Desperation leads to deception...

It is well established that public safety is the top priority in Chico for this City Council election, and acknowledged by all that Chico does not have enough police officers. Chico voters should be aware that every candidate will want the voters to believe they support and/or have knowledge or understanding about public safety issues, and policing specifically. Some of the candidates will be able to easily establish that they know what is going on...because they really do! They have taken the time to do their homework, to talk to people at all levels of the Police Department, they have done ride-alongs with officers, and they have studied the issues. Others, who by the way have already demonstrated publicly that they don't have a clue or really even care about CPD or their ability to do a good job, are going to have a harder time convincing the voters they are supporters of public safety. Some of these have records of up to 12 years that clearly indicate an absence of support, and others have only recently spoken publicly in such a way as to convey they don’t know what is going on. The latter will resort to deception, like is described in the following blog post from 2010, to convince voters they are connected and in tune with law enforcement:

*********************************************************************************

Beware of paid slate mailers

By Josh Richman

 Friday, May 28th, 2010 at 2:01 pm in 2010 election.

A copy of the “COPS Voter Guide,” a slate mailer urging votes for certain candidates and ballot measures, recently landed on my desk, reminding me how wary voters should be of such things.

Use of the word “COPS” in big print, and the badge logo that accompanies it, seem to imply that law enforcement is endorsing these candidates and measures. That’s not true.

The COPS Voter Guide is a business: It sells endorsements. Its online “endorsement form” simply asks a candidate check a box to “agree that public safety is a top priority for public service. As an elected official, I will uphold the laws and work with California Law Enforcement on issues of mutual concern. This pledge does not commit me to any issue positions, nor does it mean that the COPS VOTER GUIDE agrees with me by endorsing all of my issue positions.”

It’s run by Moran & Associates, a Folsom-based political consulting firm; I left messages for company President Kelley Moran, but haven’t heard back from him.

This one – designed for Democratic voters – looks to me as if Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown is the only candidate who didn’t pay to be on it, as he’s the only one without an asterisk next to his name; the mailer’s fine print says “Appearance is paid for and authorized by each candidate and ballot measure which is designated by an *”

So the mailer urges the recipient to vote for Gavin Newsom for Lieutenant Governor. Yet when I look at Newsom’s endorsement page under the heading “public safety,” I see three firefighters’ organizations but not a single police group. His rival, however – Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn – has been endorsed by the Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC), Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca and several LA-area police groups.

Similarly, Democratic candidate for Attorney General Pedro Nava, an Assemblyman from Santa Barbara, is on the mailer. The only law enforcement endorsements he lists on his website are Ventura County Deputy Sheriff’s Association and the Ventura County Peace Officers Association, plus a few local sheriffs and police chiefs. Yet Ted Lieu, the Assemblyman from Torrance and one of Nava’s six rivals for the Democratic nomination, actually has the endorsements of the California Peace Officers Association, the California Police Chiefs Association and nine other law enforcement groups.

It’s not illegal for a candidate to pay a slate mailer for an endorsement, or for a mailer to solicit such payments. But voters should read the fine print and discern the endorsements that a candidate has bought from the endorsements that a candidate has earned.

*********************************************************************************

Here’s the bottom line folks: It is a regular part of the political process that candidates will use slate mailers like described above to create perceptions about themselves. Usually, they are deceptive. In our local race for the City Council, an experienced politician/incumbent (our Mayor) has paid this very same outfit referenced in the blog above to have his name listed with their logo in a mailer to Chico voters to create the perception he is supported by law enforcement and that he supports law enforcement. Since he has established this race is about “sides,” he has apparently persuaded the novices on his “side” to join him. In the case of the mayor, his well established record of the last 12 years demonstrates that he does not and has not supported the Chico PD or the job they do. Sadly, the two newbies on his side have stumbled and bumbled as they have feebly attempted to convey that they know about and/or support law enforcement. As a result of this cumulative situation, with awareness of what the top issue facing candidates in this election is, these candidates have had to initiate an act of desperation to convince the voters they really support public safety. Public records in the Chico City Clerks Office indicate they all paid money to this outfit, and now that the mailers have been received we know it was to get their names out their as supporters of law enforcement.

So what about the “COPS Voter’s Guide?” This is in fact a front for a guy in Folsom, Ca who has spent the last 30+ years as a public affairs and political consultant. He does not now, nor has he ever worked in public safety (although it appears he may have formerly had a public safety client who "discontinued their relationship" with him). He is also the owner of the “California Energy Voter Guide.” With either one, it doesn’t matter what your party or what your position on an issue is, if you pay him he will put your name on a flyer and mail it to voters in attempt to create a perception in your favor as a candidate. Research on this guy’s COPS guide in particular indicates that for at least the last dozen years it is widely used to perpetuate deception in elections.

If you receive one of these mailers locally, recognize it as a clue that the candidate(s) listed thereon either know nothing about public safety, they have demonstrated that they do not support the CPD and that if they are willing to resort to deception to convince you they are all about public safety, where else will they deceive you if they are elected???