The respective pre-filing deadline shows-of-strength by the campaigns of long-time conservative activist Jim Righeimer and Gardne Grove Councilwoman Janet Nguyen continues [full disclosure: I’m supporting Jim].

I just received a press release from the Nguyen campaign announcing endorsements by Assemblywomen Sharon Runner and Audra Strickland.

The contact name on the press release is Kevin Spillane, which answers the question of who her consultant is.

UPDATE: I received this e-mail from Kevin Spillane:

Matt Rexroad (pictured to the left) is someone that I hold in high regard. I’ve known Matt for over a decade. His political acumen is pretty sharp. He is a friend. I thought a recent commentary that he wrote was very interesting.

Former Assemblyman Howard Kaloogian is one of the ten thousand Republicans vying to replace the disgraced Randy ‘Duke’ Cunningham in Congress. At his firm’s Cal Races website, Rexroad says:

Orange County’s Coastal State Senate 35th District is in the midst of a Special Election. There are two candidates vying for the open seat, vacated when the incumbent, John Campbell, was elected in a special election to Congress.

Since the beginning of the year, the momentum in the race has all been for Dana Point Councilwoman Diane Harkey (you can click her ad on this site to find out more about her). Her opponent, Assemblyman Tom Harmon has been relatively quiet, though presumably his name identification from having represented a good chunk of this district would be pretty high.

Harkey, who is quite affluent herself, has been raising money and putting out mail pieces the old fashioned way – where the campaign produces and mails them out.

Harmon, who has less cash-on-hand is resorting to what is probably legal but a shady practice — pumping out taxpayer-paid-for mail right in the midst of a special election (see the attachment).

I think that this will backfire on Harmon, who can’t campaign as a conservative Republican in a closely-watched primary while using confiscated tax dollars to fund his campaign. California… Read More

JESSICA’ LAW PROPONENTS TURN IN SIGNATURES Consultant and FR Friend released the news today that legilslative dynamic duo George and Sharon Runner today turned in over 600,000 signatures to qualify the tough-on-sexual-predator Jessica’s Law measure for the ballot.

Assemblywoman Runner had this to say:

"California families have waited too long for this day to come. I lookforward to November when Californians will vote to make our neighborhoodssafer for our children and grandchildren. It is unfortunate our Legislature refused to act on Jessica’s Law, but the people have a history of showinggreat aptitude to act when the Legislature refuses good public policy. The yare doing just that by qualifying the Jessica’s Law initiative."

IS DR. PHIL OUT OF THE RACE?… Read More

Environmentalists exhibit a pattern of saying pretty much anything in order to achieve their objective, whether true or not.

My favorite topic, the 241 tollway extension in Orange County, is a good example.

The enviros are fond of calling it a "private road." They think it is horrible to build any kind of road on state parkland, but to their collective sensibility it is even more offensive to build a private road. My guess is they’re trying to incite the general public with the suggestion that corrupt taxpayer susbsidies are being given to a greedy private toll road operator.

For example, a fellow named Jack Eidt – the director of a group called the Wildlife Heritage Planners — penned a letter to the editor of the Orange County Register last month opposing (surprise) the completion of the 241. In it, he stated:

My beautiful wife opened our utility bill from the City of Orange a couple of days ago, and found this inside:

I imagine these Measure M promotional pieces are accompanying municipal utility bills all over Orange County (I’ve attached a larger version at the bottom).

For those who don’t know, Measure M is Orange County’s half-cent transportation sales tax. It was passed in 1991 and endures until 2011. The Orange County Transportation Authority is putting a 30-year renewal on the November 2006 ballot.

I voted against Measure M in 1991, but I freely admit that the subsequent transportation improvements funded by it have proven my vote wrong. I’m generally supportive of renewing it, although I haven’t read through the renewal proposal, yet.

Even so, this kind of taxpayer-funded electioneering just doesn’t sit right with me. It’s one thing for OCTA to seek renewal and put it on the ballot. It’s another thing to spend tax dollars trying to persuade voters to renew it. OCTA… Read More

Yesterday I wrote a column on Monterey County’s General Plan Initiative aimed at stopping all growth and development. Yesterday a group called Plan for the People (formed specifically to fight the initiative) launched their campaign. It was well covered by the media. The Monterey Herald pointed out one of the most troubling aspects of the initiative that I forgot to mention:

"Juan Uranga, executive director of the Center for Community Advocacy, a Salinas farmworker support group, said the initiative would allow the heavily white communities of Carmel Valley, Pebble Beach and Big Sur to veto growth plans in Salinas Valley communities made up of "mostly working-class people of color."

‘I find it to be offensive to my notion of social justice,’ Uranga said.

The General Plan Initiative would require countywide votes to allow additional growth in rural areas, but foes… Read More

Three months after Prop. 77 (the state redistricting initiative) was defeated at the polls, the state Supreme Court has ruled that the initiative was properly placed on the ballot and that differences in two versions of the initiative did not render it invalid in this case. (Read the Sac Bee article here.) At issue were two versions of the initiative, one submitted to the state Attorney General for preparation of an official ballot title and summary, the other was circulated to the public. The Court, in a 4-2 decision,ruled that despite the differences in the two versions, the defects were not sufficient to keep the measure off the ballot based on the basis that there was "substantial compliance" with the law.… Read More