The Votes Are In!
2023 Readers' Choice is back, bigger and better than ever!
View Winners → 
Opinion: Been to a 5th District Supervisorial Candidates’ Forum Lately?
Arcadia Weekly May 09, 2016
by
share with
This will be the first time in more than 35 years that the 5th District seat is open. Antonovich is leaving because of term limits. – Courtesy photo
You’re Not Getting the Big Picture
By Terry Miller
Ah the eternal competition which calls itself public politics. It does not matter what you think, it is who you know, really! It also helps if you conform to a certain party’s agenda.
One of the most important seats on the board of supervisors, which currently is held by Republican Mike Antonovich, is up for grabs due to term limits … representing one of the largest areas in Los Angeles County, to the tune of 2 million constituents and 2,000-plus square miles.
In recent weeks, we have been in contact with supervisorial candidates who have been (directly or indirectly) excluded from participating in various and sundry 5th District Candidate forums … for a variety of reasons – ranging from, “We send invitations to everyone,” to, “They didn’t meet our criteria … ”
One of these candidates for Antonovich’s seat on the board of supervisors, Billy Malone, is not a wealthy politician with insider information like some other candidates. Malone is a humble working man who wants to make a difference but cannot seem to get his name on any of the recent debates, some of which have been shown on ABC7.
The Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters (LALCV), formed in 1976, is the only environmental Political Action Committee (PAC) in Los Angeles County and recently they held a forum with some notable absences last week.
I asked the LALCV why Malone and others were not invited to that forum that was broadcast by ABC7 Los Angeles last week. Here is what they said:
“LALCV has been involved in local elections for nearly four decades, and we’ve sponsored many debates in races across L.A. County. In our experience, sometimes, so many candidates file for an office that including all of them in a single, one-hour debate would prevent the informative discussion we aim to facilitate. This was one of those races. So, we invited six candidates based on our assessment of each candidate’s political viability and positions on the issues.
Thank you,
– Shona Ganguly, LALCV Board Member.”
We repeatedly asked LALCV for their “criteria” in selecting candidates for the forum, alas we have not heard back from them.
Malone told Arcadia Weekly: “This stinks of foul play. I have also attached the response I received from them when I asked why they are being exclusive … ‘only included those who met our internal criteria for selection.’
Yet it was advertised as a public debate to be televised. I am sure they will come up with an excuse of what ‘only included those who met our internal criteria for selection’ means, but either way it is really not good and purposefully gets others like myself a bad rap for not showing up.”
Malone continued: “I then added a list of facts including that all Republicans were invited but only one Democrat, Rajpal was the only person of color and only rep that lives in AV (Antelope Valley) and he received 21 percent of the vote last election, which in a split vote election like this could be enough, yet he did not meet their secret selection criteria. He and I will lose votes as no-shows and, like the others, we work hard for them. I actually had a number of followers who asked why I wasn’t there and if I had dropped out.
There was no disclaimer stating that it was only a personal selection, not a public forum. Secret agendas should never be part of a public forum, transparency is required of our candidates and election and no less should be expected from those dealing with it. The debate lineup would assume you have to be white and rich to be included, otherwise you are out. Two candidates are not even from our district but were invited, they happen to be white, wealthy, and Republican.
Even if Rajpal only gets a few votes, there is a kid of color out there who sees [a candidate] that looks and sounds like him and can make him think, ‘oh, I can do that if he did’ … but not if he sees only rich, white people are invited to the table.
It is not always about the winning but the difference you make trying.
This is not about who wins, it is about principle. We should be encouraging more people to get involved, this only discourages and leaves us with fewer choices.
That’s not even addressing the issue of stealing votes away from us.”
Malone also said told Arcadia Weekly that he spoke with candidate Darrell Park who stated, “I did not realize how many forums and interviews I have not been invited to … ” Malone added: “I looked back and, up til’ now, only two for me, and one of those was because it was the real estate associations and I happen to be a member. There are more coming up that are not inviting all.
As a point of interest, Mitch Englander got the endorsement from LALCV, which proves it was just their internal endorsement interviews made public.
Also spoke with Rajpal and he was shocked to find out he also was not being invited.”
It comes down to money:
According to report in the Los Angeles Times … L.A. City Councilman Mitch Englander raised $580,570, according to campaign finance reports filed with the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk. Kathryn Barger, the chief of staff to incumbent Supervisor Antonovich, raised $514,957. The other leading money-raisers in that race are:
– Prosecutor Elan Carr, $426,068.
– State Senator Robert Huff (R – Diamond Bar): $264,437.
– Glendale City Councilman Ara Najarian: $113,652.
This will be the first time in more than 35 years that the 5th District seat is open. Antonovich is leaving because of term limits. The district is 2,800 square miles, covering northern L.A. County from the county line down to Santa Clarita and the San Gabriel Valley.
It is our humble opinion that in such an important race as this, each candidate who is registered and on the ballot should not be excluded from participating in forums. Organizations that exclude and play favoritism need to be held accountable for their actions and voters should demand nothing less.
More from Arcadia Weekly
