Yesterday we reported that Tony Strickland will pay a $3,000 fine for violation of state campaign law.  Today we hear that Audra Strickland, soon to be ex-assemblywoman, appears to be in violation of the city ordinance prohibiting campaign signs earlier than 45 days prior to an election [TOMC 9-4.2304(d)].  Yesterday an Audra Strickland for Supervisor sign was spotted at the ExxonMobil gas station at 45 N Reino in the Newbury Park neighborhood of Thousand Oaks.

We’re sure that it is just a coincidence that the first sign to appear is on the property of one of her campaign donors, but careless disregard of the law seems to be a recurring theme with Audra and Tony.  Candidates need to keep in mind the best interests of the community and not on what will leverage a degree of political advantage in a contentious campaign.

A public opinion survey this month showed a “toxic” level of negative views about Assemblywoman Audra Strickland just before she launched her campaign for county supervisor, the pollster said Tuesday.

The poll was commissioned by the Ventura County Deputy Sheriffs’ Association. The union supports Strickland’s opponent, 2nd District Supervisor Linda Parks.

Precision Politics, a political consulting firm based in Simi Valley, conducted the poll during the first week of February, a few days before Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks, officially entered the race.

Marc O’Hara, Precision Politics’ owner and founder, said the results show “a very toxic environment for Audra Strickland.”

Herb Gooch, a political science professor at California Lutheran University, said the poll is a “rough indicator” for the 2nd District, because it had a fairly high margin of error. But even taking that into account, Gooch said, Strickland’s negatives were very high.

“If I were running Audra Strickland’s campaign, I’d be worried,” he said. “She’s got a lot of work to do…”

~ excerpted from the Ventura County Star 2/16/10; article by Tony Biasotti

As Audra Strickland’s time in the state assembly draws to a close, and with little to show for it save a steady paycheck, she has announced she will move to Thousand Oaks and run against popular fellow Republican Linda Parks for County Supervisor.  Parks, who enjoys rare bi-partisan support, was elected District 2 Supervisor in 2002 and was re-elected in 2006.

In making her announcement, Strickland blasted Parks as being a “carpetbagger from Berkeley.”   It was a rough start for Strickland with this swing and a miss as Parks has never lived in Berkeley.  In fact, it is Strickland who re-registered to vote in the 2nd Supervisoral District only two weeks ago for the sole purpose of qualifying to run.

Strickland cited support and urging from the GOP Central Committee in her decision to run and has stated that she was surprised by a recent push poll they commissioned which attempted to discredit Park’s record.  It is interesting to note that the GOP Central Committee members include Strickland’s husband Tony Strickland, her mother-in-law, a former staff member and his wife, a business partner, and a businessman who has received more that 1.5 million in business from the Stricklands.

In the past, the majority of campaign funding for Strickland came from outside of her district and included contributions from big tobacco, horse racing, and indian gambling interests.

as reported by Timm Herdt, Ventura County Star, 1/19/10

The chairman of the Ventura County Central Committee on Tuesday all but acknowledged that the county GOP was behind a politically charged telephone survey conducted earlier this month that questioned Thousand Oaks voters about a potential challenge of incumbent Supervisor Linda Parks by termed-out Assemblywoman Audra Strickland.

The survey, known in political circles as a “push poll,” included an array of highly negative assertions about Parks’ performance, including such allegations as she “cut food services for poor senior citizens” and “fought for $100,000 to fund more humane ways to kill ground squirrels.”

Asked Tuesday whether the county GOP was behind the survey, Chairman Mike Osborn responded: “Maybe.” He acknowledged, however, that he had seen the results, which survey firms typically disclose only to their clients.

Does that mean the county party paid for the survey? “I don’t think anybody’s paid for it, yet,” Osborn responded.

The party is not required to publicly report political expenditures made between Jan. 1 and March 17 until March 22.

Parks, a Republican, said she is concerned the county party would be involved in an attack on one of its own.

“It’s really disappointing that they would go after a moderate Republican,” she said. “There’s been a push by the right-wing element to go after moderates.”

She said she is further disappointed the party would inject partisan politics into a nonpartisan campaign for supervisor. “I don’t want to see the Board of Supervisors locked up in the same gridlock we have in the state Legislature,” she said. “I really disdain the thought of having partisan politics on the Board of Supervisors.”

The GOP Central Committee is dominated by close allies of Strickland and her husband, Sen. Tony Strickland. They include Osborn and his wife, Mary; Tony Strickland’s mother, Toni; Chris Valenzano, a former staff member for Tony Strickland, and his wife, Deyla; and Darin Henry, whose campaign mailing firm received more than $1.5 million in combined business in 2008 from the Stricklands.

Parks will be seeking re-election to her third term this year. The election will take place June 8; if no candidate receives a majority in that balloting, a runoff would be conducted in November.

