It was an interesting dynamic at the council meeting with Mayor Pro Tem Ruth Asmundson absent due to an exclusive invitation with the Pilipino President. Suddenly the narrow 3-2 majority became a 2-2 deadlock on anything controversial. The battle lines were drawn on the issue of hiring a $75,000 consultant to conduct a survey on future park usage.
Heystek and Greenwald came out strongly against the suggestion, citing as we did in yesterday’s blog, concerns about budgetary priorities. Realizing that he lacked the votes, Saylor first tried to table discussion until December 12, when Asmundson would return. But that move was defeated by a 2-2 vote (a tie is essentially non-action). Saylor then attempted to convince Mayor Greenwald and Councilmember Heystek that the consultant was the right way to go. This made for an interesting exchange, but ultimately failed. I’ll say this—when you need their votes, it makes for a much more cordial atmosphere than when you know you have a de facto majority.
Finally, they voted to take no action. But Saylor had one more trick up his sleeve and with a shocking move he joined Heystek and Greenwald in support of that motion. Why would he do that? Parliamentary procedure states that in order to reconsider an item, a person who voted with the prevailing side is the only one who can bring it up for discussion again. Saylor could not bring the item back had he voted against taking no action. (At least that’s my understanding of the rule, I am no parliamentarian). Thus, when Asmundson returns, Saylor can bring the item back for discussion and they can vote to hire the consultant.
It was a little disappointing that a fiscally cautious member such as Saylor would approve such an expenditure. Thus we urge Saylor to practice the type of fiscal restraint he has repeatedly urged council and the school board to undertake over the years.
Dunning Goes After Heystek Again
Dunning in yesterday’s exegesis references Noreen who remarks that “Lamar Heystek will be on a panel with three other privileged men to discuss ‘struggle.’” I had to look it up and among the other privileged men is none other than Desmond Jolly. I do not know how many people know Desmond Jolly, but if Desmond Jolly does not know what struggle means, none of us do. Yes, he is a well-regarded Professor Emeritus now, but I’m willing to bet he had to jump through more hoops in life than most people in this town to get there.
Now Heystek is actually the butt of the joke by Dunning, but I need to point out that clear oversight by Dunning (and Noreen who may not know who Jolly is or where he comes from, but Dunning certainly does or at least should).
Dunning with his usual rapier writes:
wow, nobody knows the trouble he’s seen, overcoming his college education and teaching position at UC Davis to become one of the youngest City Council members in Davis city history … struggle? … Lamar? … heck, he’s not old enough to have even struggled with a razor …
While Heystek probably isn’t going to be auditioning for “Oliver Twist” any time soon, I’d hardly say he’s lived a privileged life. He worked his way through school while working at Safeway to support himself. That’s not worthy of a pity party (and he’s never asked for one), but I doubt most students at UC Davis these days have to work to get through school. He was a clear underdog for the council but managed to create enough support in the progressive community and with a grassroots organization to get on the council where he makes a very meager income. Meanwhile he has another full-time job just to scrape by as a university lecturer, which is not a high paying gig.
A lot of cities who expect City Councilmembers to do a full-time job actually pay a full-time job’s wage. For those who cannot survive on the $500 per month salary that a councilmember in Davis gets, they have to work an additional job. No one should feel sorry for Lamar, he’s done well and he’s doing what he wants to do, but let’s not pretend that he lives some kind of privileged life–in fact, he’s probably the councilmember who can most relate to the issue of struggle as he’s fought hard to obtain good wages and fair treatment for workers. And while we are at it, maybe if we do not want all our councilmembers to come from wealthy backgrounds, we can actually pay them a more decent wage. But then again, we’d have to have money to do that and we keep paying that money out for consultants.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
i would expect that most UCD students work while they study, although it’s close to impossible to fully support yourself working part time. lamar is pretty representative in that regard.
i would expect that most UCD students work while they study, although it’s close to impossible to fully support yourself working part time. lamar is pretty representative in that regard.
i would expect that most UCD students work while they study, although it’s close to impossible to fully support yourself working part time. lamar is pretty representative in that regard.
i would expect that most UCD students work while they study, although it’s close to impossible to fully support yourself working part time. lamar is pretty representative in that regard.
