Solicitor Law Pushed Off

The Crime Commission has been trying for two years to pass a law that would require solicitors to obtain a license.  Our police want this law passed as soon as possible and believe it would go a long way toward making our town safer (click above link to learn more).  The Council has dragged its feet on this law for too long and has sought to dilute it.  The ordinance was to be considered on October 27th.  Mayor Anderson has chosen to push that to November 10th.

Why?  The official reason is that Councilmember Anduri will not be present, but that makes little sense.  He will have had over a month to review the law.  Four councilmembers will be present; that is a quorum and the law can be passed.

It seems that the Council may have pushed this decision back to after the election so that I do not make it a campaign issue by pointing out how long they have taken and/or so they can dilute the law without the pressure of an election making them pass it in its current form.

Meanwhile, a good, elderly friend of mine and his wife were recently subjected to solicitors that ignored his “No Solicitors” sign and were refusing to leave his house without money.  The situation was not resolved in a peaceable manner.  This law would likely prevent that situation in the first place.

The City Council should put politics aside and finally pass this law.

Lafayette Vistas

As I have stated before, the Lafayette Vistas, including the one that came out today, is a taxpayer-funded piece of propaganda for whomever runs the city at that time.  The fact that the city publishes it with taxpayer money is like an ice cream cone that demands money to lick itself.  I do believe that we should stop publishing the Vistas, or publish it only a few times a year with useful information only, like tips on keeping our neighborhoods safe.  We would free up funds and foster local democracy in action.

This issue even includes rebuttals to specific complaints I have issued, defending the recent re-paving of Lafayette with selective facts and defending the city’s push for high-density, low-value housing, for instance. 

The truly infuriating part, however, is that this newsletter, which we pay for has an article entitled “Ten Ways to Destroy Your Town.”  The article is a didactic screed explaining how we residents of Lafayette detract from our town.  The main way to harm Lafayette according to the article? ”1. Complain about the local government officials.”  What?  Are we really paying to print a newsletter that accuses those of us who fight to improve Lafayette of ruining it?  That is asinine.

How unfortunate that the Council has allowed this to be printed.  It is not in the spirit of democracy and it is not neighborly.  This is offensive to every resident of Lafayette and the fact that we paid for it is just another insult on top of that one.

Setting the Record Straight on Donations

Did anyone notice something odd about the Thissen article in the Lamorinda Sun on donations to Lamorinda campaigns?  For one, you may have noticed that the other candidates have completely outpaced me on fundraising and have accepted a great deal of money from local business concerns.  The part of the article that touches on my own fundraising reads, “Gabriel Froymovich, who is challenging Lafayette’s three incumbents, raised $3,206.63, all from three people in Indiana.  $3,200 of it came from Etelka and Gabriel Froymovich of Carmel, Ind.” 

Huh?  Those numbers seem a bit odd.  They imply that someone donated $6.63 to my campaign for one, a donation amount that wouldn’t even be reported.  Mr. Thissen, the author, plans to have these claims corrected.  Until then, let me give some full disclosure on my fundraising:

My number one financial supporter was Etelka Froymovich, my mother, of Carmel, Indiana.  She donated $2200 or $2300.  I do not feel any conflict of interest for accepting her donation, as I am already indebted to her for being a great mother.

The next biggest donor is Gabriel Froymovich, myself.  For some reason, the Sun had me as being from Carmel, Indiana, but I haven’t lived in Indiana in almost a decade and never lived in Carmel.  I donated about $1300.  No conflict of interest there.

The third biggest donor is my aunt, Katherine Katz, who lives in Brownsburg, Indiana.  She donated $300.  Again, no conflict of interest.

I have received money from about one dozen other people, mostly from California.  I have accepted no donations larger than $60 from anyone who is not a relative and none larger than $40 from anyone who resides in Lafayette.  I feel that this is a good indication that I am not in anyone’s pocket.  In fact, such fundraising limits could be a healthy thing for local races, in general.  I recently received a $75 donation from someone in Oakland.  The balance of the donation, minus processing fees, will be refunded.

Update

First off, thank you to everyone who has helped out with the campaign.  If you want to be added to my e-mail update list – I don’t send a lot of e-mails – let me know. 