Osborn said he was “pretty pleased with the results” of the survey and hopes that Strickland will decide to challenge Parks. “If it were me, I’d be chomping at the bit,” he said.

Parks angered many Republicans in 2008, when she endorsed Democrat Hannah-Beth Jackson over Tony Strickland in their high-profile campaign for state Senate. Parks, known for her advocacy for open space and land conservation, said she based her endorsement on what she considered to be Jackson’s superior environmental positions.

Audra Strickland said last week she has not decided on her future political plans but is keeping open a variety of options. Strickland lives in Moorpark, and would have to move to Parks’ District 2 to run for the supervisorial seat. The district includes the Conejo Valley, the Santa Rosa Valley and parts of the Oxnard plain.

Strickland announced in November that she intended to run for treasurer-tax collector, but those plans were dashed after the Board of Supervisors voted to adopt in Ventura County an optional state law that allows counties to impose professional and educational criteria for the job. Strickland apparently does not meet the standards.

She said last week, however, that she has not completely abandoned the idea of running for treasurer-tax collector. Sources have told The Star that she has sought a legal opinion as to whether her service as an assemblywoman on the state’s Little Hoover Commission would meet the legal criteria. Strickland would not confirm or deny whether she has sought such an opinion.

Strickland must make a decision about her political future by March 15, the deadline for candidates to file in order to appear on the June ballot.

By Michael Sullivan Ventura County Reporter

When Ventura County Treasurer-Tax Collector Larry Matheney announced last week that he would not seek another term, it came as a big surprise that Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, whose professional experience is limited to her political work and her time as a private junior high schoolteacher, was going to run for the position, which she officially announced Tuesday.

Albeit, in order to run for just about any elected seat — whether it be the governor of California or the tax collector of Ventura County — candidates must meet very minimal qualifications, mainly, they must be registered to vote and be older than 18, and the process to obtain such positions is based solely on the will of the people. While we are not going to dwell on the flaws of the democratic process — the electing of certain individuals who are seemingly not qualified — in the case of county treasurer-tax collector, if we refuse to learn from the mistakes of the past, we are doomed to repeat them.

Fifteen years ago, Orange County declared bankruptcy, losing $1.6 billion due to extremely risky financial investments made by the longtime treasurer-tax collector, Robert Citron. Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California then wrote a follow up to the OC debacle in 1998, making 10 policy recommendations to prevent such a disaster in the future. One of the recommendations was that “local elected officials need more financial expertise and objective professional advice so that they can make sound fiscal policy decisions in the complex world of municipal finance.” California legislators had also passed Senate Bill 863 in 1995 that would require individuals running for treasurer to meet certain professional and educational standards. But this law was specific to individual counties and would only be enacted if a county’s board of supervisors adopted it. To this day, the provision has not been adopted locally by the Board of Supervisors.

Although times have changed, fortunately, the supervisors can still approve and enact the law before Matheney gives up his post as the county’s watchdog over public funds. SB 863 requirements include either having worked in a senior financial management position for a public agency; have an accounting or finance degree or be a certified public accountant or chartered financial analyst. We believe these qualifications to be minimal and absolutely necessary, considering the millions of dollars the treasurer-tax collector must be accountable for and the county’s multimillion dollar budget shortfall during this economic climate.

Given the questionable practice of earning money by running husband Tony Strickland’s Senate race campaign where Audra’s company earned six figures through fundraising — a practice which now is illegal, courtesy of a bill proposed by Tony himself this summer — and her limited professional experience, we don’t believe she is the right person for the job. We are also careful to endorse any person for that position, unless they meet the minimum requirements included in the provision, whether or not the supervisors enact it.

We hope Ventura County’s Board of Supervisors expedites this agenda item of raising the minimum requirements for treasurer to the top of the list — or at least well before Feb. 15, the time when candidates can file declarations of their intent to run for office. While the current treasurer-tax collector called Audra’s intent to run for the seat as “great,” we suggest proceeding with caution, hoping that the supervisors will do everything possible to hire a qualified and experienced individual to this important decision. At a salary of more than $150,000, they should have many applicants.

IN A MOVE THAT WILL SURPRISE absolutely nobody, State Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Moorpark) voted in committee last week against a proposal to tack a tax on cigarettes to raise about $1.2 billion annually for the state’s ailing general fund.

He also recently voted against two measures, SB 602 and SB 603, which would make it harder for minors to buy cigarettes.

The senator joined two other Republicans in voting no on SB 600, despite the fact that polls, such as one conducted after the May vote and another done in April by Field Research Inc. say an overwhelming majority of state residents favor an increase in tobacco taxes and don’t want to see drastic cuts to health-care programs for low-income and disabled residents and children.

In the last 10 years, tobacco companies have spent millions in California to keep taxes on tobacco products here among the lowest in the nation. Strickland alone has been the recipient of a whopping $91,550 in tobacco contributions since he entered politics.

