Did you offer Noreen the same opportunity too? Or is this just a Wacco moderator opportunity for the candidate he supports?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
Printable View
Did you offer Noreen the same opportunity too? Or is this just a Wacco moderator opportunity for the candidate he supports?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
Lynda was kind enough to offer to take questions from us at the picnic. Noreen was invited well in advance (August 8th) and initially accepted but then set up a conflicting event. Additionally, per the straw poll at the picnic, Noreen already has the support of vast majority of our members.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by scamperwillow:
Please note that my questions for Lynda are quite critical. I asked her to address the top concerns about her candidacy as expressed by Noreen's supporters. That said, I'm happy make the same opportunity available to Noreen.
So to kick it off for Noreen:
1) Relations with the SEIU Union. Please recount the history of all public actions you took affecting the SIEU including pensions and any other regulations or negotiations. With the SEIU contributing over $80,000 in direct expense and untold volunteer time to support your campaign, how can we trust you to be impartial when it comes to handling the pension problem and other negotiations with the union? Aren't you in the same position of being beholden to the SEIU as you accuse Lynda and her donors?
Please send her answer to me for publishing.
Please ask Noreen if the support pledge she signed with SEIU is binding or non binding.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
And ask if her plan to use TOT tax to pay down the pension obligation is still in force?
And ask if her idea to use the $2 billion pension fund to build cheap housing is still in play.
She has never said she would use the $2 billion to build cheap housing. She did suggest that she would look into using "PART" of the pension funds to build WORKFORCE housing - you know the kind that most of us live in - except the 1%. People that don't like that idea haven't looked at the price of housing here lately. Right now, our pension funds are being used to build housing in other places - does that make sense?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by jbox:
Here is Noreen's response.
"Thank you for allowing me to comment. As you know, I had a campaign event going on at the same time as the WaccoBB picnic, so was unable to attend in person. However, I am grateful so many of my supporters were there!
Based upon my lengthy record of public service, voters can be confident that I will do what I say I will do. Voters take a risk with a candidate who has no history of public service, because its easy to promise everybody everything during a campaign, but challenging to deliver on those promises once in office.
As State Senator, I supported the Public Employees Pension Reform Act (PEPRA), eliminating abuses like spiking and air time used by some of our former public employees to increase their pension benefits so they retired with more than their salaries, and capping pension benefits. Following the adoption of PEPRA, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors negotiated with County employees to reduce pension benefits and increase employee contributions, as well as requiring current employees to contribute part of their salaries to pay off the unfunded liabilities created by the decision of an earlier Board of Supervisors to increase pension benefits, including their own.
As State Assemblymember, I was tasked with balancing the state budget during the Great Recession, by cutting expenditures by over 25% and without raising taxes. We reduced employee salaries and benefits and furloughed state employees. To this day, the state's largest labor union, Association of Federal, State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) refuses to support me because of the decisions I had to make to balance the budget. From these tough decisions, voters can have confidence I will continue to make decisions in the best interests of the public.
As a Santa Rosa City Councilmember, I voted on contracts negotiated between the City and SEIU. These contracts were adopted unanimously. As a legislator, I was not involved in negotiating labor contracts. State labor contracts are negotiated by the Governor.
In today's politics, campaigns are funded by various interests. My campaign has over 1,000 individual donors and is supported by environmentalists and by both private labor unions such as Carpenters and Electrical Workers, as well as public labor unions like SEIU 1021 and SEIU 2015. I am proud to stand with the working people of Sonoma County.
I have never claimed any candidate is "beholden" to any particular interest. That's not how it works in politics. Financial support during campaigns--particularly financial support in the tens of thousands of dollars as we've seen in this campaign--usually means access and influence. That's why Hopkins’ campaign consultant Rob Muelrath advertises himself to potential clients as “Working at the intersection of business and government” on his website. https://www.muelrathpublicaffairs.com/about/
Any new candidate with no independent base of knowledge or experience must rely heavily upon advisors. Who such a candidate surrounds herself with is critical to understanding how she will be advised as an elected official. Further, if a Supervisor consistently votes against the interests of those who funded her campaign, those interests will quickly find themselves a friendlier candidate when it comes time for re-election.
Its up to voters to decide which candidate they trust-- the one who aligns herself with wealthy and powerful donors such as New York billionaire investor John Dyson who expressed his disdain for workplace protections by saying I have a “nasty attitude,” and the Vice President of our local trash company which is facing millions in fines from Sonoma County for failing to recycle--or the one who stands with the working people of Sonoma County and has a long history of fighting against great odds for the things West County cares about."