Lamar is the only council member that truly represents the average “Joe” so to speak. The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community. They lack substance. It’s the reason we have had and continue to have such a homogeneous council majority. It’s time for a change.
RE: Saylor – Of course he is trying to fill his war chest. For what? Supervisor or Assembly maybe. Who knows and who cares? I have lost any and all respect for the man. In any other city he would be registered a Republican. He is a Democrat simply because he believes it helps him garner votes in Davis. Time for a change.
JMB
Lamar is the only council member that truly represents the average “Joe” so to speak. The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community. They lack substance. It’s the reason we have had and continue to have such a homogeneous council majority. It’s time for a change.
RE: Saylor – Of course he is trying to fill his war chest. For what? Supervisor or Assembly maybe. Who knows and who cares? I have lost any and all respect for the man. In any other city he would be registered a Republican. He is a Democrat simply because he believes it helps him garner votes in Davis. Time for a change.
JMB
Lamar is the only council member that truly represents the average “Joe” so to speak. The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community. They lack substance. It’s the reason we have had and continue to have such a homogeneous council majority. It’s time for a change.
RE: Saylor – Of course he is trying to fill his war chest. For what? Supervisor or Assembly maybe. Who knows and who cares? I have lost any and all respect for the man. In any other city he would be registered a Republican. He is a Democrat simply because he believes it helps him garner votes in Davis. Time for a change.
JMB
Lamar is the only council member that truly represents the average “Joe” so to speak. The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community. They lack substance. It’s the reason we have had and continue to have such a homogeneous council majority. It’s time for a change.
RE: Saylor – Of course he is trying to fill his war chest. For what? Supervisor or Assembly maybe. Who knows and who cares? I have lost any and all respect for the man. In any other city he would be registered a Republican. He is a Democrat simply because he believes it helps him garner votes in Davis. Time for a change.
JMB
The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community.
That’s a complete non sequitir. To suggest that Stephen Souza is “disconnected” because he owns a small business (which serves many people in the Davis community) is ridiculous. Equally absurd would be to suggest that Ruth Asmundson, who has been an active member of the Davis community for more than 50 years, is “disconnected.” There are very few members of our community who are more well connected to the community than the members of the city council. That is how they got elected.
They lack substance.
What do you base that kind of personal attack on? What makes you think that you are so substantial that you are in a position to rip the “substance” of others?
It seems to me that people who run for public office, win or lose, have a lot of courage. They put themselves out there, and, as Doug’s intro suggests, get very little reward for it.
To call yourself anonymous and then take pot shots at their characters shows just the opposite of courage.
The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community.
That’s a complete non sequitir. To suggest that Stephen Souza is “disconnected” because he owns a small business (which serves many people in the Davis community) is ridiculous. Equally absurd would be to suggest that Ruth Asmundson, who has been an active member of the Davis community for more than 50 years, is “disconnected.” There are very few members of our community who are more well connected to the community than the members of the city council. That is how they got elected.
They lack substance.
What do you base that kind of personal attack on? What makes you think that you are so substantial that you are in a position to rip the “substance” of others?
It seems to me that people who run for public office, win or lose, have a lot of courage. They put themselves out there, and, as Doug’s intro suggests, get very little reward for it.
To call yourself anonymous and then take pot shots at their characters shows just the opposite of courage.
The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community.
That’s a complete non sequitir. To suggest that Stephen Souza is “disconnected” because he owns a small business (which serves many people in the Davis community) is ridiculous. Equally absurd would be to suggest that Ruth Asmundson, who has been an active member of the Davis community for more than 50 years, is “disconnected.” There are very few members of our community who are more well connected to the community than the members of the city council. That is how they got elected.
