including wine, water, housing, forests, and other related issues. Let's try to elevate our discussion, which this post helps do.

Well, I had to reply to this but please don't think this an attack on Tom Lynch, the person but instead a critique of Tom Lynch, the Planning Commissioner. ...

[photolite]

Linda has publicly denounced these mailers. She is legally prohibited from having any direct communication with the PAC that has produced them. She has publicly stated that she believes they have cost her votes.
She is not culpable here and they shouldn't be held against her.

Lots of good reasons to vote FOR Noreen, but even if there weren't, the quantity and venal quality of Linda's mailers would turn me away. I know she is a good human being who is a good farmer, but why does she allowed these nasty mailers to represent her? A bad mistake.

[John Eder]

Linda has publicly denounced these mailers. She is legally prohibited from having any direct communication with the PAC that has produced them. She has publicly stated that she believes they have cost her votes.
She is not culpable here and they shouldn't be held against her.

You are obviously delusional. This is kind of like Nixon saying, "I don't know why those guys were in the office at the Watergate. I was at home, watching All In The Family..."