Key Vote Tomorrow For Elk Grove City Council Aspirants Chaires, Ly

April 7, 2014 | Although the general election is still seven months away, the Elk Grove-South County Democratic Club has been steadi...


April 7, 2014 |

Although the general election is still seven months away, the Elk Grove-South County Democratic Club has been steadily conducting votes of its membership to determine endorsements in key area races. While the endorsement votes have been conducted early because of the June primary where there are multiple Democratic candidates, the club will conduct a vote tomorrow on a race between two party members that will not happen until November's general election.

At stake is the club's endorsement for the two current Democratic candidates in the race for the Elk Grove City Council District 4 seat between Elk Grove Unified School District Trustee Steve Ly and Elk Grove Planning Commissioner Nancy Chaires. 

Tomorrow's endorsement will be based on a popular vote of current members in attendance at the meeting. As of last month's meeting, club by-laws stated that any due-paying member who is in attendance can cast a vote and membership into the club is available right up to any particular vote.

That procedure has led to some rumblings in the club's earlier endorsement votes.

In previous meetings club membership has voted to endorse Assembly Member Roger Dickinson over Assembly Member Dr. Richard Pan for the California Senate seat being vacated by Darrell Steinberg. But in the endorsement vote between Democratic Assembly candidates Elk Grove Vice Mayor Jim Cooper, Sacramento City Council Member Darrell Fong and Sacramento City Unified School District Trustee Diane Rodriguez, no candidate drew a majority, so no endorsement has been issued.

During the Dickinson-Pan vote and the Cooper-Fong-Rodriguez stalemate, there were grumblings from some longtime club members', candidates and campaign staffers that some candidates had supporters join the club very recently to push their particular candidate or to use as the new members votes as leverage to gain endorsements from other fellow Democratic office seekers. 

The one vote where there seemed to be no controversy was the endorsement issued to Sacramento District Attorney candidate Todd Leras over Assistant California Attorney General Maggie Krell. Leras, a self-acknowledged dark horse candidate, appeared at the meeting where he won the endorsement where Krell had a proxy stand in.

"I am looking forward to working with the Elk Grove-South County Democrat Club as we inspire even more people to become involved in improving our great city," Ly said in an email response seeking comment on tomorrow's vote. "The energy and spirit of our campaign is indicative of our ability to engage voters within the City of Elk Grove and to get them excited about the democratic process."

Chaires did not respond to an email request to comment on tomorrow's vote.

At the last three meetings, where the above-mentioned votes were conducted, the meetings have been held in front of large standing-room-only audiences at the Elk Grove Public Library. Tomorrow’s meeting at the Elk Grove Public Library starts at 6:30 p.m. and is expected to draw another large voting audience.    

Post a Comment

12 comments

Anonymous said...

what is the rush here? Who is pushing so hard for this endorsement to happen now? Neither of these individuals are even officially on the ballot. Why not wait and see who actually is qualifies to run for this seat before we start making official endorsements. A lot can happen in between now and the end of July when candidates can file for this seat with the registrar of voters, remember just because the filed an intent to run with the city does not mean they will appear on the ballot.

What if the club endorses one person and something happens to that person, they move, are ruled ineligible to run or just decide to do someothing else?

We should wait until after the June election to make an edorsement in this race.

Daddy Warbucks said...

Endorsements = money, that's the rush...

Anonymous said...

Sounds like an easy one to me. Why would they vote for someone who did not honor his pledge to finish his term as EGUDS Trustee? We have enough on our present city council with no integrity. Need someone who can think for themselves, work for the community as a whole and don't find it important to honor the big bucks or "yes" their sidekick on the city council. That person IS Nancy Chaires!

Laguna Pete said...

Neither of these candidates will be good for our city council. Both are dems that vote via special interests of their party. Ly lacks integrity, something already sorely missing from our council based on his lack of commitment to his current post on the EGUSD board. If you speak to him privately, you can see he's really not very smart at all.

As for Chaires, she's smart, but she's a candidate that votes party lines and special interests instead of what is best for the city.

Please vote for anyone else who shows a willingness to do what is best for the city regardless of party affiliation. City Council is not a "partisan" position. Please don't make it one.

Lynn said...

voters make it partisan as local elections and candidates are not a voter priority...party lines are it....and in the end the majority of council decisions have been 5-0. Just ask the developers

Laguna Pete said...

Lynn: so you're saying the city council is not a partisan , party line group? You say they vote 5-0 regardless of party lines and only based on special interests that have lined their pockets?

Then it's okay for voters to vote party lines because it's irrelevant?

I don't buy that completely. Yes, members will vote for those projects brought forth by those who line their pockets, but I believe they also vote via party lines to maintain their hold on the majority.

Laguna Pete said...

Following your thought process Lynn, all council members must belong to the same political party as they always vote 5-0.

That's just not true. I believe Davis, Hume and Trigg are democrats and Detrick and Cooper are republican.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Capt. Benjamin L. Willard said...

Laguna Pete, Mr. Cooper and Mr. Davis are Democrats while Mr. Detrick and Mr. Hume are Republicans. Not entirely sure of Mr. Trigg's affiliation, if any.

L Pete said...

Captain: Thanks for the clarification, but the question still begs an answer, if "party lines are it" then why aren't the votes split 3-2 on most votes?

Capt. Benjamin L. Willard said...

Pete, Speaking only for myself, I think party line distinctions are made for the larger community. My daughter-in-law will only vote based on party lines, regardless of what individual candidate stances are. In the last election she voted for mayor based on that candidate's party, even though on an issue-by-issue basis, she had no agreement with that candidate. Party line voting is alive with a large part of the electorate who use it as a guide even in local elections where a candidates stance say on Gay marriage or abortion, really has no significance.

My perspective is party affiliations on a very local basis are meaninglessness. If Mr. Davis and Mr. Cooper are such good Democrats, why did they support suburban sprawl. The answer is easy - money.

Lynn said...

Laguna Pete; Capt Willard described the voting patterns of the elk grove voters. Really our council does vote a political party; it is called "Developer Driven"... Developers will donate to all the council members regardless of party affiliation; it is a matter of assuring their bets for project approval. "Developer's Delight" "MND is alright". Unfortunately, it is the residents that are left with these decisions. 8.7 on the agenda last night; listen to council discussion. This conversation was the result of a rezone. What made the initial decision worse; the discussion of last night where the developer has spent monies etc to develop his plan according to the "rules" set by the decision of council and now the council was trying to get something different. Business friendly? NO way. It is an ugly game played here. I once had a discussion with a developer and he shared his interaction with the city; not positive. Of course I have not been happy with what has and is going on. I asked him "who is happy with the planning decisions of our city?"....I think in reviewing budgets ect... it is our contracted planners. Unfortunately, some how our leaders are believing with the hybrid zoning of the SEPA this will be a better plan and what occurred last night won't happen again....hmmm....I don't think all their decisions have caught up with them yet. For instance; not enough monies to fix roads, however they are investing in the Kammerer Road JPA extension...hmmmm who benefits....they are investing in improvements etc on Big Horn out to Kammerer....hmmm.... I recognize I did not stay on point here.

Anonymous said...

Seldom on to agree with Lyn...
She's right.
Watch the tape from last night. Davis asks, "What are we, a rubber stamp?" Well, yes. Yes, you are. A few years ago, you and the rest of the council forced the hand the city had to play last night (lest we get sued).
The parties we have aren't Dem/Rep, it is Developer and Citizen. The Developer Party is in full control of the council. Follow the money, people!

Follow Us

Popular

Archives

Corrections

Responsive




item