SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
March 27, 2010· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

SCV Tea Party endorses David Gauny

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

There’s something really amusing about the SCV Tea Party’s reasons for endorsing David Gauny for Santa Clarita City Council:

The 2010 Santa Clarita City Council election is an important one.  Our city has grown over the past decade and we have an important choice to make about who will be Santa Clarita’s next City Council members.  I want to tell you why I’m supporting David Gauny.

David has been an active champion of homeowner and business concerns during the past five years.  He has fought for neighborhoods facing ruin by overbuilt projects and he has served on two subcommittees on our city’s Economic Development Corporation.  In short, he understands the needs of residents and business interests and has some very specific ideas for growing our tax revenues without the urban sprawl that has ruined much of greater Los Angeles.

If there’s one thing the inchoate tea party movement stands for, it’s small government and laissez-faire economics. These are people who believe in Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” of the marketplace. They dislike government regulations, intrusions into the private sector, and they think Keynesian is a slur with which you can tag Democrats. They will, to a person, tout the rationality of the “free market” scarcely two years after under-regulated Wall Street drove our economy off a cliff.

Yet when it comes to the local level, it seems conservatives can’t get enough government. They want our city government to block developers from building on land privately owned, projects like the Casden project near Placerita Canyon or the Avenues Project in Wiley Canyon. They want City Council members who will essentially limit the freedoms of private, for-profit corporations like Newhall Land, Palmer, and Pardee Homes to do what they want on land they own.

Indeed, they think our current City Council is too laissez-faire when it comes to local development. That’s why they want the incumbents out of office.

So while it’s okay to have a do-nothing, small government nationally, they want an activist and interventionist government locally. Does that seem a little inconsistent to you? Shouldn’t we “let the market decide” everywhere?

Afterall, in Adam Smith’s world, developers will stop tearing up ridgelines and building dense housing projects when the market stops buying that kind of development.

And finally, while the local Tea Party screamed and shouted about bailouts to “Government Motors,” they were utterly silent when Santa Clarita handed over $200,000 of our dollars to private interests to duplicate the business outreach efforts of the City, the Chamber, and COC with the SCV Economic Development Corporation.

Indeed, as you can see from SCV Tea Party, handing over taxpayer cash to private interests in Santa Clarita is given as a reason to support a candidate, not fight against his election.

Comments (30)

