News in Media 6
Editorials and Letters to Editors:
Letters
to the Editor
C.V. incorporation:
It’s up to the voters
HERE AT The Pine Cone, we have selfish reasons to want the Town of Carmel Valley to be created. Elections in the new town — which would regu- larly pit ardent no-growthers and environmentalists against people who think property rights, affordable housing and a vibrant economy also matter — would be fascinating to cover. So would the meetings of the Carmel Valley City Council and Planning Commission. So when you vote in the November election (absentee ballots go out Oct. 5 and election day is Nov. 3), if your goal is to make The Pine Cone’s staff happy, vote Yes on incorporation. (If this editorial were a text message, we’d insert a smiley face icon here.) However, we admit that residents of Carmel Valley have a bit more at stake. For people who live there, the main issues are two: n Without incorporation, will Monterey County supervisors allow Carmel Valley to be overdeveloped?
The answer is they can’t. As the result of a lengthy legal battle following the approval of Carmel Valley Ranch more than 30 years ago, Carmel Valley has a highly restrictive general plan which prohibits most new subdivisions and strict- ly limits development on lots of record. If the Monterey County Board of Supervisors decided to open the floodgates by amending the general plan to per- mit extensive new development, those changes would be halted in their tracks by CEQA. So residents of Carmel Valley can rest easy, knowing that it is impossi- ble for their valley to experience San Jose-style (or even Carmel-by-the-Sea- style) development. What incorporation proponents don’t want is any development at all. And while the United States Constitution protects the rights of property owners to use their property in an economically beneficial way, making some new develop- ment on existing lots inevitable, it is certainly true that an activist city council with plenty of taxpayer funds to spend on experienced no-growth lawyers could delay even the most determined property owner’s development plans almost indefinitely.
So while the Monterey County Board of Supervisors couldn’t allow intensive development even if it wanted to, a no-growth city council could probably fig- ure out a way to prevent the few development projects the board might approve under the existing Carmel Valley general plan. Is that what Carmel Valley voters want? It is up to them. n Can Carmel Valley afford to incorporate? Even in these tough times, it stands to reason that, if any group of citizens in the State of California can afford their own local government, the people of Carmel Valley can. Upscale communities always pay far more in taxes than they receive in government services (whether federal, state or local). So, no matter what the fiscal analysis shows, the council of the Town of Carmel Valley should be able to pay its bills.
However, it is also true that adding a new lawyer of government invariably increases government expenditures.
So the question for the people of Carmel Valley is: Given that they can afford their own government, but also that the new government will cost extra, are the benefits of incorporation worth the costs? The answer to that question is in the eye of the beholder. In other words, it is up to the voters.
Incorporation of Carmel Valley seems likely to fail. If it does, we will be dis- appointed. But the will of the voters is to be respected. And if the people of Carmel Valley say they don’t want to incorporate, the question should be con- sidered settled for at least 50 years.
Candidate now favors
incorporation
Dear Editor,
When I became a candidate for council in the possible Town of Carmel Valley I wanted to get involved with my community but was undecided to incorporate or not. I am now decided to favor incorporation.
My decision is based on factual research of the past, reasonable evaluation of the pre- sent and professional appraisals of the future.
The central issue is this: Are the citizens of Carmel Valley better served by five mem- bers of the local town community that can be voted in or voted out of office or are we bet- ter served by five members of a huge county community when only one can be voted in or out? It is taking control of one’s destiny, for better or worse, and not leaving it to
strangers.
There are two ethical considerations for voters and candidates: If a voter is against incorporation then he/she should vote
against it and abstain from voting for any town council candidate because a vote for a council member implies a desire for a town which the first vote excludes. If a candidate for town council is dead set against incorporation then he/she should campaign against incorporation and withdraw his/her candidacy as an act of honesty. To con- tinue to denigrate the existence of the town and then volun- teer to administer should it become a town is dishonorable and a betrayal to all the citizens who voted for incorporation expecting loyal leadership.
An analogy is of a ship that may or may not set sail soon and someone is saying it shouldn’t, but if it does sail it won’t float and will sink, injuring all aboard and yet that naysayer volunteers to crew.
The passengers get to choose the crew to whom they are entrusting their lives. If the ship does sail with the pessimist now a crew member, he will certainly have motive to make sure it does sink so that he can say, “I told you so,” causing a self fulfilling prophecy giving great satisfaction to himself. In a way that’s sabotage.
John Barry Smith, Carmel Valley
From Monterey County Herald 9 Sep
Lots to love in Carmel Valley
The incorporation issue for the Town of Carmel Valley has caused strong feelings on both sides. Regardless of the vote, there is much to love in Carmel Valley: the dramatic climate change, hot and dry in the village, cold and damp at the mouth; the fog bank moving in and out.
Squirrels will still eat the bird seed, birds will poop on cars, the deer will munch, baby quail will scamper in July, and the poison oak will still itch.
Carmel Valley Road will always have tourists sightseeing, employees cruising to work, and the RVs taking up space. All will mix reluctantly. We will still meet our neighbors at the local markets and chat as we also buy our pumpkins and Christmas trees locally. We will check out the plants for sale at the nurseries.
We hope to find time to hike at Garland Ranch. We still pray for rain. We will worry about wildfires, earthquakes and mountain lions. In other words, we will continue to be a community of friends, neighbors and strangers living and working in a rural and urban environment surrounded by beauty all year long.