 

The campaign is going well and we’ve really been able to get our message out there.  I just spoke at the Lafayette Homeowner’s Council’s Candidate Forum, which was a success, though I have to admit, debating against a team of two experienced attorneys can be a bit unnerving.

 

I have also been trying to even out the playing field with yard signs.  I am not as well-funded as Councilmembers Anduri and Federighi, but I do have some signs.  One of the problems is that for various reasons my signs don’t stay up as long, whereas they have many signs up in violation of the sign ordinance, which bans us all from attaching them to the most visible areas, like telephone posts.  So, I would love to have more signs legally placed for me.  That means they must be on private property, off any easements.  If anyone has a place on their yard that they would be willing to put a yard sign, that would be great.

 

Also, a pro-active member of our community has donated the website www.Vote94549.com to the campaign, which routes to here.  Please forward this website to any friends of yours in Lafayette.  If you would like, I can also send a concise e-mail with the main points of my platform.

 

Of course, if anyone wants posters or fliers, please let me know, I have plenty.

 

Now is also the time to step up letters to the editor.  If you are willing to send one, but don’t have the time to write, let me know, I have a couple of pre-written letters. Don’t forget to include your name, phone number and address.  You can send the letters to:

 

Lamorinda Sun: ccsun@cctimes.com (200 words max)

Lamorinda Weekly: letter@lamorindaweekly.com (350 words max)

CoCo Times: ccnletters@bayareanewsgroup.com (350 words max)

Other than that, keep talking to your neighbors, and tell people to vote for Froymovich only, in order to increase our chances (you can cast up to 3 votes for Councilmember).  Of course, if someone plans to vote for one or two other candidates no matter what, at least urge them to vote for me, too.

 

Finally, if anyone would be willing to help with registering voters, handing out flyers or making phone calls to voters (you can do this from home), let me know – I’ve got plenty to do and never enough time.

Lafayette’s Homeowners’ Council Forum

Tonight was, more or less, another debate night, hosted by the Lafayette Homeowners’ Council.  Things went well, though I usually spoke first and could not then rebut others’ statements.  This presented a difficulty, since other candidates have a different version of the facts than I do.  For instance, Councilmembers Anduri and Federeghi portrayed the Council as not planning to raise the sales tax issue again.  I pointed out that they were the ones who paid consultants with taxpayer funds to pass the sales tax and that they noted an interest in bringing the issue back up in Lafayette Vistas.  Councilmember Anduri denied that Vistas, their mouthpiece, indicated that they wanted to pass the sales tax at a later date.  Here is the text of Vistas:

“Ultimately the Lafayette City Council chose not to put

the sales tax measure on the ballot. Council members said

organized opposition from the Chamber would have made

it too difficult to pass the measure. They also cited the lack

of any organized support for the measure and expressed fear

that failure on this tax could hurt the prospects for passing a

similar measure in the future.”

 

 

I want to be clear that every fact I give and every claim I make is as verifiable as I can verify.  I am ready to be corrected, but I research everything.

 

 

In that vein, if you were at the event, you may remember that there was some good-natured disagreement as to Lafayette’s growth in population over the past 40 years.  I claimed it was only 3,000 people, not 16,000; I was off slightly, but it was between 3,000 and 4,000 people.  I stand by my belief that this is a healthy rate of growth, less than 100 people per year.  Here is the vital piece of the puzzle that was missing:

 

http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/cities/Lafayette70.htm

 

I take the integrity of my claims very seriously, so if someone tries to claim that I am mis-contruing the facts, feel free to ask me about it, I will readily correct any that are wrong.

Solicitor Permitting Law

Two years ago a tragic crime was committed in Lafayette.  A solicitor raped and murdered an elderly woman.  There was no way for anyone to foresee that crime.  There are companies that come into Lafayette with vans full of solicitors and have them comb the neighborhood.  There have been complaints in the past about solicitors who have become a nuisance and, sometimes, aggressive.  Some of these solicitors have been found to be convicts.  There is no real upside to having solicitors in Lafayette, but it does create a public safety risk and helped bring this horrible crime to Lafayette.