  1. PetzMarch 28, 2010 at 4:11 am
    David Gauny has grown tremendously during the years he prepared for his candidacy for city council. He deserves our vote despite (because of) the disparaging and conflicting points of the rant above. David came into public view when he exposed troubling relationships between city staff and developers during the Henry Mayo expansion debate. David has studied economic development and is dedicated to smart growth that attracts private sector jobs to our valley. David knows that the problems relating to illegal immigration need to be dealt with at the local level because national leaders have been AWOL on the topic. His campaign motto is “People First”, which is accomplished through fair application of effective policy at ALL levels of government. David Gauny is being mentored by a great conservative leader in this valley, Bob Kellar. Effective leaders always prepare a path for their replacement and we should support prudent transition. David Gauny and TimBen Boydston deserve our support for city council because they represent responsible leadership for a new generation of Santa Claritans. The incumbents have become too close to the plutocratic aparatchiks who run the city for their own selfish interests. Join Petz and thousands of other citizens of this valley in casting your ballot for David Gauny and TimBen Boydston, while withholding your vote for any incumbent.
  2. JeffMarch 28, 2010 at 6:05 am
    Let the market decide Petz, let it decide everywhere! No big government at City Hall!
  3. Timothy MyersMarch 28, 2010 at 5:50 am
    Petz; Bottom line. I don’t like Dave Gauny. He is a slick salesman with good hair who doesn’t know what he doesn’t know and will say anything to close the sale, and if he goes on the City Council he will be Frank Ferry with good hair.
  4. PetzMarch 28, 2010 at 5:59 am
    Let me get this straight TJMSR, You are voting for Frank Ferry because he pulled off some prank at Hart High years ago, and you think DG is slick. Does Petz have this correct? What do you think of Bob Kellar-or should Petz know the answer before he asks such a loaded question ?
  5. Timothy MyersMarch 28, 2010 at 6:04 am
    Bob Kellar is a good man who means well and works hard for the various causes he involves himself in, but word on the street is that Dave Gauny doesn’t show up to meetings, whines when he does, and can quickly absent himself whenever anyone asks him to do work that does not include standing in front of an adoring public.
  6. BrianMarch 28, 2010 at 8:49 pm
    So much for your judgement of people Myers! Kellar is a pompous elitist who thinks laws aren’t meant for him. Go ahead and tell me he takes a cab from all these open bar fundraisers or Elephant Bar stops. He doesn’t believe in seat belt laws either. Personally observed! A good man, eh? An arrogant, insufferable, better than if you ask me!
  7. cashMarch 29, 2010 at 8:01 am
    Tim, the facts do not seem to support what you are spewing. His work on the hospital suggests a different David than your innuendo. Seems you will do or say anything to win a bet.
  8. SCV VoterMarch 28, 2010 at 8:20 am
    Gauny is the character “Jefferson Davis” played by Eddie Murphy in the early 90′s movie “Distinguished Gentleman.” Lots of sound bytes “Ask not what your country can do for you”, “read my lips,” or my personal faviorite “I will address illegal immigration.” All talk, absolutely no substance, just a well dressed guy who tries to come off as appealing and who at the end of the day was just concerned about his backyard view.
  9. damageincMarch 28, 2010 at 12:20 pm
    HAHAHA…. I love how Gauny claimed “the media” is calling him the Scott Brown of Santa Clarita. Really? The West Ranch Beacon which is pretty much read by Jeff is now considered the media? Besides didn’t Glenn Beck and his band of teabagger get pissed when Brown didn’t do their bidding? Turned out brown was more moderate then anyone could expect essentially a Blue Dog Democrat.
  10. PetzMarch 28, 2010 at 6:33 am
    Petz experience with DG (including a presentation to my Prager Group) has been positive. DG exhibits grace under pressure and has earned my respect and vote.
  11. Timothy MyersMarch 28, 2010 at 7:15 am
    Petz: Dave Gauny is the Sarah Palin of the SCV, who will not be able to get his head around the fact that he is not universally loved and adored.
  12. LindaMarch 28, 2010 at 7:58 am
    The vitriol you spew whenever you mention David Gauny is puzzling. I worked with him on the Smart Growth committee during the G&L Office Building expansion controversy and never saw any of the “slick salesman” behavior you so snidely refer to. In fact, we committee members saw him as a conscientious and determined leader who tackled all the convoluted issues by amassing facts through hard work and dogged research. He then presented them in a forthright manner before the Planning Commission and the City Council. It would have been easy to simply whine and moan when our facts were ignored by the majority of the council and the city manager, but David persevered with more facts. When the council handed down its final decision, David accepted it, but he kept the pressure on our developer-friendly council by speaking alongside the residents battling the massive Casden and Calgrove Corridor projects. It’s too bad, you choose to ignore his hard work, concentrating instead on some strange fixation with his hair!
  13. CCMarch 28, 2010 at 10:56 am
    That’s because Tim Meyers has been part of the back room political group of SCV for years and doesn’t like what he can’t control. have you noticed that he likes to tell everyone to not bother to vote because the mailers have already decided the election? His greatest complaint about Dave is his hair. Kinda kindergarten don’t ya think? I’m voting for David.
  14. Timothy MyersMarch 28, 2010 at 4:56 pm
    The mail in ballots have decided the election. That is a five star lock, as they say in Vegas!!!