John Barry Smith
Carmel Valley
No on incorporation
Dear Editor:
At the recent Hacienda Carmel panel on Carmel Valley incorporation, the differences seemed to hinge on how much you trust government.
The proponents of cityhood quoted the LAFCO financial feasibility study, relying on the numbers implicitly (suppos- edly the city will continue to accrue a surplus, even while paying “alimony” to Monterey County). The opponents pointed out that those estimates were made when property values and related tax revenues were at their peak. The opponents wisely suspect that the new town council will tend to spend any surplus, and then look for other sources of revenue. This could be sales taxes, it could be occupancy taxes. Either of these can be increased by encour- aging tourism, new hotels, and other things nobody wants to see. Would our town council resist this temptation to finance their ideas for making Carmel Valley better? Those skeptical opponents suggested that, as the town grows on the urban radar, as in some other new cities, new regulations might come to bite us: requirements for sewers, roads, more housing. The proponents asked in essence “what government study are you quoting?” Glenn Robinson smilingly assured us that we will be happier with our neighbors
— “people we know and trust” — in the boss’ seat over us. I don’t know every- one in Carmel Valley, and I certainly don’t trust people based on their address! One more layer of government is
one more group of unneeded meddlers. Most people with common sense will vote against Measure G.
Jane Heider,
Carmel Valley Incorporation Myths
Dear Editor,
As a resident of Carmel Valley and mortgage banker
I would like to address the myths of incorporation.
First myth: “Incorporation is desired by the residents of CV.” Ninety percent of my neighbors, by a vote of the association, do not want to incorporate.
Second myth: “Incorporation will stop big development and developers.” How much big development has there been in the last ten years? There has been virtually no major devel- opment in the past 10 years in CV.
Third myth: “There are a number of major developments in the planning stages.” True. Speaking as a mortgage banker, the chance of these projects being financed in the next five years, given the current melt down of the financial markets, virtually nonexistent.
Fourth myth: “C.V., because of its wealth, can afford all of the amenities of a new city.” Well, Pacific Grove would seem to have a similar demographic and it’s considering filing for bankruptcy.
Fifth myth: “By incorporating, new major development will not happen.” Mmmm, well, if we look at the City of Monterey we have seen several major developments, i.e., Monterra and Pasadera and how have those major develop- ments worked out? Monterra is in financial trouble with var- ious law suits and the developer facing foreclosure. The Pasadera golf course is also in trouble and looking for a buyer.
And just this past week the new city manager of Del Rey Oaks said that new development is key to the survival of the city, citing the new shopping center at Canyon Del Rey and Highway 68. Mmm.
The residents of Carmel Valley are very aware of the financial situation of the surrounding cities and have been excellent watchdogs and stewards of our wonderful valley. There is no need to incorporate.
David Wheeler,
Carmel Valley
The Monterey County Herald
Updated: 08/10/2009 09:14:20 AM PDT
Preserve C.V. way of life
Good news for Carmel Valley residents who hate country living. It's ending! Prefer Pasadera McMansions, asphalt, stop lights, road noise, gridlock? Hate open space, farmland, woodlands, safe neighborhoods? Vote against incorporation. The county's facing bankruptcy and C.V. is its Troubled Asset Relief Program!
Subdivision city! The 1,150 approved/proposed new C.V. lots NOW in the pipeline will add 12,000 more daily vehicle trips on C.V. Road, now carrying 15,000 trips per day. The county will push hard for four lanes clear to Greenfield, municipal sewer systems and large parcel subdivisions. "Our goal is full build out in C.V. as fast as possible"˜ County Planner 2003.
Salinas Valley politicians and their "friends" control your life now; to them C.V. is like free money. Incorporation is about who controls your community: you or them; out-of-towners or locals; developers or you and your neighbors. Think about it while driving along C.V. (washboard) Road.
Don't take my word for it. Look at the trend over the last 30 years and what used to be a bucolic paradise. Township now!
J.D. Wachs
Carmel Valley
Vote for incorporation
In the late 1700s, there was a little problem in the colonies called "taxation without representation." That concern, (and others), resulted in the American Revolution. Today, in Carmel Valley we have a similar situation, though on a smaller scale.
Although Supervisor Dave Potter theoretically represents Carmel Valley at our county government, he's routinely outvoted by the other four supervisors. If you've ever visited Board of Supervisor meetings, our citizens are likewise customarily ignored. Unless, of course, you're a developer.
Similarly, Carmel Valley never receives its fair share of services compared to the taxes we deposit into county coffers. A vote for incorporation will rectify that shortchanging.
Some, like Bob Sinotte and his Libertarian brethren, think incorporation is a "stupid" idea. Well, there must be a whole lot of stupid (city) folks out there. And how many are unincorporating?
Sinotte equates incorporation with bankruptcy. Actually, incorporating in lean times can be the ideal time, instilling a frugality and financial rationality into government that would probably not prevail in times of abundance.
Elections aren't stupid, and neither is incorporation.
Larry Parrish
Carmel Valley
Who's really working for Carmel Valley?
It's wonderfully strange, or perhaps utter madness that both sides in the Carmel Valley incorporation fight claim the same goal ˜ to limit future development.
The pro-incorporation folks say that local control by a town council elected by the voters in Carmel Valley would do a better job of controlling development than the supervisors in Salinas.
