It was a decision that was not automatic for First Term County Supervisor Matt Rexroad. In fact, there was a point where it seemed a good possibility that he would not run for re-election. He had told me that he could always run for Supervisor but his kids wouldn’t always be young. As he wrote in his blog on Saturday:“I had pretty much decided that I was not going to run for re-election to the Board of Supervisors. My family and business commitments were calling.”
“The thing is that I have a very different view of the county fiscal situation than all four of my fellow Supervisors… I am given the opportunity to state my view regarding how we should handle the budget — and I do my best to do that.”
Reflecting on his first term, he told the Vanguard:
“My biggest disappointment to date has to do with the budget this year. The Board of Supervisors has not stepped up to make the reductions that were needed at the end of 2008. We will pay for that during the next fiscal year.”
He believes that he has accomplished a number of key goals during his term. Among them include bringing Clark Pacific to Woodland, establishing and maintaining a good relationship with the Woodland City Council and other boards, pushing for Gibson House Museum improvements, pledging ongoing support of Wayfarer Center, promoting more open government, starting to address the flooding issues in Woodland, and sponsoring the backpacks for kids programs.
It is the latter work that I think in many ways typifies Mr. Rexroad’s first term, working hard on behalf of a number of charitable efforts throughout the county.
There is much still that he wants to accomplish.
“We have some big issues facing Woodland like the Yolo County General Plan, Courthouse construction, Woodland-Davis bike path, Gibson Mansion sustainability, Woodland annexation issues, re-entry facility, surface water supply for Woodland/Davis, Wayfarer Center issues, and Backpacks for Kids. On these issues and a couple others I can help Woodland tremendously.”
A big issue that both he and Davis have joined up on is the Woodland-Davis bike path. It was just last year when a cyclist was killed biking on a county road early in the morning on the way to work. It has been a long process, but one that will eventually make a difference to a number of local residents who regularly bike between the two cities, and for those who would do so more frequently if the route was safer.
Mr. Rexroad writes:
“I am going to seek another term and plan to vigorously defend my record and activities as a member of the Board of Supervisors. I will work hard and am committed to being re-elected. I will walk precincts, raise the money, and do the work necessary to give me a good chance. If the people of Woodland choose to send me into the game for another four years then I am up for it.”
Commentary
At the time, I criticized the Enterprise’s endorsement as another along the same lines of pro-development conservative candidates.
The Enterprise had written:
“We’re disappointed in the partisan politics that have been injected into this race. Sure, Rexroad is a Republican but he enjoys broad support from both Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals. We respect him for his intellect, his abilities and his leadership.”
I went on to argue that there is no such thing as a non-partisan race and cited the Republican strategy of using local government as a means by which to develop a farm system. And while I still believe in the generic what I wrote that day, I underestimated the person that Matt Rexroad is.
The first time I met Matt Rexroad, a few weeks later at Crepeville, I told him he would probably learn to hate me. It now seems that this did not occur.
I probably disagree with Matt Rexroad on more things than I agree with him on. In fact, I suspect it is not all that close.
From my standpoint, I disagree with him most on his stance on the Madison Prison largely against the wishes of that community. But perhaps for different reasons than one might ordinarily think. You see one of the things that I have respected the most about Mr. Rexroad is that his view is that local communities should get to decide for themselves on issues of growth and development.
And so as Davis’ own Supervisors back in the summer of 2007 were pushing for county-initiated peripheral growth, Matt Rexroad stood in opposition to it, recognizing that the people of Davis did not want that growth. Just as he did not want Davis Supervisors to tell Woodland how and when to grow, so to did he not want to tell Davis as a Woodland supervisor how to grow.
While Matt Rexroad believes he has been on the short end of a number of 4-1 votes, and he likely has, the board of Supervisors is no monolith. There are times it comes down to the Democrats and the Republicans, were Mr. Rexroad and Duane Chamberlain end up on the short-end of the stick. I certainly disagreed with Mr. Rexroad on social issues like medical marijuana and the needle exchange.
On the other hand, unlike a lot of Republicans, Mr. Rexroad does see the need for preserving the kind of county services that are vital to support local people in need. He has generally supported the preservation of farmland even as he pushes for growth in other areas. And despite his reputation in places like Davis, many of his Republican colleagues would consider him more of moderate and a maverick.