  15. Timothy MyersMarch 28, 2010 at 4:55 pm
    Linda; I’m not your Dad! You can go to the prom with Dave.
  16. Timothy MyersMarch 28, 2010 at 7:39 am
    Petz: That is just great! Maybe DG will invite you to the prom!
  17. Always a Petz FanMarch 28, 2010 at 7:40 am
    Dave Gauny already knows he is not loved and adored by all….case in point he was treated poorly when he attempted to bring insight to this very forum on the OTN library subject. Why subject DG to vicious and unwarranted personal attack? Anyone who voted Obama and calls DG slick has NO sense of perspective. Just Petz’s opinion.
  18. SCV VoterMarch 28, 2010 at 8:23 am
    Actually no, there is a huge difference but thanks as always for playing.
  19. Jeff JohnsonMarch 29, 2010 at 12:13 am
    1) Mr. Gauny did not “attempt to bring insight to this very forum on the OTN library subject.” Mr. Gauny tried to milk a political opportunity by expressing outrage over something he thought could earn him points then came back to say: “I don’t have a strong opinion about the design, only that the people involved in the Newhall Redevelopment Committee (NRC) and the Old Town Newhall Association (OTNA) should have, by definition, been included.” Only of course later we have Mr. Kevin D. Korenthal saying,”I do not recall ever being asked to give my opinion on the facade prior to earlier this year. Though I do not deny that outreach meetings might have been scheduled, NRC members invited and the events might have taken place, I have no recollection of them.” So clearly they were included although maybe not to the extent that some thought they should be, but Mr. Gauny’s stumping comments were disingenuous at best, and flat out misinformed at worst when he says they should have been included, implying that he knew they were never included at all. 2) Mr. Gauny is probably a very nice, well meaning person, however he comes off like a used car salesman that will lick his finger and place it into the air to determine which way the wind is blowing before deciding what to say, again only my opinion and impression. Is he any better or worse than anyone else running? No, probably not, in my opinion he is likely more of the same. So if you are a change for the sake of change person then he may be a fine candidate but I am guessing it will only be a matter of a few years before you are looking for his replacement for the same reasons there is a desire to replace the current incumbents. 3) He was not treated poorly, he was asked to answer some questions about the topic he had jumped into but decided to act hurt and defensive, as if asking a candidate questions is out of bounds.
  20. David GaunyMarch 29, 2010 at 8:18 am
    Jeff J: My first post on the day you’re referring to (my first post in a few weeks actually) had nothing more than additional comments about the failed process the city used to arrive at the library design. Your first reply to this included the following comments: http://scvtalk.com/2010/03/25/hey-city-council-get-some-spine-and-a-clue/#comments Wow, Dave, you found a nice spot for a grand-standing campaign speech… I’m sure EVERYTHING would be different under you wouldn’t it… be a bit more careful about which bandwagon you jump onto, your new buddies at Save our State are a bunch of opportunistic racist nut jobs, using you for their benefit… the way you, and others to be fair, campaign is a reason why voter turnout is low and apathy is high. We are SICK of non stop negativity and mudslinging, truly sick of it by all of you. You sling mud and then after election or re-election you fall into the same exact patterns. You make the electorate feel hopeless. Responses like this do not emanate from a person wanting to better understand a position; they come from someone who is looking to tear someone down. Please forgive me if I misread your intent. Maybe you just had a bad day. You have somehow missed the answer to your question. What would I do differently? My response was clear – I would follow the process we have in place by including the two main committees that should be involved in this approval: OTNA and the NRC. Their input along the way would have made this a non-issue as we would have had agreement at the final hour instead of discord. Today, referring to Korenthal’s comments you state: So clearly they were included although maybe not to the extent that some thought they should be, but Mr. Gauny’s stumping comments were disingenuous at best, and flat out misinformed at worst when he says they should have been included, implying that he knew they were never included at all. I personally attended the NRC and OTNA board meetings in question in order to understand their issues and be a better representative. I was an eyewitness so my comments are not “disingenuous” or “misinformed.” Since you were apparently NOT there, your bold statements may be better fitted to these terms. A vote on the design should NEVER have bypassed these two boards. Period. You may want to consider that Korenthal cannot legally speak on behalf of the board which may be part of the reason why his remarks are somewhat neutral. He is being a responsible board member. You state: “[Gauny] comes off like a used car salesman that will lick his finger and place it into the air to determine which way the wind is blowing before deciding what to say… he was asked to answer some questions about the topic he had jumped into but decided to act hurt and defensive, as if asking a candidate questions is out of bounds. Jeff, I have stood on many contentious issues for many years despite what the wind tells me. You may not agree with my decision to attend the SOS meeting but I did so in hope of refocusing their argument on policies, not people – I did this at the opposition of some here and at that event. The wind did not dictate my position in either case and I have not deviated from my stance since then. The way you come across tells me you either have an anger problem or an agenda. You seem to shoot first and then ask your questions, assuming the worst of me in each circumstance. It seems I have only two definitions in your view: “grandstanding” or political “opportunism.” If so, I’m not sure the point in continuing a dialog with you. Please forgive me for not affording more time to reply.