The anti-incorporation folks want to sell us on magical thinking, the idea that the word "city" magically equates to high-rise buildings, multi-lane highways, hillsides covered with condominiums, new shopping centers with big box stores, and big increases in taxes. And that if we just put our heads in the sand and vote against local control, it will all go away.
Perhaps one way to differentiate between the two sides would be to ask which has been active in fighting development all along the way. It's clear that the pro-incorporation folks have a strong track record of fighting development, lobbying the supervisors, trying to stop specific projects, trying to ensure that the general plan will represent slow-growth interests. When and where have the anti-incorporation folks actually done anything?
Rob Cooper
Carmel Valley
A vote for representation
I have lived in Carmel Valley for 29 years and I want to preserve my quality of life.
As I understand it, a town of Carmel Valley would take power from the county in only a few areas: Land use, police, fire, animal control and public works. Those areas most directly impact the quality of my life in Carmel Valley. Decisions regarding those areas are made by a majority vote of five supervisors. I am only allowed to vote for one of those five, whose district covers a much larger area than the town of Carmel Valley. I cannot vote for or against the other four, whose decisions directly affect my quality of life. That reminds me of taxation without representation.
Incorporation would allow me to vote for all of the representatives whose decisions would directly affect my quality of life and they would reside in my community. If I want to talk to them, I wouldn't have to go to Salinas. If I don't like their decisions, I could vote against them the next time in a local election. In my mind, that is the best way to preserve Carmel Valley.
Barry Harrow
Carmel Valley
For Immediate Release Contact: Glenn Robinson, Citizens for Carmel Valley
Cell Phone: (831) 241-4475
Alt. Phone: (831) 656-2710
Carmel Valley to Vote on New Town in November
Residents Seek Local Control
to Stop Poorly Planned Development
The Monterey County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote today to place a measure on
the November 2009 ballot to ask Carmel Valley voters if they want to create a new Town of
Carmel Valley.
Carmel Valley residents have been fighting for 10 years to take control of development and land
use decisions in their neighborhoods. The solution: create the Town of Carmel Valley.
Currently, land use decisions are made in Salinas at the sole discretion of the Monterey County
Board of Supervisors.
Dozens of supporters of a new Town of Carmel Valley attended today’s Board of Supervisors
meeting to launch their campaign for local control.
“We started this effort to create the Town of Carmel Valley in order to gain local control over
many important decisions – land development, open space preservation and traffic control. By
creating our own town, with our own locally elected representatives, we will no longer be subject
to the County deciding these issues for us,” stated Glenn Robinson, a Carmel Valley resident.
Milt Kegley, who lives at the mouth of Carmel Valley is in favor of creating a new town to help
stop a large planned subdivision near his neighborhood. “The proposed Rancho Cañada
subdivision would build about 300 houses at the mouth of Carmel Valley. The County Board of
Supervisors routinely approves poorly planned development projects like Rancho Cañada
without regard for the concerns of local Carmel Valley residents. The only way to stop the
Rancho Cañada subdivision – and control the rate of development in our community – is to
make sure these decisions are made locally by electing our own town council.”
Former County Supervisor and Carmel Valley resident, Karin Strasser-Kauffman noted that
forming the Town of Carmel Valley would not increase taxes. “The independent, third party
study by the Local Agency Formation Commission of Monterey County shows that the new
Town of Carmel Valley would protect local taxpayers and provide improved services. This is
good news, indeed, at a time when we need certainty in planning. Taxes will not increase and
the 20-year budget projects a bright future for our valley.”
Carmel Valley Business owner Larry Bacon explained, “Over time, the new Town of Carmel
Valley will reduce taxpayer costs by keeping our tax dollars focused on efficient local services,
rather than sending millions of dollars to the County as we do today. Furthermore, due to
California state law and Prop 218, tax increases can only happen with a vote of the people.
Creating the town will not increase taxes.
Citizens for Carmel Valley is a volunteer, grassroots campaign committee that is mobilizing to
urge a Yes vote to create the new town in order to gain greater local control over development
without increasing taxes.
By LAITH AGHA
Herald Staff Writer
Posted: 02/02/2009 01:31:35 AM PST
After running the gauntlet of lawsuits, deferred decision-making and heated diatribes among rivals on its nine-year journey to getting on the ballot, Carmel Valley incorporation has hit another snag.
Franklin Lunding, a Carmel Valley resident and outspoken opponent of the proposed town, has filed two lawsuits against local government agencies.
And the same Southern California law firm representing Lunding in those suits has sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice seeking to block the incorporation process on grounds that the proposed town would violate the Voting Rights Act.
In one of the lawsuits, Lunding says the Board of Supervisors' approval of putting incorporation to a public vote was based on a flawed fiscal analysis of the proposed town's viability. In the other lawsuit, Lunding says the Local Agency Formation Commission wrongfully dismissed the California Environmental Quality Act when it approved the incorporation ballot.
"If they proceed ahead and an election is held, sooner or later the taxpayers of Monterey County will have to pick up the problems," Lunding said. Or there will need to be more development in Carmel Valley to generate more tax revenue, Lunding said. That would go against the motive for incorporating, which is primarily to grab local control to limit growth, he said.
The commission, which in December approved putting incorporation on the ballot, settled on a boundary of the proposed town that excludes Tehama, Clint Eastwood's luxury community that can be entered from Carmel Valley Road.
Lunding, who was against the proposed town before the final map was drawn, said excluding Tehama was a major blow to the proposed town's fiscal viability.