They lack substance.
What do you base that kind of personal attack on? What makes you think that you are so substantial that you are in a position to rip the “substance” of others?
It seems to me that people who run for public office, win or lose, have a lot of courage. They put themselves out there, and, as Doug’s intro suggests, get very little reward for it.
To call yourself anonymous and then take pot shots at their characters shows just the opposite of courage.
The others are either retired, independently well off, or have their own business. They are so disconnected from the community.
That’s a complete non sequitir. To suggest that Stephen Souza is “disconnected” because he owns a small business (which serves many people in the Davis community) is ridiculous. Equally absurd would be to suggest that Ruth Asmundson, who has been an active member of the Davis community for more than 50 years, is “disconnected.” There are very few members of our community who are more well connected to the community than the members of the city council. That is how they got elected.
They lack substance.
What do you base that kind of personal attack on? What makes you think that you are so substantial that you are in a position to rip the “substance” of others?
It seems to me that people who run for public office, win or lose, have a lot of courage. They put themselves out there, and, as Doug’s intro suggests, get very little reward for it.
To call yourself anonymous and then take pot shots at their characters shows just the opposite of courage.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Souza’s pool cleaning business focuses on
Davis apartment/devloper-owned pools rather than individual residential swimming pools.
If so, his business is intimately tied to apartment owner/developer interests. Ruth Asmundson’s 50 years as part of the old-guard, Davis Establishment with its ties to the Davis realtor/developer world does not connect her to today’s Davis community.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Souza’s pool cleaning business focuses on
Davis apartment/devloper-owned pools rather than individual residential swimming pools.
If so, his business is intimately tied to apartment owner/developer interests. Ruth Asmundson’s 50 years as part of the old-guard, Davis Establishment with its ties to the Davis realtor/developer world does not connect her to today’s Davis community.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Souza’s pool cleaning business focuses on
Davis apartment/devloper-owned pools rather than individual residential swimming pools.
If so, his business is intimately tied to apartment owner/developer interests. Ruth Asmundson’s 50 years as part of the old-guard, Davis Establishment with its ties to the Davis realtor/developer world does not connect her to today’s Davis community.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Souza’s pool cleaning business focuses on
Davis apartment/devloper-owned pools rather than individual residential swimming pools.
If so, his business is intimately tied to apartment owner/developer interests. Ruth Asmundson’s 50 years as part of the old-guard, Davis Establishment with its ties to the Davis realtor/developer world does not connect her to today’s Davis community.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population. She had a fundamental lack of understanding about what the issue of police oversight was about. Eventually I can probably clip together some video to show that.
Souza is different. He loves to play games and he has his own agenda. It will be interesting to see if he runs for council again, how he does. A lot of people who voted for him last time, will not this time, but he’ll pick up some other developer types.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population. She had a fundamental lack of understanding about what the issue of police oversight was about. Eventually I can probably clip together some video to show that.
Souza is different. He loves to play games and he has his own agenda. It will be interesting to see if he runs for council again, how he does. A lot of people who voted for him last time, will not this time, but he’ll pick up some other developer types.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population. She had a fundamental lack of understanding about what the issue of police oversight was about. Eventually I can probably clip together some video to show that.
Souza is different. He loves to play games and he has his own agenda. It will be interesting to see if he runs for council again, how he does. A lot of people who voted for him last time, will not this time, but he’ll pick up some other developer types.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population. She had a fundamental lack of understanding about what the issue of police oversight was about. Eventually I can probably clip together some video to show that.
Souza is different. He loves to play games and he has his own agenda. It will be interesting to see if he runs for council again, how he does. A lot of people who voted for him last time, will not this time, but he’ll pick up some other developer types.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population.
Didn’t Ruth just win re-election to the council a few months ago? In fact, didn’t she come in first place in that election?