Noreen Evans for Sonoma County Supervisor
708 Gravenstein Hwy N. #164
Sebastopol, CA 95472
www.NoreenforSupervisor.com
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
What you requested and I consented to was for Noreen to answer questions from WaccoBB members (including me). If you, Scamperwillow, want to post your own answers instead of Noreen's please use our main discussion thread for that.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by scamperwillow:
But while we are here, I believe this is the pledge that she signed. Please tell me if this is not correct:
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...3_11-29-37.png
This is from the questionnaire sent out from the SEIU (attached below). There are some interesting questions here (see below). Presumably Noreen has an electronic copy of her answers. Please provide her original answers if available, and if not please ask Noreen to answer again for us.
3) Under what circumstances, if any, do you favor privatizing existing government services?
4) In the event that any public services were to be contracted out, would you support or oppose the requirement that the private contractor would have to offer its employees comparable wages and benefits?
7) What would you do to decrease workload levels for County workers?
8) Sonoma County is one of only two (or three) counties in the state where the water agency staff are tied to the general County structure. Locally some of the water agency staff were given raises to bring them up to the level of comparable water agencies, however, the SEIU members are not compensated as water agency comparables. What would you do to solve this discrepancy?
10) Would you support improving Sonoma Transit bus service by having this service provided by Sonoma County workers and instead of continuing to contract out the operation of the bus service?
16) How can Sonoma County make health care more affordable to its employees?
23) Which of the following actions would you take to support workers engaged in union activity such as bargaining and organizing?
YES NO
___ ____ Walk picket lines
___ ____ Mediate with employers
___ ____ Write letters of support
___ ____ Fight for proper enforcement of current labor law
___ ____ Hold a press conference
___ ____ Speak at rallies
25) If elected, which of the following will you commit to for the purpose of building a strong working relationship with SEIU?
YES NO
____ ____ Call for and welcome SEIU input on relevant policy matters
____ ____ Attend SEIU leadership and worksite meetings
____ ____ Work with SEIU to develop legislative proposals
____ ____ Ensure direct access to you and your staff
____ ____ Work to appoint qualified union members to appropriate Boards and Commissions
28) Do you support or oppose an initiative to take away vested pension benefits from current public employees?
OK - sorry for posting in the wrong place - I actually removed part of it and you can see now that I have posted Noreen's official response. I'm not going to ask her to answer any more questions - she is understandably very busy right now. There is tons of information at her web site and her Facebook page.
thanks,
Marty
Thank you, Scampershillow. No, it does not make sense.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by scamperwillow:
I take it the pledge is sorta non-binding?
So she just wants to use part of the pension fund money for workforce (ie. cheap) housing? Doesn't she know nobody is building because it costs too much to make it financially viable, due in part to government fees and regulations that Noreen is so in love with. Plus the housing market bubble is about to burst, the price of housing has just about doubled in the last 5 years. Bad thinking and bad timing IMHO. I have a real estate secret to share with you and Noreen. Buy low, sell high. As opposed to build new housing when we are at an all time high, get foreclosed later.
But wait, does she still want to use "part" of the TOT tax to pay down the $500 million or so of unfunded pension liabilities? Another brilliant use of tax dollars. We could pay off the deficit in less than 500 years,
assuming the bubble doesn't burst and the river don't rise
At least Lynda Hopkins doesn't have these really silly ideas as part of her platform. Give me the farm waif over the battle axe any day.
She didn't answer a single question! Pure rhetoric.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by scamperwillow:
Yes, it is quite plain that Noreen has no plan, no goals, nothing specific to solve the issues and problems facing the 5th district. She comes up with some vague generalities like pot for potholes but if elected she is going to coast along at this point in her career and go to meetings, make the requisite public appearances and photo ops. At a meet the candidates night held at my house with the 5 candidates she touted her long experience with the bureaucratic process. So she is an expert in bureaucracy, but it can be worked against or for the public. She seems quite resistant to any sort of change or progress, she seems to believe that business is bad, without exception. She embodies what people dislike about Washington and Sacramento.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by photolite:
Lynda Hopkins is just the sort of bright young person who should shape the future for her generation and for her children, they are the ones inheriting this county. We have had our run and now we need to graciously allow new blood in the body politic. Anyone who actually believes Hopkins will destroy the coast, the river, the environment, allow unchecked development and degradation is just falling for the fear mongering that the Evans campaign has spewed since the beginning. Give the farm waif a little credit, she is too smart to be like Noreen wants you to believe. Don't be so gullible, folks. Wake up, the future is here and her name is Lynda Hopkins.