Lunding is founder and president of Planning 2020 Inc., a group he said is involved in planning issues throughout the state. Protect Carmel Valley is a new group headed by David Churchill, a Carmel Valley resident and attorney in Monterey, Lunding said.
Two battles
The Carmel Valley Forum, the nonprofit organization that has worked to get incorporation on the ballot, is named as a defendant in both lawsuits. Planning 2020 Inc., is listed as a plaintiff in both cases, and Protect Carmel Valley is listed as a plaintiff in the suit against LAFCO.
Supporters of the incorporation movement say the lawsuits are a last ditch effort by opponents to derail the process that was approved for a public vote nearly nine years after it began.
"Mr. Lunding is afraid of the vote," said Michael Stamp, attorney for the Forum. "He is afraid to let the people of Carmel Valley decide for themselves. He is throwing everything he can, including the kitchen sink, in order to stop it."
While creation of a town is the central matter being contended, the two sides have generally been fighting two battles. Opponents have routinely argued against the viability of the town, while proponents have pushed for the right to vote on the matter.
A long process
"They seem to be pulling out all the stops and are willing to use any and all legal means," said Mike McMillan, the Forum's secretary. "Whoever is behind it is very concerned because they are willing to spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to slow, delay or kill the whole process."
LAFCO commissioners have discussed the lawsuit in a closed-door session. Salinas Mayor Dennis Donohue, LAFCO's chairman, said he was not surprised by the court action.
Since a small group of Carmel Valley residents first met in 2000 to discuss incorporation, getting the issue to the ballot has been an arduous process.
After determining in late 2005 that an environmental review was not necessary, LAFCO appeared to be on the verge of approving the incorporation vote in October 2006. Instead the commission ordered the forum to produce an environmental impact report, which would have cost the group more than $300,000.
Ruling reversed
The Carmel Valley Forum answered by filing suit against the commission. A May 2008 court ruling determined that the commission's request was unsubstantiated, and included a mandate that the commission decide by December 1 whether to allow incorporation to be voted on by Carmel Valley residents.
The commission voted 6 to 1 in favor of placing it on the ballot, possibly by November.
Orange County attorney John Ramirez is representing the plaintiffs in both cases. Ramirez, who did not return a message from The Herald on Friday, also sent a letter last week to the Department of Justice on behalf of three people, saying "each of whom is a Latino resident of Monterey County who is opposed to the proposed incorporation of the Town of Carmel Valley."
Monterey is one of four counties in California determined to have a history of discriminatory voting practices. Any jurisdiction with this distinction must receive pre-clearance from the federal government for any proposed changes to voting procedure.
Revenue neutral
According to the letter, "the effect of the proposed incorporation will be to carve a wealthy white, English-speaking enclave out of a county in which a majority of residents are currently Latino."
This would shift political power from the county's minority residents to white residents of the proposed town, because Carmel Valley residents "would have control over a significant amount of tax revenue which is currently under the control of the county."
The letter also states that the proposed town would strip the county's Latino population of its influence over land issues in Carmel Valley.
Before LAFCO approved incorporation for a vote, it negotiated a revenue neutrality agreement with proponents to offset monetary losses the county would incur if Carmel Valley's 12,000 residents and its businesses incorporate.
While the lawsuits question the town's fiscal viability, Monterey County Counsel Charles McKee said LAFCO and the supervisors allowed incorporation to proceed to the ballot with the county financial interests considered.
The county's "obligation is to make sure that if an incorporation occurs, it is revenue neutral to the county, at the same time not allowing to move forward a town that is not financially viable," McKee said. "That wouldn't be in anyone's interest."
Laith Agha can be reached at 646-4358 or lagha@montereyherald.com.
Town Criers
The battle over Carmel Valley incorporation continues.
Lawrence Samuels is running for a seat on the Carmel Valley Town Council. But he doesn’t want the job, and he doesn’t believe Carmel Valley should be a town.
On Nov. 3, residents will vote on incorporation. On the same ballot, they’ll also be asked to elect five leaders to sit on the Town Council, and they’ll vote on whether members of the council – in future elections – shall be chosen by district rather than at-large.
Of course, the latter two measures are moot if the majority of Carmel Valley voters say no to forming their own town. And that’s what Samuels, chair of the Monterey County Libertarian Party, wants them to do. He says incorporation will ruin the valley’s rural nature.
“The other side truly believes this [incorporation] is going to make Carmel Valley more quaint, but they don’t realize once they’re gone, and the city doesn’t have enough money, they are going to build hotels, give land away to developers, build big resorts.”
If there is a new town, and he’s elected to sit on the council?
“Maybe I’ll resign,” he says. “I don’t know. I don’t want to be a politician.”
Samuels is part of a group of candidates running on an anti-incorporation slate – “don’t vote for me, don’t vote for the city,” he says – along with local actor Savva Vassiliev and KRXA radio host Scott Dick.
“We’re against incorporation for various reasons,” Dick says, adding that the proposed town’s two part-time public works employees won’t be able to provide sufficient city services. “We’ve chosen to live in Carmel Valley because we want to be left alone by the county. If we incorporate, we’ll turn into small-town politics, we’ll turn into P.G. We’ll have all the backfighting and finger-pointing and lawsuits that small towns have – except we’re not a small town. We’re a huge town with a small population.”