With Mr. Rexroad, I have drawn common cause on issues such as open government. When pushing for things like the better preservation and openness of public records, I went to Mr. Rexroad first even before my own Supervisor.
And while it is easy for Mr. Rexroad to be placed into the pro-growth category, that position is not so simple with him. Some criticize his advocacy of the urban limit line in Woodland as placing that line out too far, and yet he made the motion to take the special planning areas off the table for Davis. From the perspective of Davis, it was the relatively conservative Supervisors who led the way in opposition to that push during the county general plan talk, not the liberal supervisors representing Davis.
From Davis’ perspective that was the most important issue that we faced during this period from 2007 to 2009 that Matt Rexroad has served on the board of Supervisors and he was on our side.
When Mr. Rexroad unveils his list of supporters in the coming weeks, it will include people on both the left in Yolo County political life and people on the right. And by people on the left, I am not just simply talking about the developer Democrats who have no problem supporting someone like a Jeff Reisig. I mean real, true, progressive Democrats. I will leave it to Mr. Rexroad to release the list in his due course.
I fully expect Mr. Rexroad to be attacked by many on this page, as does he. The question at this point is whether he will draw a credible opposition. Speculation right now focuses on former candidate Brenda Cedarblade and Woodland Councilmember and Deputy Sheriff Jeff Monroe.
Meanwhile Davis awaits an announcement by their own Supervisor Helen Thomson as to whether she intends to seek a third term or whether she will retire after her term expires and open things up for among others perhaps Don Saylor to run for the Supervisor seat. If that happens, then we are in for a wild ride.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
“republican” and “democrat” are as useful in describing a person’s politics as “left-handed” and “right-handed” are in describing their sex…
Politically, I think that Supervisor Rexroad and I would disagree on a huge list of items that don’t matter. He is a Supervisor, and where his job relates to Davis, he has done well for us.
Nice article, well done.
I am a Democrat and if I lived in Rexroad’s district I would vote for him. We certainly do not agree on a lot of issues, but he has done a better job than many of the pseudo Democrats we have preserving open space.
Good luck on your re-election campaign Matt Rexroad.
Matt Hart says:
“He is a Supervisor, and where his job relates to Davis, he has done well for us.”
Rexroad is an ambitious career politician with a day-job as a REPUBLICAN political consultant. It costs him NOTHING politically to spout rhetorical support for Davis issues from his seat as a Woodland Supervisor. “Wanting to spend more time with the family and business commitments” is a standard political pubic explanation; he has apparently decided that it is best for his political career to remain in the public eye rather than retreat into the political wilderness during these difficult times. DPD’s one line disclaimer,” I probably disagree with Rexroad on more issues than I agree with him on” when measured against the flood of praise in this commentary is indicative of the political “love-fest” that Rexroad enjoys in the Vanguard.
“the political “love-fest” that Rexroad enjoys in the Vanguard”
And to what do you attribute that “love-fest”? After all, by itself who cares if he enjoys a love-fest unless it actually means something?
If we had more Republicans like Matt Rexroad in office California would not be so messed up. As a Supervisor he has served as a manager instead of an ideologue, we are lucky to have him.
He is also a professional politician and a great campaigner, nobody can shake hands or hug a baby as well as Matt.
“He is also a professional politician and a great campaigner, nobody can shake hands or hug a baby as well as Matt.”
That bodes well for his future in the state legislature. Nobody can shake a baby or hug a hand as well as Mariko.
There are a lot of issues that are not Republican/Democrat, Growth/No Growth. I don’t see the pro-developer stuff as being a left right issue. It is an issue of smart planning.
I voted against covell village because it would gut the towns finances. This is not a left/right debate. Will it cost the city or won’t it? It is an issue of Mathematics. However, I support measure K because we need retail in a big way more than ever. I don’t see myself as a liberal because I oppose covell village, but support Target. I see myself as a person who thinks through the issues and votes.
Sometimes taxes need to be cut. Sometimes they don’t.
I’m not sure If I support Rexroad. I don’t agree with his support of hemp growing within the community to take care of the finances. That garbage is illegal. I thought that move was in poor taste.
However, I do agree with his opposition for “medical” marijuana because “medical” marijuana is the opening drug legalizers are looking for to get drugs legalized. But that is another issue.
I also don’t agree with his support for the prison in Yolo.
I don’t care what party he is from.