In response to the murder, and in light of the dangers of unregulated, door-to-door solicitation, our volunteer crime commission has been seeking for two years to pass a law that would require commercial solicitors to obtain permits to operate in Lafayette.  This would require a cursory background check and an ID.  The first violation would be punished with a small citation and the second could result in jail.  This would not apply to canvassing for political, religious or other non-profit organization; free speech would be respected.  This law could have well prevented the tragic crime mentioned above.

The City Council has dragged its feet on getting this ordinance passed and has sometimes been obstructionist.  Recently, they objected to the banning of people who have committed crimes of “moral turpitude” from obtaining solicitors’ permits.  The Council believed that some crimes, like petty theft, should not keep someone from obtaining a solicitor’s permit after a certain number of years has expired.  The City of Lafayette is not chartered with a role in prisoner rehabilitation; it is to consider Lafayette’s best interests.  I do believe in rehabilitation, but I know that I do not want to deal with solicitors at all, much less those who have committed petty theft in the past.  I congratulate the commission for standing firm and recommending an ordinance that bans anyone who has a misdemeanor or felony from obtaining a permit.  Infractions, such as marijuana possession or not paying for BART would not disqualify anyone.  Anyone who has had his or her record expunged would also be allowed to acquire a permit.

This is an important ordinance that, according to our police officers, would give them a new and promising enforcement tool to keep our neighborhoods safe.  It would make us less attractive to irresponsible solicitor groups.  The ordinance is up for Council consideration on October 27th.  Let the Council know that the people of Lafayette do not want their personal beliefs to get in the way of passing a reasonable law that will help keep us safe.  E-mail them at cityhall@lovelafayette.org or come to the Council meeting.  I plan to be there.

Lafayette City Council Debates!

Last night was an exciting debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden, but they weren’t the only ones who debated yesterday. There was a roundtable discussion scheduled for the Lafayette City Council candidates, too. Mayor Anderson and Councilmember Federighi did not attend, so it was just Councilmember Anduri and I, making this more of a friendly debate than a roundtable discussion. Now, I was nervous because Carl (Councilmember Anduri) could be expected to be a formidable debater, seeing as how he is a successful attorney.

I held my own, though, but he did as great as I thought he would. I didn’t get in all the licks I wanted to, but that’s life. I spoke about sending two councilmembers to a conference in Long Beach, when one should have sufficed, and Councilmember Anduri showed his true colors. He said that he would have liked to have sent more. Moments later he was claiming that there was no waste in the City’s budget.

You can watch the debate on the last 3 Sundays prior to the election: October 19th, October 26th and November 2nd on Comcast Channel 26/28 at 7:30p. The Contra Costa Times should be running an article on it, too.

Speaking of the CoCo Times, today was a good day in the Lamorinda Sun for me. They published a letter to the editor of mine about ABAG and had a fair article about housing in Lafayette (and Moraga), in which I am quoted.

The Lamorinda Weekly just had an article about the race, too.

Conference of California Cities

We were recently represented at the Conference of California Cities, in Long Beach by not one, but two of our City Council members.  Councilmember Federighi assured me that this conference was worth attending and important enough to warrant the use of taxpayer money for it.  I believe her, but do not understand why we had to send two Councilmembers.  I asked how much this would cost.  The Council did not know.

They did have the City Clerk get back to me, and I do laud them for being transparent about the expenditures.  The total cost was $1926.  So, we could have save about $1000 by sending only one Councilmember.  This may not be enough to fix Lafayette’s problems, but taxpayer costs should inform and guide all of the Council’s decisions.  They should have known how much the trip would cost and they should have sent only one Councilmember.

Missing Campaign Signs

Recently, some of my campaign signs were removed from a lot now bearing signs for two of the councilmembers running against me.  I do not believe that whoever put up their signs took mine down and, in fact, they were courteous enough to speak with me about the incident to see if we could piece together who may have done it, to no avail.  In any case, I just wanted to ask all of my supporters that, if you would like to help the campaign, there are many ways to do it, but please do not remove any other candidate’s materials, so long as the materials have a right to be displayed where they are displayed.

Videos!

I threw together some videos for the campaign.  I did not really have the time to polish them to perfection, but they get the point across.  The short one is in this post, but the Roads and About Me section have one each, too.  In addition to YouTube, these videos will be available through the League of Women Voters and a website sponsored by ABC.