City Campaign Update, September 18
The erosion of Diane Greenwood’s campaign continued last week, turning into a political mudslide following two huge ethical lapses.
Greenwood’s first problem developed over a reception Councilman Frank Ury scheduled at his house on Sun., Sept. 17, for a big-name political candidate in a county race. The county candidate’s invitations were received by residents in the Stoneridge gated neighborhood where Ury lives. According to a political insider, the county candidate’s campaign usually picks up other expenses as well, including the cost of refreshments. Meanwhile, Diane Greenwood was sending invitations of her own to the same event, billing it as a fundraiser for herself and giving the impression the county candidate was there to support her.
The big-name candidate apparently knew nothing about Greenwood’s invitations, which may have been distributed largely in the gated neighborhood of Canyon Crest. Greenwood was asking $100 per person, with proceeds going to her own campaign to attend her fundraiser, which was the other candidate’s event. Greenwood evidently became so desperate she was distributing her fundraiser invitations to those she hardly knew – inviting everyone for $100 and then asking them to attend for free if they’d just show up. The response wasn’t merely bad, it was abysmal. Largely through Greenwood’s mass distribution, the big-name candidate learned of the second set of invitations and the political sleight of hand.
In case it sounds like nothing more than a little misunderstanding, the county candidate was allegedly not pleased at being used. There was an additional problem of Greenwood’s giving the appearance the other candidate supports or endorses her when three of Greenwood’s opponents already have the candidate’s endorsement. Ury was at the epicenter, with his name as the RSVP contact for Greenwood’s fundraiser while simultaneously using the other candidate as a drawing card.
One Canyon Crest resident who learned about the ethical issue said, “Diane Greenwood is through.” Actually, she’s not, and that’s the problem. Her attempts at deception don’t end.
Greenwood recently interviewed with a union that works with the Fire Authority, seeking endorsement and campaign funding. The group long ago decided to oppose Councilman Ury on a variety of grounds. Here’s an account of Greenwood’s interview with the union last week from a highly reliable source. The union representing the firemen asked Greenwood in a very direct way if Ury is supporting her campaign. Greenwood answered in a very direct way that Ury isn’t supporting her. Her answer is amazing, given Ury’s “fundraiser” for her on Sept. 17 and his blatant promotion of her candidacy. As a problem for Greenwood, she has Ury’s endorsement on her Website. Since those who were interviewing Greenwood are not the bumpkins she thinks, they had seen her Website and reacted appropriately to her lie. Her denial isn’t good for Ury, either, as Greenwood is disavowing the endorsement from the one and only elected official who would actually put his name on her campaign.
Then there’s the matter of Greenwood’s vision of affordable apartments on top of retail stores at La Paz and Marguerite. Given Greenwood’s closeness to Ury, how does her vision reconcile with his remarks? Ury has for months been promoting the idea of “upzoning” the retail center (Big Lots corner), giving the property owners the option of residential zoning of up to 30 units per acre. If owners have the chance to get a windfall by razing the buildings and constructing high-density apartments, would they not do so? Despite Greenwood’s campaign theme of “quality of life,” the outcome is instead misery for anyone living in or near the project. Capistrano schools and four adjacent neighborhoods would be impacted, including Pacific Hills.
Here’s a statement directly from Greenwood’s campaign flyer: “I promise to run a morally responsible, ethical campaign and serve with these same values.” With six weeks to go before the election, Greenwood has ethically struck out.
|