I just wanted to add another comment on the medical marijuana. First it will be medical marijuana. Next it will be “medical” crack, “medical” cocaine, and “medical” PCP
“First it will be medical marijuana. Next it will be “medical” crack, “medical” cocaine, and “medical” PCP”
Doubt it.
The hypocrisy isn’t in Rexroad, it’s in the Greenwalds’ supposed social liberalism joined with the conservative ideas of no-growth. This is the crux of the Progressive Regressive movement.
Hasn’t a large portion of the progressive movement always focused on limiting development of farmland and open space, environmental and habitat protection, etc. How is that hypocritical? What’s the hypocrisy?
[i]”I just wanted to add another comment on the medical marijuana. First it will be medical marijuana. Next it will be “medical” crack, “medical” cocaine, and “medical” PCP”[/i]
Medical cocaine ([url]http://www.umm.edu/altmed/drugs/cocaine-031500.htm[/url]) is used in dentistry as a topical anesthetic. Pharmacologically, there is no greater reason to fear cocaine than novacaine, benzocaine or any other -caine. If you want to outlaw medical cocaine, you should get a root canal without any anesthetic.
It is also the case that PCP was used developed for medical use ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phencyclidine#History_and_medicinal_use[/url]), also as an anesthetic. However, because of its bad side effects, it has not been prescribed since 1965 for people and since about 1970 for animals.
Although I don’t take or smoke any drugs and rarely drink alcohol, I’m interested to know where in “life, liberty and the pursuit of hapiness” the government has the right to prohibit an adult from, for example, growing a marijuana plant in his garden and smoking the buds of it in his home? It seems to me that if you think the government has the right to use violence to stop a free adult from growing a bush in his backyard, you really don’t want to live in a free country.
Not sure how a Rexroad thread morphs into a medical marijuana thread, but I don’t see where the push is going to come from for medical cocaine. One of the reasons that medical marijuana is appealing is that it is a relatively inert way to relieve painful suffering while stimulating appetite in cancer patients. Considering the alternative is powerful narcotics like morphine (far more powerful than marijuana and yet legal), I don’t see why one would have such a visceral reaction to marijuana.
I don’t know what cocaine would do that other legal drugs can’t. And as Rich said, PCP has bad side effects and again the marginal benefits seem lacking given better and safer alternatives.
So I’d be curious (hence my name) why the reaction by Caine, where his concern comes from, and whether he really understands this issue on more than just a knee-jerk level.
“I just wanted to add another comment on the medical marijuana. First it will be medical marijuana. Next it will be “medical” crack, “medical” cocaine, and “medical” PCP”
Medical cocaine is used in dentistry as a topical anesthetic. Pharmacologically, there is no greater reason to fear cocaine than novacaine, benzocaine or any other -caine. If you want to outlaw medical cocaine, you should get a root canal without any anesthetic.
It is also the case that PCP was used developed for medical use, also as an anesthetic. However, because of its bad side effects, it has not been prescribed since 1965 for people and since about 1970 for animals.
Although I don’t take or smoke any drugs and rarely drink alcohol, I’m interested to know where in “life, liberty and the pursuit of hapiness” the government has the right to prohibit an adult from, for example, growing a marijuana plant in his garden and smoking the buds of it in his home? It seems to me that if you think the government has the right to use violence to stop a free adult from growing a bush in his backyard, you really don’t want to live in a free country.
Your first two points are interesting about the use of cocaine and PCP. However, there is a difference between putting those items in a concentrated prescription drug vs. letting someone grow weed in his weeds only to grow and sell them to other addicts.
Your attack on my concept of a free country? I am in favor of a free country. I am not in favor of mob rule where anything and everything goes like you are. There is a difference. A free country has rules in it. There is a balance between order and freedom in any country including this one. Our founding fathers made a radical proposal to secede from England with freedom in mind, but they didn’t live in the time of Osama bin Laden, where you must close your society a little to prevent it from being destroyed from within by terrorists armed with potentially nuclear weapons. (I know I am going on a bit of a tangent)
Furthermore, Marijuana is a gateway drug, linked to hard narcotics which are not over the counter like you described earlier. Those drugs are linked to crime. Where those drugs go, crime follows and affects the general safety of the public. You are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness so long as that pursuit doesn’t infringe on the pursuit of happiness of others. So I don’t think it’s fair to just write it off as “its my own business-what’s the big deal?”