According to tobacco-facts.net, California’s tobacco tax rate of 87 cents per pack is 32nd in the nation. Rhode Island is No. 1 with $3.46 a pack. Some city governments in other areas of the U.S. have imposed their own taxes as well.

The bill, co authored by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Pacoima) and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) has earmarked the revenue to go toward the general fund, lung cancer research, tobacco cessation and control, school-based anti-smoking programs and tobacco enforcement efforts.  SB 600 is sponsored by the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association.

Besides generating much-needed revenue, the bill is expected to discourage smoking among youth, according to a press release issued by Padilla.

“California needs to do more to keep tobacco away from kids,” Padilla said.  “With every 10 percent increase in the price of cigarettes, youth smoking is reduced by about seven percent and overall cigarette consumption by about four percent. Raising the tobacco tax reduces youth smoking,” he added.

The bill’s co-sponsor, the American Cancer Society, argues that the increase is long overdue and since California’s last tobacco tax increase, 44 states have increased their tobacco taxes. The American Heart Association, also a co-sponsor, argues that this bill will help reduce heart disease, which is the No. 1 killer in the United States.

Assemblymember Tom Torlakson (D-Antioch) has introduced a similar bill, AB 89.

STRICKLAND HAS A LONG HISTORY of siding with Big Tobacco on legislation, especially when it comes to sales of tobacco products to minors. Beyond the recent votes against bills to curb youth smoking, while in the Assembly he voted against allowing the Department of Health Services to conduct stings on businesses selling tobacco to minors. It passed into law anyway. He also voted against restricting non face-to-face sales of cigarettes. The measure was signed into law by Schwarzenegger.

In May, he voted against SB 4 which prohibits smoking on any state coastal beach or state park unit, except in adjacent parking lots.

The Ventura County Republican Party has been well funded by tobacco dollars as well, with $50,000 deposited into its account in May of 2008 by Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris.

Other county tobacco donations include $28,650 for Assembly member Audra Strickland (R-Moorpark), $20,900 for Assembly member Cameron Smyth (R-Santa Clarita), and $18,900 for Sen. George Runner (R-Lancaster). None of the current Democratic legislators have accepted tobacco money.

Watch to see how all these politicians vote when the bills come before them.

SB 600 is opposed by California Chamber of Commerce, California Black Chamber of Commerce, the Black Chamber of Commerce of the San Fernando Valley, the Assn. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, the California Taxpayers Assn. and the Neighborhood Market Assn. All these groups have received tobacco contributions, according to tobacco-facts.net.

Of the two senators who sided with Strickland in the Senate Health Committee, both have also accepted tobacco money. Sen. Dave Cox (R-Fair Oaks) accepted $26,800 and Sen. Sam Aanestad (R-Grass Valley) took $10,100.

The following letter to the Ventura County Star is in response to an opinion column by Assemblywoman Audra Strickland from June 14, 2009.

Once again Assemblywoman Audra Strickland wastes three columns of print on the Opinion page of the Sunday Star. She calls for the legislative leadership to reform and streamline the budget process, yet she tells us that only five elected officials really craft the state budget – three Republicans and two Democrats. So who is to blame?

Our legislature is at a stalemate. Democrats hold the majority, yet they can’t get the 2/3 majority vote required to pass a budget because Republicans refuse to sign off on raising revenue to cover critical services. Therefore, it is minority Republicans who ultimately decide the fate of California’s budget process.

Strickland complains about “dark-of-the-night” deals, but as I recall it was just such a deal by Republican Senator Abel Maldonado that garnered promises not to increase certain taxes and also resulted in a series of ill-fated propositions being placed on the May ballot. Hindsight shows us that Californians not only rejected this Republican trick, but in so voting actually acknowledged a revenue rescue was necessary.

So why is California really in the mess it is in? Despite the waste and pork barrel spending Strickland dwells on relentlessly, the biggest culprit is an anticipated
decrease in state revenue. We will see revenue shrink from about $100 billion to only $83 billion this year due to the global recession. That’s a 27% decrease in money the state has to spend. In an attempt to fill an expected $41 billion deficit, California could fire every state employee—including prison guards and university professors—close every government office, stop all travel and even cease the purchase of paper clips without closing the budget gap. The government would be gone but the deficit wouldn’t. It’s time for Strickland (and Republicans) to get real and acknowledge that it will be impossible to fix the budget deficit by eliminating waste and cutting programs.

A combination revenue rescue combined with cuts in non-essential spending is the only answer and we have just a couple of weeks to make it happen. I’ve seen a number of proposals, but at a minimum we should join every other oil-producing state and tax oil extraction at 9.9% (Alaska is 25%). Second, we should impose a dime-a-drink alcohol tax, a cigarette tax and a medical marijuana tax. Next, we should restore top income tax brackets of 10 and 11 percent (up from 9.55% max) on incomes of $250,000 and above, and establish a 3% withholding for all independent contractors who earn more than $600 per year.

