Intelligent City Council Votes

Democracy was the winner Thursday at the City Council forum of the Redlands Tea Party Patriots.

About 175 people packed the Mill Creek Cattle Co. on Thursday to engage in a Redlands City Council forum hosted by the Redlands Tea Party Patriots.

Candidates Don Wallace, Lane Schneider, Mike Saifie and Pat Gilbreath spoke their minds and answered questions -- even specific ones that put some distance between the candidates -- as part of an informative and entertaining evening.

Failed 2012 congressional candidate Pete Aguilar again proved he was an empty suit because Thursday was the second time this year he did not have the courage to appear before people who might disagree with him.

Candidate Mike Layne, after initially accepting an invitation, backed out Wednesday.

The four candidates, after introducing themselves to the crowd, sounded similar on many issues and all appeared to be responsible with city finances. They all had impressive resumes. All said they supported the tea party values of constitutionally limited government, free markets and fiscal responsibility.

All said they would vote to repeal the pro-Occupy Redlands resolution that the Redlands City Council approved earlier this year. 

The candidates said they understood the frustrations of having a city with such lousy roads and wanted to find ways to fill potholes.

Most mentioned that the public-employee unions, whose salary and benefits alone consume nearly three-quarters of the city's annual $133 million budget, needed to give in big time to solve the city's financial woes. One said the unions, unlike the private sector, do not currently contribute anything to their pensions.

The candidates were asked about Prop 30, Gov. Jerry Brown's tax increase on the Nov. 6 ballot, and Prop 32, which would prohibit unions from forcing members to contribute to political causes.

Wallace, Schneider, and Gilbreath said the will vote "no" on 30 and "yes" on 32. Saifie said he would vote the other way on both propositions.

The Redlands Tea Party Patriots, a fiscally conservative group, had listed Wallace and Schneider on their popular voter guide. Despite that, both got tough questions. Many said they appreciated Saifie and Gilbreath appearing.

All four candidates worked the crowd before or after the two-hour meeting. They appeared to have won some votes for their efforts.

The Thursday forum was more than democracy in action; it was a great way for residents to learn about City Council candidates and cast well-informed votes on Nov. 6. 

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Gregory Brittain October 07, 2012 at 06:38 AM
Mike Saifie said he supported "anti blasphemy" laws to prevent people from offending Muslims. There was not time to explore whether that would apply to offending persons from other religions. That he so completely misunderstands or would disregard the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment, in my opinion, disqualifies him from any public office.
John F. Berry October 08, 2012 at 06:17 AM
YES. He did say that. I thought he was confused, so I asked him afterward whether he undersood what he had actually said. He said he did not support anti-blasphemy laws and was sorry for the mistake. I urged him to be more clear next time he answers a question like that.
Gregory Brittain October 08, 2012 at 06:50 AM
I seem to be a minority of one, but I like my idea of putting government employee union contracts and major employment contracts, e.g. the $400,000 per year city manager contract, to a binding or at least advisory vote of the people. That would overnight shift the balance of power in negotiations in favor of the tax payers. The GEUs exert tremendous power in CA state and local elections, driving the states and cities towards insolvency. "I am sorry Mr. or Ms. union negotiator, as much as I would like to exceed to your demands, the voters would never approve than pension increase." The GEUs take the contracts to their members for ratification. Why shouldn't the taxpayers get to ratify the contracts they have to pay for?


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »