Politics & Government

Continuing Controversy over PAC's Fair Campaign Pledge

Yes for Walnut Creek, one of Walnut Creek's three political action committees, asked the three City Council candidates to sign a pledge of civil campaign conduct. Two candidates declined on legal, free speech grounds; police are crying foul.

In an ongoing dispute over a Walnut Creek PAC's fair campaign pledge for City Council candidates, the Walnut Creek Police Association is now raising questions about its legal soundness.

The police association, representing the department's officers and managers, believes that this pledge from the Yes for Walnut Creek Political Action Committee is a veiled attempt to censor the opinions of city employees and to show favoritism to incumbent Cindy Silva. The Yes for Walnut Creek group said it was not endorsing any of the three candidates in the November 2 race. 

Yes for Walnut Creek, a self-described grass-roots non-partisan coalition made up of residents, business leaders, and supporters of the city's arts, recreation and open spaces, In signing this pledge, the candidates would be vowing, among other things, to focus on the issues, not misrepresent facts and refuse to engage in personal attacks on other candidates and their families.

Find out what's happening in Walnut Creekwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Silva, the mayor pro tem who is running for re-election, signed the pledge, saying that it was an excellent idea because it will help ensure a campaign "that focuses on the facts and does not condone the types of negative or personal attacks has has become so commonplace in other communities."  

All three candidates signed the city's voluntary fair campaign pledge, which you can read here.  

Find out what's happening in Walnut Creekwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

But the other candidates, Lawson and Wedel, resisted signing the Yes for Walnut Creek pledge. Lawson, an attorney and planning commissioner, raised concerns about the same section of the five-part pledge that is bothering the police officers association. Lawson said she would be happy to sign the pledge but only if this section were removed because she believes it violates election law. 

This section reads: 

I will formally request of all local advocacy groups and PACs--business interests, public employee unions, developers or any other--to not make independent expenditures that involve negative or personal attacks on my opponents, and I promise to immediately and publicly denounce any of this activity if it occurs.

Lawson believes candidates are prohibited from dictating an independent group's expenditures in any way.

A spokeswoman for the state Fair Political Practices Commission told the Contra Costa Times she didn't see any problems with the pledge, saying there is nothing in the Political Reform Act that would prohibit a candidate from signing.

City Clerk Patrice Olds also told the Times she sees no conflict with the pledge and local law.

Wedel called the pledge an attempt to limit free speech, and the police association said its objection to the pledge is based on legal advice it received, said association spokesman Sgt. Steve Gorski. In a press release issued Friday afternoon, the association said that "it is our opinion that Mrs. Silva's act of signing this pledge is legally dubious and may be in violation of California election laws, specifically the Political Reform Act."

The association also raises similar First Amendment concerns as candidate Lawson. In its release, the association said: 

"In our opinion, formally requesting local advocacy groups, PACs, and public employee unions to send or not send a particular message, constitutes an 'arrangement, coordination, or direction' from the campaign to the otherwise independent group, about expenditures that group should make on the candidate's behalf. This is in direct contrast with principles of the First Amendment and an attempt to censor public employees, who have the most intimate knowledge of the inner workings at City Hall and local government projects."

The association also said it appears that Yes for Walnut Creek "may be supporting the Silva campaign." The three co-chairs of Say Yes for Walnut Creek are listed as endorsers on the Silva campaign website. They are community activist Carole Wynstra; Emily Chang, executive director of the Walnut Creek Downtown Business Association; and Rich Carlston, of the law firm Miller Starr Regalia and Silva's campaign manager. 

Wedel said he would not sign the Yes for Walnut Creek's pledge. He, too, signed the city's voluntary fair campaign pledge (which you can read below). He added that he too has concerns that backers of the Say Yes for Walnut Creek pledge have already expressed their support for other candidates, even though the self-declared non-partisan Yes for Walnut Creek political action committee says it decided not to endorse any candidates. Wynstra said Yes for Walnut Creek's only purpose with this pledge is to ensure that Walnut Creek has a clean and ethical City Council campaign.  

But Wedel was not buying that argument: "This is a desperate attempt by supporters of other candidates to deflect attention from the issues caused by the City Council and the concerns and constitutional rights of Walnut Creek citizens and employees.  I will focus my attention on the issues facing Walnut Creek rather than attempting to prevent  free speech of the community.

Yes for Walnut Creek describes itself as a coalition made up of residents, business leaders, and supporters of the city's arts, recreation and open spaces, according to co-chair Wynstra. Yes for Walnut Creek is one of three PACS in town and was originally formed in 2009 to support the successful campaign Measure I, which paved way for construction of Neiman Marcus in downtown Walnut Creek.  

Following the Measure I vote, Yes for Walnut Creek decided to maintain its political presence, "believing that other issues would surface affecting the citizens of Walnut Creek."  In July 2010, the committee repurposed itself as a general purpose committee.

In a press release, Say  Yes for Walnut Creek says the upcoming November 2 election for two seats on the City Council is "in the forefront," as is a "concern" regarding the developing tenor of discourse. 

Yes for Walnut Creek might be referring to negative and hurtful statements made by some people commenting on the message boards of  Walnut Creek Patch, the Crazy in Suburbia blog, or the Contra Costa Times. In some comments, public figures' or family members have come under personal attack or been accused of improper or unethical behavior. 

Saying it wants to keep things civil in public forums, advertising and on message boards, Yes for Walnut Creek developed the five-point pledge for the candidates.

Yes for Walnut Creek's Campaign Pledge

1. I will focus on the issues in all statements, debates, advertisements, and press releases, and I will not misrepresent, distort, or otherwise falsify the facts.

2. I will at all times be prepared to provide to the media supporting evidence for statements I have made, and will issue a retraction and apology, in a timely fashion, should I find that I have been in error.

3. I will not condone personal attacks in my campaign. I will not issue any statement or communication whatsoever discussing my opponent's family, children, race, national origin, religion, personal associations, or sex.

4. I will formally request of all local advocacy groups and PACs--business interests, public employee unions, developers or any other--to not make independent expenditures that involve negative or personal attacks on my opponents, and I promise to immediately and publicly denounce any of this activity if it occurs.

5. I call on other candidates to adopt these same policies. 

Here is the text for The City of Walnut Creek's Fair Campaign Pledge, which all candidates signed: 

1. I shall conduct my campaign for city office openly and fairly.

2. I shall discuss the issues and participate in fair debate with respect to my views and qualifications.

3. I shall not engage in, or permit, defamatory attacks on the character of my opponents; nor shall I engage in unwarranted invasions of personal privacy unrelated to campaign issues.

4. I shall not at any time use or permit the use of any campaign material or advertisement which misrepresents, distorts, or otherwise falsifies the facts regarding any candidate or the candidate's position on issues.

5. I shall clearly identify myself, or my campaign committee (s), as the sender of all my campaign mailings.

6. I shall personally approve in writing all of my campaign materials, advertisements, or mailings, prior to their use.

7. I shall publicly repudiate support derived from any individual or group whose activities would violate this Fair Campaign Pledge.

8. I shall file all campaign statements as required by the California Political Reform Act and City ordinance on time with full disclosure of campaign contributions and exptenditures.

9. I shall not duplicate or use any lists of contributors filed by any other candidates for the purpose of compiling my own mailing lists without the permission of the other candidate.

10. I, the undersigned candidate for election to a city office in the City of Walnut Creek, hereby voluntarily endorse, subscribe to, and solemnly pledge myself to conduct my campaign in accordance with the above principles and practices.

 


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here