by Jack Lee
This is from Chico City Councilman Scott Gruendl’s website: “Tuesday, September 7, 2010 – CHICO – Several local members of the tea party, under the leadership of council candidate Bob Kromer and his Treasurer Stephanie Taber crashed a Chico City Council meeting.
Truth: The several local members he refers too were 53 people. They were a mix of concerned citizens and Tea Party people who are also concerned citizens.
Truth: They were not under the leadership of Bob Kromer! I wouldn’t mind if he had organized it, but he didn’t. Bob Kromer had nothing to do with it, he was just there and gave a shot opinion on pending legislation. The protest event was organized by a very nice lady by name of Karen Zinniel who also did a television interview and she listed herself as the origanizer on TV …guess Gruendl doesn’t watch the news? Karen has never ventured into politics before and she was really nervous and put in a lot of time and effort, but I though she did a wonderful job of planning and getting the message out.
Gruendl continues…. Taber, the filer of the petition to move the election to June, which according to the survey from Concerned Citizens of Chico, asked residents if they would move the election when students are out of town.
Tea partiers said at the council meeting that people needed to stop spreading misinformation about their purpose: “to increase voter participation.”
Truth: What Tea Party? I was there and I go to Tea Party meetings, this was not an official Tea Party event. It is true they donated some help in getting the word out, but so what? So did a lot of people.
Gruendl said, “One partier even stated that the council’s approval of a first ever historical preservation ordinance was an afront on private property rights that her father went to war to protect. This even though the ordinance makes local building rules more flexible for those with historical structures and was created to merely help stop the demolition of a historic structure. A main Tea Party member, Karen Zinniel used business from the floor to threaten council that the partiers would do everything in their power to control the next three open seats on the council.
Truth: OMG…no Karen didn’t! I couldn’t stay beyond 8 p.m., but I never heard her say anything close to that.
Gruendl….”Throughout the meeting, the partiers held up paper plates on paint sticks with frowning faces on them. These plates seemed to represent anger towards government and a general hate for liberals. It is a sad day when people in our community feel they have to communicate this way and use the constitution to justify their own misguided ways. I have grave concerns for the future of our country when people use patriotism as an excuse to avoid change. After all, its innovation that makes our country work.”
Truth: The people protesting were not protesting change – they were angry about the council spending the city into a hole. This was about boondoggles, costly lawsuits and in general wasted money.
This was an exercise in free speech and it was about time. I hope Chicoans vote out Scott Gruendl, he’s one of the biggest problems on the city council.
Truth?
I read Stephanie Taber’s letter about how council races are supposed to be non-partisan.
A few hours later I saw she and her candidate at partisan headquarters.
Are these TEA baggerz even CAPABLE of telling the truth?
Do they know what truth is?
Are you sure?
I saw Ms. Zinniel on television. It was obvioulsy an attempt at some TV time, as the council has not taken a position and have not spread ANY information about moving the election. She did threaten.
That’s fine.
For the record. Ms. Taber is a liar–and I am HAPPY to put that in print! The reason they are trying to move the election is to keep the students from voting. You can put lipstick on that pig and give any reasons that help you sleep at night.. The truth is the baggerz want to disenfranchise the students!
Don’t you find it odd that the “conservative” news organ of your community expends virtually no coverage on the doings of your city council?
The CN&R reported on the frowny faces at the meeting, though.
They too reported that by the time Karen had her say, most of the frowny faces had gone home.
I do not agree at all with Mr.Colgan, The students will still be able to vote absentee, provided they are interested enough in Chico to do so. I feel the Liberal bash/spin of disenfranchisement on this subject may be that their candidates, which depend on these young fluid groups who respond well to Liberal motivation, then are guided to the polls for a guaranteed vote.
What I believe is that a voting block of temporary students are more important to the Liberal politicians needs then the actual needs of the community of voters who settled in Chico, provide it’s foundation and live here 365 a year.