Being “in touch” is a relative thing. Maybe Ruth was, as Doug says, more “in touch” in the past. I don’t really know. And she might be “in touch” with some aspects of Davis and not others. But I doubt anyone on the current council or too many off of it is more “in touch” with Davis than Ruth is.
It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population.
Didn’t Ruth just win re-election to the council a few months ago? In fact, didn’t she come in first place in that election?
Being “in touch” is a relative thing. Maybe Ruth was, as Doug says, more “in touch” in the past. I don’t really know. And she might be “in touch” with some aspects of Davis and not others. But I doubt anyone on the current council or too many off of it is more “in touch” with Davis than Ruth is.
It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population.
Didn’t Ruth just win re-election to the council a few months ago? In fact, didn’t she come in first place in that election?
Being “in touch” is a relative thing. Maybe Ruth was, as Doug says, more “in touch” in the past. I don’t really know. And she might be “in touch” with some aspects of Davis and not others. But I doubt anyone on the current council or too many off of it is more “in touch” with Davis than Ruth is.
It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.
Ruth Asmundson is clearly in touch with her sector of the community–although perhaps less so than in the past. After Target, she’s probably alienated a segment of the small business owners in downtown. But I was amazed during the past year just how out of touch she was from a large sector of the population.
Didn’t Ruth just win re-election to the council a few months ago? In fact, didn’t she come in first place in that election?
Being “in touch” is a relative thing. Maybe Ruth was, as Doug says, more “in touch” in the past. I don’t really know. And she might be “in touch” with some aspects of Davis and not others. But I doubt anyone on the current council or too many off of it is more “in touch” with Davis than Ruth is.
It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.
Rich: isn’t it possible that Asmundson was able to win largely based on her past reputation and contacts? That was my perception last spring.
Rich: isn’t it possible that Asmundson was able to win largely based on her past reputation and contacts? That was my perception last spring.
Rich: isn’t it possible that Asmundson was able to win largely based on her past reputation and contacts? That was my perception last spring.
Rich: isn’t it possible that Asmundson was able to win largely based on her past reputation and contacts? That was my perception last spring.
Come on Rich, you should know me a little better by now:
“It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.”
You will note that I did not make the same assertion for either Saylor or Souza (or Puntillo) that I did for Asmundson–even though they all share similar views on the issue I referred to. That alone should put the notion that I called her disconnected merely because I disagree with her.
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue. She appeared to have no idea not only of what was going on, but of what the issues were. I can try to put together some video to show that, but it will take some doing on my part.
Come on Rich, you should know me a little better by now:
“It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.”
You will note that I did not make the same assertion for either Saylor or Souza (or Puntillo) that I did for Asmundson–even though they all share similar views on the issue I referred to. That alone should put the notion that I called her disconnected merely because I disagree with her.
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue. She appeared to have no idea not only of what was going on, but of what the issues were. I can try to put together some video to show that, but it will take some doing on my part.
Come on Rich, you should know me a little better by now:
“It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.”
You will note that I did not make the same assertion for either Saylor or Souza (or Puntillo) that I did for Asmundson–even though they all share similar views on the issue I referred to. That alone should put the notion that I called her disconnected merely because I disagree with her.
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue. She appeared to have no idea not only of what was going on, but of what the issues were. I can try to put together some video to show that, but it will take some doing on my part.
Come on Rich, you should know me a little better by now:
“It’s a mistake, in my opinion, to conclude that someone doesn’t know what’s going on or lacks substance or is disconnected just because that person disagrees with you on policy or has a different perspective.”
You will note that I did not make the same assertion for either Saylor or Souza (or Puntillo) that I did for Asmundson–even though they all share similar views on the issue I referred to. That alone should put the notion that I called her disconnected merely because I disagree with her.
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue. She appeared to have no idea not only of what was going on, but of what the issues were. I can try to put together some video to show that, but it will take some doing on my part.
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue.