God bless you and have a nice day.
[i]”I am not in favor of mob rule where anything and everything goes like you are.”[/i]
I’m for rules. I’m for the Constitution. The Constitution is supposed to limit the intrusion of government into people’s lives; and moreover, the powers of government are strictly prohibited in order that free people can pursue happiness as they see fit.
[i]”A free country has rules in it. There is a balance between order and freedom in any country including this one.”[/i]
How does an individual’s choice to grow a cannibus bush in his backyard threaten disorder?
[i]”Our founding fathers made a radical proposal to secede from England with freedom in mind, but they didn’t live in the time of Osama bin Laden, where you must close your society a little to prevent it from being destroyed from within by terrorists armed with potentially nuclear weapons.”[/i]
“He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.” — Ben Franklin ([url]http://www.kevincraig.us/tempsec.htm[/url])
[i]Furthermore, Marijuana is a gateway drug, linked to hard narcotics which are not over the counter like you described earlier. Those drugs are linked to crime.”[/i]
Therefore, if you legalized marijuana, you would de-link it from crime and criminals and harder drugs.
[i]”You are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness so long as that pursuit doesn’t infringe on the pursuit of happiness of others.”[/i]
If an adult chooses to smoke pot in the privacy of his home, he does not infringe on anyone else’s rights. If the government makes that illegal, his rights are being denied.
I’m for rules. I’m for the Constitution. The Constitution is supposed to limit the intrusion of government into people’s lives; and moreover, the powers of government are strictly prohibited in order that free people can pursue happiness as they see fit.
If you take that argument to its extreme, there should be no laws whatsoever because they infringe on peoples absolute freedom.
“He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.” — Ben Franklin
And Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus to preserve the nation in a time of crisis. Actually, I find it amusing when the people who bitch about Bush for taking away civil liberties which is nothing more than monitoring internet traffic for terrorist type phrases put Lincoln on a pedestal.
If you take BF’s argument to the extreme, then we should not have laws whatsoever, and I doubt even BF would agree with that.
Your quoting of BF goes exactly to the point I just made. These people lived in a time where England ruled the colonists with an iron fist, hence BF’s assertion. The situation has changed dramatically since then, and these people might have a change of opinion if they had lived now. As I stated, terrorism feeds on government instability and the absence of order.
If an adult chooses to smoke pot in the privacy of his home, he does not infringe on anyone else’s rights. If the government makes that illegal, his rights are being denied.
Wrong. A parent that is stoned on dope neglects his/her children. Child neglect is not legal.
Therefore, if you legalized marijuana, you would de-link it from crime and criminals and harder drugs.
so the saying goes. People who are stoned on dope get addicted to harder drugs and commit crimes to feed their habit.
Furthermore, criminal activity is often in places where drugs including marijuana and prostitution are.
god bless
Caine-607, I absolutely agree w you on every point! I’m not crazy about Rexroad, but he is better than a lot of politicians. Medical marijuana has been a disastrous experiment, in which “medical pot shops” have turned out to be nothing but drug havens for those who are not sick. The worst legislation we ever passed was to legalize the medical use of marijuana.
And I took the same positions on Covell Village and Target as you, Caine, and for the same reasons. I do not consider myself a Democrat or Republican – can’t stand either party. I consider myself an Independent, altho I am a registered Republican to make sure my vote counts in the primaries.
More propaganda from Rexroad. His family is less important than his ego.
Rexroad wants the public to believe that he’s different and that we need him. With no specific details the traveling snake oil salesman, abandons his family to feed his own selfish desires.
Rexroad joined supervisor’s Helen Thomson, Duane Chamberlain, Mc Gowan, Seifer and now assemblywomen, Mariko Yamada, in obstructing CV06-581 against now Sacramento probation chief, Don Meyer, for conspiracy and obstruction on felony foster abuse allegations.
Rexroad acts the same as the rest and ignored the 2002 judicial council model that revamped the county(s) and court(s) shared liability of a California chief probation officer.
Rexroad will now use the elected positions special powers to obstruct GC 27641 complaint(s) filed (09/10/09) against council Robyn Truitt Drivon and Judge Steve Basha, as the bread crumbs lead to the supervisor’s, the court and the dirty DA Reisig.
Rexroad go back to your kids and business, for god’s sake.