Remember the last election? The Hooker Oak Alliance sent out a mailer with a picture of a little boy wanting to fly his kite on Bidwell Ranch. He couldn’t because it was fenced. The mailer was a comment on the City Council’s policy of not allowing the public to use public property. The kite just happened to have a rainbow on it. The HOA was then accused of promoting an anti-gay agenda because a rainbow is an emblem of gay rights and Mr. Gruendl happens to be gay. This was a complete lie. How do I know? I was in every meeting where the mailers were discussed. The kite was just a kite. It was the only one that was available when the picture was taken. There was never any consideration at all of the fact that Mr. Gruendl is gay in any of the meetings. Prior to this Mr. Gruendl had met with the HOA and was interviewed to determine if he would be supported by the HOA. Mr. Gruendl knew all the people in the HOA. He also knew that the mailer had nothing to do with him being gay. He had the opportunity to stop this lie very early on but I guess he saw that it could help him in his race for City Council so he supported the lie in a radio interview. Why would we expect that he would change his tactics now and stick to the truth? It’s all about getting reelected and not about the truth. By the way, the HOA supported 3 candidates during that election. Mr. Gruendl almost made the #3 position. He didn’t because we felt the platform he was running on would cost way too much money. That was the only reason he was not selected. Take a look at the city finances and the financial hole the council has put the city. Looks like the HOA was right!
For an argument based on survey data, it is surprising that no one has looked at the county voting data. Outside of Obama, student turnout is low (17%) and the vote is fairly split for democrats (55) and republicans (45).
It is a silly idea, sure to backfire.
And it is not moving the elections back to June. They use to be in April. Don’t those people remember the April Committee, or did they just move here?
Mark I don’t know what county data you are using. In Chico 10,000 new voters arrived in Chico before the 2008 election and 90% of them voted. Who can tell if they are students or cares? This is about returning the decision of who will represent us on the city council to people that have lived here more than a few months. People that have invested their lives in Chico are sick of having their votes over ridden by people that don’t even stay in Chico long enough to vote in the June County elections.
The new Chico General Plan until the year 2030 is being written and voted on by a city council elected by people who haven’t been here long enough to know what is in it or have already left Chico forever.
County voting data can be broken down by precinct. So, if you know where students live, you can tell if they have voted. It is not real tough.
Do people who move here in March get to vote in June?
Jack, You quoted Gruendl’s webpage: “Several local members of the tea party, under the leadership of council candidate Bob Kromer and his Treasurer Stephanie Taber crashed a Chico City Council meeting.”
Are these council meetings held in secret or closed to the public?
If not, what business is it of his if citizens come to a meeting for any purpose and by what right does he treat them with such arrogance and disrespect? Is he not a public SERVANT?
This alone should be enough to earn no votes for Mr. Gruendl.
“….Throughout the meeting, the partiers held up paper plates on paint sticks with frowning faces on them. These plates seemed to represent anger towards government and a general hate for liberals. It is a sad day when people in our community feel they have to communicate this way and use the constitution to justify their own misguided ways. I have grave concerns for the future of our country when people use patriotism as an excuse to avoid change. After all, its innovation that makes our country work.”
How dare they object to a liberal’s idea of innovation…and with scarey frowning paper plates!
Whether Gruendl agrees with what these citizens had to say or not he owes them common courtesy as a representative.
Tina this was an open meeting and the people were concerned citizens expressing the most fundamental right (and obligation) under our system of government we have. Gruendl is an elitist…his reply to them was disgraceful and it will cost him votes. I am very pleased he had made his views so public, it’s a great help to removing him from office.
Mark,
Every one gets to vote in June just the same as Nov and there is the same amount of registered voters in June as Nov. No one is preventing anyone from voting.
County voting date is broken down by registration date, precinct and voters age. Still you cannot assume voters between the age of 18 and 24 are students. Many students are older. You cannot assume that every voter that lives near the college is a student. That said voters in 2008 voters that registered at the same time the students come into town in the precincts where the most of the students live between the ages of 18 to 24 turned out at 76% and were split 62% democratic, 17% DTS and 15% republican. Those precincts counting only the newly arrived voters provided the liberal candidates a 2,000 vote victory margin in a race where the top vote getter beat the 5th place also-ran by 1,588 votes. Without those newly arrived voters the votes from people that have lived in Chico more than a few months changes the top to also-ran order to Wahl, Sorensen, Walker, Holcombe and Schwab. Of course they did get here in time to vote knowing almost nothing about Chico issues and 2,400 of tier vote by mail ballots were returned from those precincts “no longer at this address” this June. One might speculate from the statistics that the residents of Chico are voting for a more balanced city council and having their votes over ridden by people new to Butte County that just moved into the area where students live.