Doug,
You very well may be right: that Ruth was uninformed on that issue, and that she was “out of touch” with what some in the community felt about the police. (However, I recall a number of people speaking out on this particular issue during public comments at council meetings, so she at least had to have heard what was being said. She very well just may have had a different read on their complaints.)
Nonetheless, my point that Ruth is generally not disconnected (or is relatively well connected compared with most people, including myself) related not to anything you posted in the original blog or in your comments above, but specifically I was referring to an anonymous poster who said “they (meaning the council majority) are so disconnected from the community.”
—
FWIW, I had a nice telephone converstation with Lamar Heystek tonight. He’s a very pleasant person, which is always helpful for an elected official (or for most occupations, I suppose).
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue.
Doug,
You very well may be right: that Ruth was uninformed on that issue, and that she was “out of touch” with what some in the community felt about the police. (However, I recall a number of people speaking out on this particular issue during public comments at council meetings, so she at least had to have heard what was being said. She very well just may have had a different read on their complaints.)
Nonetheless, my point that Ruth is generally not disconnected (or is relatively well connected compared with most people, including myself) related not to anything you posted in the original blog or in your comments above, but specifically I was referring to an anonymous poster who said “they (meaning the council majority) are so disconnected from the community.”
—
FWIW, I had a nice telephone converstation with Lamar Heystek tonight. He’s a very pleasant person, which is always helpful for an elected official (or for most occupations, I suppose).
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue.
Doug,
You very well may be right: that Ruth was uninformed on that issue, and that she was “out of touch” with what some in the community felt about the police. (However, I recall a number of people speaking out on this particular issue during public comments at council meetings, so she at least had to have heard what was being said. She very well just may have had a different read on their complaints.)
Nonetheless, my point that Ruth is generally not disconnected (or is relatively well connected compared with most people, including myself) related not to anything you posted in the original blog or in your comments above, but specifically I was referring to an anonymous poster who said “they (meaning the council majority) are so disconnected from the community.”
—
FWIW, I had a nice telephone converstation with Lamar Heystek tonight. He’s a very pleasant person, which is always helpful for an elected official (or for most occupations, I suppose).
Rather, I call her disconnected because of the things she said in response to the police issue.
Doug,
You very well may be right: that Ruth was uninformed on that issue, and that she was “out of touch” with what some in the community felt about the police. (However, I recall a number of people speaking out on this particular issue during public comments at council meetings, so she at least had to have heard what was being said. She very well just may have had a different read on their complaints.)
Nonetheless, my point that Ruth is generally not disconnected (or is relatively well connected compared with most people, including myself) related not to anything you posted in the original blog or in your comments above, but specifically I was referring to an anonymous poster who said “they (meaning the council majority) are so disconnected from the community.”
—
FWIW, I had a nice telephone converstation with Lamar Heystek tonight. He’s a very pleasant person, which is always helpful for an elected official (or for most occupations, I suppose).
Running on her record, Ruth Asmundson won the mayor pro tem seat just barely by beating out Lamar Heystek by about 100 votes. This was a resounding rebuke of her record of peformance. I would wager that she would not be sitting on the council dais today if our last election had been a choice voting model. Asmundson received about 25% of the vote, mainly from her uncritical, lifelong Davis “connections” but would probably have fallen out of the running if 1st and 2nd choices were accumulated to receive the required
% of the vote.
Running on her record, Ruth Asmundson won the mayor pro tem seat just barely by beating out Lamar Heystek by about 100 votes. This was a resounding rebuke of her record of peformance. I would wager that she would not be sitting on the council dais today if our last election had been a choice voting model. Asmundson received about 25% of the vote, mainly from her uncritical, lifelong Davis “connections” but would probably have fallen out of the running if 1st and 2nd choices were accumulated to receive the required
% of the vote.