  21. Jeff JMarch 29, 2010 at 11:38 am
    Thank you for taking the time to respond, I know you’re a busy man. Honestly Mr. Gauny, I don’t have any specific bone to pick with you. You feel like I have either an anger problem or an agenda, in the interest of disclosure I do have an agenda or rather just an ongoing point of contention and it is not with you specifically but “politicians” in general. Not public servants mind you but those who look and feel like “politicians” to me. And I don’t have any anger issues, I am just worn out by “politicians” and all of the rhetoric and double speak that often accompanies them. You were simply the one who made, what I felt, was an opportunistic statement on an issue that I feel is being overly politicized at a time when that would be beneficial to some parties. Again I disagree with your politics on some issues and you strike me as a politician. As I also stated above you are likely a very nice, well meaning person. I don’t think you’re a villain but then again I don’t think that’s likely the case with the incumbents either, they’re “politicians.” I feel like politics has become primarily mud slinging and negativity, and this election has been no exception in my opinion. Although to be clear I don’t think you’ve done so any more than anyone else, I just keep holding out hope that candidates will come along that choose the high road but maybe it’s not possible to get elected that way. As for comments about disingenuous or misinformed, I still stand by those characterizations. To clarify, you say that you attended the NRC & OTNA board meetings where this issue was discussed. My statement is specific to the fact that in your original post you say(or imply) that these groups weren’t consulted at all and yet there is definite statements to the contrary that there were indeed meetings/ forums etc scheduled and that they were consulted to some degree. Now whether or not the city took their counsel on the matter is another issue but according to what has been written it would definitely appear that they were consulted which is absolutely different, in my opinion, to what you stated. Is there an argument to be made that they should have had more sway, sure that argument could be made. When I asked the question of what you would do differently I still feel like the easy answer is “I would listen to them. They would be heard.” Well what if you listened and heard them, and yet, you needed to make a decision that did not agree with their take on it? I’m sure you can imagine that scenario playing out where you have to make a decision that does not agree directly with the suggestions of all the parties consulted. In fact with most city business I am guessing there is a group for and a group against, you can listen to both groups, hear them, take their opinions into consideration, and then render a decision. Ultimately one of those groups will be left with the argument they weren’t listened to won’t they? Honestly I’m not setting out to attack you specifically and have no desire for rancorous interactions, I just called out something that I saw airing on the siding of being politics first in my opinion. I wish you luck in your campaign, unseating incumbents can be a herculean task unfortunately.
  22. GangFangMarch 28, 2010 at 8:35 am
    These days, a Tea Party endorsement is akin to a kiss of death in my book.
  23. CCMarch 28, 2010 at 10:57 am
    I don’t vote by anyone’s endorsement but my own. I have seen David in action and like what I see. ‘nuf said.
  24. damageincMarch 28, 2010 at 12:31 pm
    Nice post Jeff. Gauny has shown himself to be a guy that will run with any stripe of extremists here in Santa Clarita, he makes promises he cannot keep. Gauny lost me with his palin’ around with David Bossert, then showing up with all the minute men. The Teaparty trolls have given up trying to convince people they are a bipartisan group. We all know they are nothing but a Republican temper tantrum…
  25. RM2March 28, 2010 at 2:48 pm
    I’m with CC. I’m not a Minute Man or a Petz “fan” but I’m voting for Gauny as well, good hair and all.
  26. Saugus SplasherMarch 28, 2010 at 7:41 pm
    Where were the teabaggers when George Bush was expanding the power of the federal government, trashing the Bill of Rights and creating a quasi-Big Brother police state (Patriot Act) and running up enormous budget deficits? With statements like “I want my America back” it’s hard not to believe their anger is stoked by racism. On DG, he is an opportunist, a chameleon, hopelessly naïve or dangerously disingenuous. He criticizes the “big boxes” the city has successfully recruited. He must be blithely ignorant of the fact that those big boxes bring in millions of dollars that the city uses for police, fire, parks and recreation, or he knows this and is being disingenuously opportunistic in his criticism.
  27. Kevin D. KorenthalMarch 29, 2010 at 9:44 am
    “Dave Gauny is the Sarah Palin of the SCV, who will not be able to get his head around the fact that he is not universally loved and adored.” Sarah Palin doesn’t need everyone to adore her. 51% will do just fine. In fact her popularity requires that the other 49% hate her guts!
  28. Timothy MyersMarch 29, 2010 at 3:56 pm
    Better check your numbers Kevin!
  29. Linda StaedtlerMarch 29, 2010 at 3:04 pm
    While I am voting for TimBen Boydsten, I can not give a vote for David Gauny. While in the beginning he fought for better growth of the Hospital, he ultimately sold out in the end and that is why I can not vote for him.
  30. cashMarch 29, 2010 at 5:39 pm
    I share your thoughts on this.

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support