Five candidates make up the pro-incorporation slate: former County Supervisor Karin Strasser Kaufman, Naval Postgraduate School professor Glenn Robinson, biologist and Chamber Music Monterey Bay President Amy Anderson, investment firm Bacon & Company President Larry Bacon, and former teacher and Davis planning commissioner Priscilla Walton.
“Carmel Valley has outgrown the county,” Strasser Kaufman says. “People here do expect city services and quick response times. Counties are set up to be arms of the states, not provide services for densely populated areas. Carmel Valley is the only densely populated area that has not moved to safeguard its tax base and take local control of its land use. Both are really critical at this time when the state and counties aren’t very viable.”
It’s about land use and local control, echoes Robinson, who sat on the county’s Carmel Valley Land Use Advisory Committee. “Frankly, the county’s land-use planning in Carmel Valley is broke. We’ve seen two approvals of September Ranch, and Rancho Cañada – the dynamics of the county are to approve these.”
He says opponents who fear future hotels and mega developments in a Town of Camel Valley “are living in fantasy land. I have every confidence that the people of Carmel Valley will continually elect a Town Council that seeks to preserve what is so wonderful about this place.
“Even if a Town Council 15 years from now approves some development I didn’t like, well, at least it would be the people of Carmel Valley making that decision.”
The Planning Commission on Wednesday (after the Weekly’s deadline) was scheduled to hear a Bernardus Hotel request for an expansion of 16 new hotel units, and a new two-story administrative building. And the Carmel Presbyterian Church is seeking “vested rights’’ for a development in the mouth of the valley. “It would be a bad precedent for the valley and for the county,’’ according to CVA president Christine Williams.
Comments »
- Kirsten Honeyman
- Tue, Aug 18 | 07:24 AM
- If
we in Carmel Valley are truly concerned about preserving the rural
nature of our stunningly beautiful valley, a local town government
comprised of local citizens is the best way to go. Our current
situation amounts to a kind of taxation without representation. The
County Board of Supervisors has tended to support developments in the
valley which truly threaten its pastoral nature. When the unspoiled
land is gone, it's gone and, as Mark Twain once said, "They aren't
making any more of it!"
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924)
Back to: CARMEL VALLEY, CA, California, All US cities.
Discuss California on our active forum.
Important note: This list is based on the data made publicly available by the Federal Election Commission. City-Data.com has made no additional attempt to verify the accuracy or validity of the names on this list and it cannot individually remove or update any of the information. Please direct any inquiries or corrections to the FEC. City-Data.com will periodically update this list based on the data made available by the FEC. Note that it is possible for multiple persons to share the same name. Unintentional errors are possible. Do not use for any purpose before consulting official data provided by the FEC.
THESE INDIVIDUAL NAMES ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR ANY COMMERCIAL PURPOSES OR TO SOLICIT CONTRIBUTIONS BY LAW.
Back to CARMEL VALLEY, CA Contributions
1999 / 2000 Contributions:
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $225 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 10/02/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 10/17/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $225 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 10/25/00
DAVID L ALLARD (FRANKLIN RESOURCES INC), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 04/08/99
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 05/19/99
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $225 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 02/14/00
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 02/28/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $225 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 04/24/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $225 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 08/10/00
RUSSELL HATCH (MCSI WATER SYSTEMS), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 08/07/00
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $450 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 07/27/00
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 09/05/00
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 08/31/99
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS on 09/13/99
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 10/04/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 10/16/00
W J COLOHAN, (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 10/23/00
APRIL GAMBLE (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 11/16/00
DAVID LOCKTON (LOCKTON VENTURES), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 11/02/00
ROBERT C BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/21/00
ROBERT C BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/25/00
ROBERT C BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/28/00
ROBERT C MRS BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/25/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/12/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/25/00
BARBARA R STROHM (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/11/00
WILBUR J STROHM (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 09/11/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 05/10/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 07/14/00
HEIDI VON PAGENHARDT, (Zip code: 93924) $300 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 07/20/00
ROBERT C BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 08/08/00
ROBERT C MRS BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 08/08/00
BOB LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 08/11/00
BARBARA R STROHM (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $220 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 08/15/00
WILBUR J STROHM (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $440 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 08/10/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE - RNC on 11/28/00
JEROME MOORE, (Zip code: 93924) $250 to CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 10/05/00
DALE EBERLY (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $400 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 10/12/00
MAUREEN BRADFORD (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 10/27/00
MAUREEN BRADFORD (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 11/16/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 10/31/00
CONSTANCE M GLOY (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $340 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 01/20/99
CONSTANCE M GLOY (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $510 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 03/22/99