Running on her record, Ruth Asmundson won the mayor pro tem seat just barely by beating out Lamar Heystek by about 100 votes. This was a resounding rebuke of her record of peformance. I would wager that she would not be sitting on the council dais today if our last election had been a choice voting model. Asmundson received about 25% of the vote, mainly from her uncritical, lifelong Davis “connections” but would probably have fallen out of the running if 1st and 2nd choices were accumulated to receive the required
% of the vote.
Running on her record, Ruth Asmundson won the mayor pro tem seat just barely by beating out Lamar Heystek by about 100 votes. This was a resounding rebuke of her record of peformance. I would wager that she would not be sitting on the council dais today if our last election had been a choice voting model. Asmundson received about 25% of the vote, mainly from her uncritical, lifelong Davis “connections” but would probably have fallen out of the running if 1st and 2nd choices were accumulated to receive the required
% of the vote.
i’m not sure that choice voting would give us very different results, because i’m not confident that we know enough about the decision process of those who vote for a given candidate. city politics is more ambiguous than it appears in the letters to the editor section of the enterprise.
i’m not sure that choice voting would give us very different results, because i’m not confident that we know enough about the decision process of those who vote for a given candidate. city politics is more ambiguous than it appears in the letters to the editor section of the enterprise.
i’m not sure that choice voting would give us very different results, because i’m not confident that we know enough about the decision process of those who vote for a given candidate. city politics is more ambiguous than it appears in the letters to the editor section of the enterprise.
i’m not sure that choice voting would give us very different results, because i’m not confident that we know enough about the decision process of those who vote for a given candidate. city politics is more ambiguous than it appears in the letters to the editor section of the enterprise.
??-wu-ming- My observations are not based upon letters to the editor. I was out knocking on doors during the last council election and the disenchantment with Ruth Asmundson was palpable. It is indisputable that the % of the vote that she received for her reelection dropped drastically from a majority of the Davis voters to around 1/4. These disenchanted former supporters would not have voted for her as their second choice in a choice voting model.
??-wu-ming- My observations are not based upon letters to the editor. I was out knocking on doors during the last council election and the disenchantment with Ruth Asmundson was palpable. It is indisputable that the % of the vote that she received for her reelection dropped drastically from a majority of the Davis voters to around 1/4. These disenchanted former supporters would not have voted for her as their second choice in a choice voting model.
??-wu-ming- My observations are not based upon letters to the editor. I was out knocking on doors during the last council election and the disenchantment with Ruth Asmundson was palpable. It is indisputable that the % of the vote that she received for her reelection dropped drastically from a majority of the Davis voters to around 1/4. These disenchanted former supporters would not have voted for her as their second choice in a choice voting model.
??-wu-ming- My observations are not based upon letters to the editor. I was out knocking on doors during the last council election and the disenchantment with Ruth Asmundson was palpable. It is indisputable that the % of the vote that she received for her reelection dropped drastically from a majority of the Davis voters to around 1/4. These disenchanted former supporters would not have voted for her as their second choice in a choice voting model.
I have the same take as Davisite on Ruth’s popularity during the last election. There is speculation that she might not have won at all without the police issue being utilized as a wedge. Furthermore, I think her subsequent pushing of the Target issue has trimmed off some of the small business people who had supported her last time.
I have the same take as Davisite on Ruth’s popularity during the last election. There is speculation that she might not have won at all without the police issue being utilized as a wedge. Furthermore, I think her subsequent pushing of the Target issue has trimmed off some of the small business people who had supported her last time.
I have the same take as Davisite on Ruth’s popularity during the last election. There is speculation that she might not have won at all without the police issue being utilized as a wedge. Furthermore, I think her subsequent pushing of the Target issue has trimmed off some of the small business people who had supported her last time.
I have the same take as Davisite on Ruth’s popularity during the last election. There is speculation that she might not have won at all without the police issue being utilized as a wedge. Furthermore, I think her subsequent pushing of the Target issue has trimmed off some of the small business people who had supported her last time.