Please re-read my first post:
Outside of Obama (2008) . . .
Since you seem to have access to some level of data, do you mind telling us the numbers in 2006? 2004? 2002?
I don’t have the time to run data for all those years. Of hand in 2000 they they held a voter registration drive on campus registering 7,200 voter that turned out at 82%. Without those precincts the finish order would have been Bertagna, Nguyen-tan[a jerk and a joke that cost us tens of millions of dollars extra for the HRBD],Wahl and Wolfe with Jarvis the also ran.
I am on the other side of the fence, and I can tell you I get berated by my friends every election. They do have detailed access to the data and they tell me, over and over again, how poorly the students turned out.
Obama was different. Gore/Nader might have been as well.
There is a healthy debate right now whether prop 19 will bring out the students. I am not convinced. I think it is more likely that climate change will bring them out now that Prop23/AB 32 is the campus “Great Debate.” We will see.
Maybe the petition will be enough to wake the sleeping giant. Keep yelling. Please.
Mark, it may surprise you to know that I am mostly indifferent to changing the election day. Its just not that big a thing to me. Granted, there may have been one or two times when the student vote made an adverse difference upon the community. But, I tend to believe that overall students don’t matter that much. They are apathetic and mostly oblivious to issues and simply dont bother voting.
That being said, I do recognize that the judgment and life experience of someone 18-24 is one heck of a lot different than say someone over the age of 40. And most of our property ownership, business owners and job providers are over the age of 40. They have a vested interest in our community. I want to protect the integrity of their vote from being usurped by itenerate voters with little or no accountability.
If we’re risking then I think that is less than prudent. But, if we can save some tax dollars by changing the election date and improve the turnout and the quality of our vote, then why not do it?
Bottom line: Nobody is being deprived of a vote if we do change the date and at the very worst some people might have to vote absentee. Big deal.
“And most of our property ownership, business owners and job providers are over the age of 40.”
Why does this statement matter when we are discussing voting?
Are you saying some are more equal than others?
I agree, no one is being deprived of a vote, but I openly question the motives of the people pushing the initiative, with comment like “to protect the integrity of their vote from being usurped by itinerate voters with little or no accountability.”
Who are you talking about?
The argument could cut both ways. I could argue that people over 65 can’t vote on Prop 23/AB 32 because they will be dead soon, and thus are “itinerate voters with little or no accountability” for the effects of climate change.
Mark: Numerically all votes are equal and thats our system and I must respect that.
However, the quality of the voter is not at all equal and you know it. You could have some people casting a thoughtless NO vote against your deeply researched vote on say ….global warming, how would you like that? Here, you have studied and invested hundreds of hours into this subject and here comes Joe Sixpack. He heard Rush say vote NO on your pet environmental law and so he did and it cancelled out your vote!!!! Tell me Mark…would that tick you off? Would you not feel your vote is a better quality vote than Joe Sixpack because it is an informed vote? Sure you would and thats all I am saying.
But, the reality is we count numbers, not quality…and their goes your environment and the planet!
Numerical voting…its not what Hamilton wanted is it and he was a pretty smart founding father, right? And the older and wiser I get the more I understand where he was coming from! : )
Personally I don’t think everyone should be voting and I’m glad they don’t. I think only those people that have demonstrated a remedial comprehension of the issues should be able to enter the voting booth. I hate it when democrats raid the rest homes and “help” alzhiemer patients fill out their absentee voting card.
If I were King I would demand some sort of a pre-test coupled to an ID check to be done at the polling place before they can vote. Not sure how I would handle absentee votes, but there must be some way of knowing that the dead, illegals or mental patients are not casting votes.
Bet the liberal demoncrats would hate quality checking, huh? lol
Jack, I have always believed in the old adage that “If God had meant us to vote, He would have given us candidates.”
A good reply to a problem we voters all have in common.