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 06/21/99
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 01/25/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 02/07/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 05/10/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 06/05/00
SAM HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 08/03/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 09/19/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 08/16/99
LEON PANETTA (PAMETTA INSTITUTE), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on 12/06/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 09/15/00
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 09/26/00
NANCY E HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 09/18/00
HOMER M MRS HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 01/14/00
ROBERT C BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 05/05/00
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 07/31/00
HOMER M MRS HAYWARD (N), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 07/22/99
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to NATIONAL REPUBLICAN SENATORIAL COMMITTEE on 08/29/00
E J HARDGRAVE (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $2500 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 11/02/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 10/27/00
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 09/05/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $400 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 09/25/00
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 09/02/99
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 11/29/99
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 01/24/00
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 02/08/99
DALE EBERLY (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 05/24/99
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 05/25/99
SAMUEL HOPKINS (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $400 to DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE on 06/14/00
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to VOTERS FOR CHOICE/FRIENDS OF FAMILY PLANNING on 03/09/00
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to VOTERS FOR CHOICE/FRIENDS OF FAMILY PLANNING on 05/03/99
LEON E PANETTA (CONSULTANT), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to GEJDENSON REELECTION COMMITTEE on 12/15/99
WARREN G WOOD (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 02/07/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $225 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 10/03/00
HOMER HAYWARD (CREATIVE ARTS DENTAL LAB), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 01/05/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $225 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 10/30/00
GORDON N HENTSCHEL (ESTATE RESORTS), (Zip code: 93924) $3000 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 10/31/00
HOMER HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 03/10/00
HOMER M M/M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $237 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 05/15/00
Mr. R W FRIEBERG (SALINAS VALLEY FORD), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 09/01/00
GORDON N HENTSCHEL, (Zip code: 93924) $2000 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 09/29/00
JOY N PRITCHARD (REAL ESTATE), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to CALIFORNIA STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY on 12/01/00
Donald D. Howard (Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $1200 to LINCOLN CLUB OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA FEDERAL PAC on 07/10/99
JANE OLIN (PHOTOGRAPHER), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to EMILY'S LIST on 10/26/99
LAURA ERBACH (COMM HOSP OF THE MONTEREY), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to EMILY'S LIST on 04/27/99
CONSTANCE GLOY (HOMEMAKER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to EMILY'S LIST on 06/13/00
CONSTANCE GLOY (HOMEMAKER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to EMILY'S LIST on 07/19/99
SUE JAMIESSON (SALINAS HYUNDAI), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to AMERICANS FOR FREE INTERNATIONAL TRADE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE INC on 04/25/00
SUE JAMIESSON (SALINAS TOYOTA-SALINAS HYUNDAI), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to AMERICANS FOR FREE INTERNATIONAL TRADE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE INC on 06/22/99
Mr. PETER NEUMEIER (NEUMEIER INV COUNSEL), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (LCV EARTH FUND) on 11/02/99
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (LCV EARTH FUND) on 07/21/00
Mr. Peter Neumeier (Neumeier Inv. Counsel), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (LCV EARTH FUND) on 08/03/99
ROLF LYGREN (LYGREN FINE ART), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to FRIENDS OF FARR on 10/05/00
SALVADOR PARRA ZARATE, (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to FRIENDS OF FARR on 10/30/00
ALAN G GIBERSON, MD (PHYSICIAN), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to FRIENDS OF FARR on 03/07/00
DAVID J III BENJAMIN, (Zip code: 93924) $500 to FRIENDS OF FARR on 07/10/00
ROBERT L HUNSICKER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to FRIENDS OF FARR on 11/19/99
ROLF LYGREN (LYGREN FINE ART), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to FRIENDS OF FARR on 11/16/99
ROLF LYGREN (LYGREN FINE ART), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to FRIENDS OF FARR on 12/07/99
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to AMERICANS FOR A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY (ARMPAC) on 09/08/00
LEON PANETTA (CSU-MB PANETTA INSTITUTE), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to ITALIAN AMERICAN DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COUNCIL on 11/02/00
PETER LOEWY, (Zip code: 93924) $500 to ABRAHAM SENATE 2000 on 11/20/00
PETER LOEWY (FRAGOMEN DEL REY ET AL), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to ABRAHAM SENATE 2000 on 09/20/00
CHARLES V FINELL (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $600 to ROGAN FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE on 05/24/00
RON FRIEBERG (SALINAS VALLEY FORD), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to TOM CAMPBELL FOR CONGRESS on 05/14/99
HOMER HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER CO), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to TOM CAMPBELL FOR CONGRESS on 05/27/99
DONALD HOWARD (ATTORNEY), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to TOM CAMPBELL FOR CONGRESS on 06/13/99
SUE JAMIESSON, (Zip code: 93924) $250 to TOM CAMPBELL FOR CONGRESS on 06/13/99
SYLVIA PANETTA (PANETTA INSTITUTE), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to FEINSTEIN 2000 on 11/01/00
LEON E PANETTA, (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to FEINSTEIN 2000 on 11/07/00
LEON E PANETTA (LECTURER), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to FEINSTEIN 2000 on 03/27/00
DAVID J BENJAMIN (TRIAD BROADCASTING), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to FEINSTEIN 2000 on 09/26/00