Then, the Legislature should reverse three expensive tax concessions to businesses that were offered up as bribes to Republicans in September 2008 and February 2009. These breaks allow, among other things, corporations to share credits with affiliated companies allowing them to use this year’s losses to obtain rebates on prior-year taxes. The legislature should also update rules governing the assessment of commercial property that allow companies that own commercial real estate to avoid having their property values updated, except under unusual circumstances.

Next, restore the vehicle license fee to 2% – the rate when Gov. Schwarzenegger took office. Then phase out obsolete and ineffective Enterprise Zone tax breaks. Reduce the State sales tax rate from 5% to only 3% but extend taxes to all services. The state could also end multinational tax sheltering and eliminate the tax loophole on like-kind exchange of commercial property. Additionally, mortgage interest deductions should be limited to the owner’s primary residence.

We could save $1 billion in five years by converting all death sentences to life in prison without possibility of parole. And last, but not least, we could use $4 billion of the $4.5 billion rainy-day fund Gov. Schwarzenegger has budgeted to help reduce the projected deficit. It’s not just raining, there’s lightning and thunder!

A combination of these and other revenue rescue proposals could easily add up to $20 to $30 billion, spread the cost fairly among individuals and business, and go a long way toward cutting our deficit and saving vital programs and services.

Our state needs courageous leadership. I call on everyone to urge your state legislator to oppose an all-cuts budget.

— Bruce Little lives in Camarillo and is a small business owner

It didn’t take long. State Sen. Tony Strickland, (R-Moorpark) who listed himself as a “renewable energy businessman” on the ballot in the Senate District 19 race last fall, predictably failed to vote on renewable energy legislation on Tuesday, March 31.

The bill, SB 14, would require investor-owned utilities to receive one-third of their power from renewable energy sources by 2020. These utilities are now required to purchase 20 percent of the energy they sell from renewable sources by next year. The current legislation, authored by Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) would revise the requirement to match one ordered by the governor in November.

Click to continue »

It didn’t take long. State Sen. Tony Strickland, (R-Moorpark) who listed himself as a “renewable energy businessman” on the ballot in the Senate District 19 race last fall, predictably failed to vote on renewable energy legislation on Tuesday, March 31.

The bill, SB 14, would require investor-owned utilities to receive one-third of their power from renewable energy sources by 2020. These utilities are now required to purchase 20 percent of the energy they sell from renewable sources by next year. The current legislation, authored by Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) would revise the requirement to match one ordered by the governor in November.

Click to continue »

Full disclosure: I am president of The Pollux Group, a qualitative consulting firm. My firm worked this cycle (almost entirely pro bono) for Eric Bauman’s LACDP on multiple races, including that of Ferial Masry in AD-37.

Eric Bauman, chair of the LACDP, announced in a conference call to supporters and media this evening that he has dropped out of the race for CDP Chair, for all intents and purposes ceding the field to the more institutionally backed John Burton, whose long history of service to the Party and fundraising prowess have earned him the endorsements of many of the Party’s leading lights.

Why should Ventura Democrats care? Because Bauman, in addition to being a Southern Californian, viscerally understands the importance of having a real 58-county strategy in California. The State Party came too little, too late to the aid of fantastic Democrats like Hannah-Beth Jackson and Ferial Masry. These local Democrats came within inches of victory and could have claimed another much-needed Assembly and State Senate seat for Democrats, even as some unmentionables retained $1.5 million Party dollars for personal defense funds, and much of the rest was showered on almost shoe-in or longer-shot races elsewhere in the state, particularly in the North.

The practical effect of Bauman’s dropping out of the race is that Ventura County Democrats (and those in the Inland Empire, where gains are also there to be made) will have to fight harder to get the support we need from the State Party to turn the registration gains made in our newly blue and highly competitive districts into electoral victories. Like it or not, money and seasoned strategists can make or break campaigns, and Ventura Democrats cannot do it alone. Eric Bauman would have been an extraordinary asset as CDP Chair, because he understands the crucial importance of areas like Ventura to the future of California and the Democratic Party

The good news, however, is that Eric is now running for Vice-Chair of the CDP. Unforuntately, in so doing, he runs against another good friend of mine, 58-county strategy supporter, outstanding progressive and head of our state blog Calitics, Brian Leubitz. My blogging loyalties are with Brian; my Southern California loyalties are with Eric. Choosing between them is like a parent picking favorites among their own children; I personally endorse them both and wish the best for each of them.

Whichever of them takes the seat, however, will need our full support in bringing the 58-county vision to the often entrenched mentality of the CDP.

For more on the leading Vice-Chair candidates, see their websites:
Eric Bauman
Brian Leubitz