CHARLES HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY VOTERS ALLIANCE (PFAW VOTERS ALLIANCE OR PFAW VA) on 09/14/00
ALAN SILVERMAN (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to FRIENDS OF GIULIANI EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE on 02/01/00
TRACY COPPINGER (GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC), (Zip code: 93924) $375 to GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC EMPLOYEE PAC - GRANITEPAC on 05/15/00
MARK E BOITANO (GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC), (Zip code: 93924) $750 to GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC EMPLOYEE PAC - GRANITEPAC on 08/10/00
MARK E BOITANO (GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC), (Zip code: 93924) $750 to GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC EMPLOYEE PAC - GRANITEPAC on 10/08/99
TRACY COPPINGER (GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC), (Zip code: 93924) $360 to GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC EMPLOYEE PAC - GRANITEPAC on 10/01/99
Mr. Robert Hunsicker (N/A / Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to BILL BRADLEY FOR PRESIDENT INC on 09/30/99
Mr. Dale Eberly (N/A/Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to BILL BRADLEY FOR PRESIDENT INC on 11/23/99
Mr. Colburn A. Jones (Self/Investor), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 02/09/00
Mrs. Barbara B. Allard, (Zip code: 93924) $500 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 05/25/99
Mr. David L. Allard (Franklin Resources), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 05/25/99
Mr. David L. Allard (Franklin Resources), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 09/27/99
Mrs. Barbara B. Allard (Homemaker), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 12/16/99
Mr. David L. Allard (Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $750 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 11/12/99
Mr. David L. Allard (Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $50] to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 12/16/99
Mr. Philip W. Mothersill (Self/Counselor), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 12/27/99
Mr. Jack N. Swanson (Self/Artist), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to MCCAIN 2000 INC on 10/05/99
Mr. Samuel Hopkins (Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to GORE 2000 INC on 02/29/00
Mr. Charles Haber (Not employed/Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to GORE 2000 INC on 08/18/00
Mr. Leon E. Panetta (CA State University), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to GORE 2000 INC on 06/18/99
Mrs. Sylvia M. Panetta (Panetta Institute), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to GORE 2000 INC on 06/18/99
Mr. Samuel Hopkins (Not employed/Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to GORE/LIEBERMAN GENERAL ELECTION LEGAL AND ACCOUNTING COMPLIANCE FUND on 10/04/00
Samuel Hopkins, (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to GORE/LIEBERMAN GENERAL ELECTION LEGAL AND ACCOUNTING COMPLIANCE FUND on 11/11/00
Mr. Samuel Hopkins (Not employed/Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to GORE/LIEBERMAN GENERAL ELECTION LEGAL AND ACCOUNTING COMPLIANCE FUND on 09/12/00
Mr. Samuel Hopkins, (Zip code: 93924) $500 to GORE/LIEBERMAN GENERAL ELECTION LEGAL AND ACCOUNTING COMPLIANCE FUND on 06/12/00
Mr. Samuel Hopkins (Not employed/Retired), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to GORE/LIEBERMAN GENERAL ELECTION LEGAL AND ACCOUNTING COMPLIANCE FUND on 07/07/00
WARREN WOOD (CONSULTANT), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to KOSTMAYER 2000 on 12/14/99
Mrs. Sandra S. Miller (Self/Publisher), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to BUCHANAN REFORM INC on 03/18/99
Ms. Christian J. Miller, (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to BUCHANAN REFORM INC on 08/06/99
Ms. Christian J Miller, (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to BUCHANAN REFORM INC on 08/06/99
Mr. Homer M. Hayward (Hayward Lumber/Chairman), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 06/28/00
Mr. Homer M. Hayward, (Zip code: 93924) $500 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 08/26/00
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 06/04/99
DAYNA K PARKER (CONSULTANT), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 06/09/99
SARA L BRANDT (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 09/03/99
AMY BROTHERS (HOMEMAKER), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 09/03/99
JEFF E BROTHERS (MONTEREY BAY BOUQUET), (Zip code: 93924) $2000 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 07/09/99
JEFF E BROTHERS (MONTEREY BAY BOUQUET), (Zip code: 93924) $100] to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 09/03/99
HOMER M HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 09/08/99
LAURA A STAHL (HOMEMAKER), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 08/31/99
WILLIAM H STAHL (STAHL MOTOR COMPANY), (Zip code: 93924) $2000 to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 07/09/99
WILLIAM H STAHL (STAHL MOTOR COMPANY), (Zip code: 93924) $100] to BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC on 08/31/99
Mr. Edmund S. Hawley (Self), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to ELIZABETH DOLE FOR PRESIDENT EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE INC on 04/29/99
Richard Sedlachek, (Zip code: 93924) $250 to KEYES 2000 INC on 02/29/00
Mr. Robert D. Bindel (Self/Contractor), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to BUSH-CHENEY 2000 COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE INC on 09/18/00
Mr. Homer M. Hayward (Hayward Lumber/Chairman), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to BUSH-CHENEY 2000 COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE INC on 09/28/00
Mr. Homer M. Hayward (Hayward Lumber/Chairman), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to BUSH-CHENEY 2000 COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE INC on 09/29/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 10/05/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 10/19/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 11/02/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 11/16/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 09/07/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 09/21/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $800 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 02/19/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $400 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 03/28/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $400 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 05/08/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $400 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 05/25/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 06/02/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 06/16/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 06/30/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 07/14/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 07/30/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 08/10/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 08/24/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 12/04/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 12/14/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK (SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC), (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 12/28/00
ROBERT D LAMVIK, (Zip code: 93924) $200 to SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE on 12/29/00
CONSTANCE GLOY (HOMEMAKER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to MARTA MACIAS BROWN FOR CONGRESS on 09/15/99
CHARLES P HABER (RETIRED), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE-CONTRIBUTIONS on 02/10/00
LEON E PANETTA (LEON PANETTA INSTITUTE), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE-CONTRIBUTIONS on 03/31/00
LEON E PANETTA (LEON PANETTA INSTITUTE), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE-CONTRIBUTIONS on 09/29/00
LEON E PANETTA (LEON PANETTA INSTITUTE), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE-CONTRIBUTIONS on 08/06/99
LEON E PANETTA (LEON PANETTA INSTITUTE), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to NEW YORK SENATE 2000 on 12/07/99
EVA FRIEBERG (HOUSEWIFE), (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to CAMPBELL FOR SENATE on 11/01/00
RON FRIEBERG (SALINAS VALLEY FORD ISUZU), (Zip code: 93924) $100] to CAMPBELL FOR SENATE on 11/01/00
HOMER HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER CO), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to CAMPBELL FOR SENATE on 10/19/00
HOMER HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER CO), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to CAMPBELL FOR SENATE on 02/18/00
HOMER HAYWARD (HAYWARD LUMBER CO), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to CAMPBELL FOR SENATE on 06/27/00
RON FRIEBERG (SALINAS VALLEY FORD ISUZU), (Zip code: 93924) $2000 to CAMPBELL FOR SENATE on 09/30/00
NANCY HAYWARD, (Zip code: 93924) $250 to CAMPBELL FOR SENATE on 09/14/00
Paul Turner (AMS/CTO), (Zip code: 93924) $5000 to AMERICAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS INC POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (AMS PAC) on 05/31/00
Colburn A Mr. Sr. Jones (retired), (Zip code: 93924) $300 to NADER 2000 GENERAL COMMITTEE INC on 11/01/00
Ms. Rosemary Matson (retired), (Zip code: 93924) $500 to NADER 2000 PRIMARY COMMITTEE INC on 08/25/00
Ms. Robin Merrill, (Zip code: 93924) $300 to NADER 2000 PRIMARY COMMITTEE INC on 08/25/00
Mr. Richard Gold, (Zip code: 93924) $500 to NADER 2000 PRIMARY COMMITTEE INC on 08/25/00
CONSTANCE GLOY (HOMEMAKER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to AMERICA WOMEN VOTE 2000! on 09/22/00
JANE OLIN (PHOTOGRAPHER), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to AMERICA WOMEN VOTE 2000! on 09/25/00
LEON PANELTA, (Zip code: 93924) $1000 to FRIENDS FOR A DEMOCRATIC WHITE HOUSE PAC INC on 10/31/00
CARSON DR EOYANG (US NAVY), (Zip code: 93924) $250 to DNC-NON-FEDERAL INDIVIDUAL on 11/02/00
CV Incorporation Opponents File Lawsuit
Town supporters say pro-development interests behind legal challenge.
A local attorney with questionable past ties to a southern California campaign contribution scandal has filed a lawsuit intended to stop Carmel Valley incorporation.
Franklin J. Lunding and Planning 2020 Inc., a group he founded, recently sued Monterey County, the supervisors, and Carmel Valley Forum over the “revenue neutrality agreement” between Monterey County and the proposed town of Carmel Valley. (This agreement would require the new town to share new income it generates with the county so that the incorporation is “revenue neutral.”) The lawsuit alleges the Board of Supervisors’ approval of the agreement was based on a flawed “comprehensive fiscal analysis”– a report showing a town of Carmel Valley would be financially viable.
“My major concern is that the city [of Carmel Valley] will be bankrupt before it even starts,” Lunding says. “We’re saying this is not a revenue-neutral agreement and they should not enter into it because the numbers weren’t there.”
In December the Local Agency Formation Commission approved the incorporation proposal. County Supervisors are expected to put the issue on the November ballot, at which point residents will decide whether they want to form a new town– unless legal action derails the vote.
“Lunding and anybody else that was opposed to incorporation has had eight and a half years to make a variety of arguments, including those about the revenue neutrality agreement, and yet he waits until the final hours to do it,” says CVF Secretary Mike McMillan, who started the group in 2001. “It sounds like someone who is trying to sabotage or undermine the process rather than someone who has a legitimate legal complaint with the incorporation effort.
Although he lives in Carmel Valley, Lunding has been active in Irvine politics for two decades. Larry Agran, an Irvine City Councilman and former mayor, appointed Lunding to the city’s transportation commission in the late 1980s. In 2006, Lunding started a nonprofit called Planning 2020 (later re-registered as Planning 2020 Inc.), which received tens of thousands of dollars from developers and contractors with projects pending approval from the Irvine City Council.
According to reports in the Irvine Tattler, Planning 2020 paid for campaign literature slamming Agran’s opponent in the Irvine 2006 election. Two years later, Lunding created a political slate mailer– presented to local residents as a community newspaper– funded by Agran, Planning 2020 contributions and his political slate, which the mailer promoted. (Read Tattler and Orange County Register articles about the issue online, www.montereycountyweekly/see/irvine.)
“Political puffery,” responds Lunding. “Although some of the people who were supportive of Planning 2020 were also supportive of political measures, and the political measure committee did provide funds to various mailings and certain candidates that the opposition didn’t like, Planning 2020 is just trying to keep land-use decisions well planned.”
The group has received money from Monterey County contributors, Lunding says, although he won’t name them: “I can’t reveal our supporters.”
Incorporation supporters worry Lunding and Planning 2020 will accept big checks from developers who don’t want to see Carmel Valley incorporate and use that money to influence the election– or simply stop it from happening.
“The people of Carmel Valley have earned the right to hold a free and fair election,” says Glenn Robinson, a member of the pro-town Carmel Valley Association. “Unfortunately, not everyone shares that view. It’s too bad that this group of developers favor greed and power instead of democracy. Dirty tricks and sleazy tactics should have no place in this election.”
“We don’t deny anybody the right to vote,” Lunding says. “The issue here, for us, is the financial viability of this proposed new city and that has nothing to do with the right to vote.”
There are serious questions about the town formation but financial pressure willl be less not more if a town is formed.