Has the Tea Party Invaded Morro Bay?

by Jack McCurdy

Synopsis: Morro Bay's long tradition of civility in city election campaigning seems to have been shattered this year with multiple-media attacks focused on mayoral candidate Betty Winholtz, which were linked to her election opponent, Bill Yates, and John Barta, whose name surfaced prominently in the Seagull Sentinel, a pseudo-newspaper flyer that was the main vehicle for the attacks on her. 

Throughout Morro Bay's 46-year history, city elections have been remarkable for their relative civility. Candidates have rarely even mentioned their opponents in campaigns. If they did, it was almost always about their voting records as incumbents or stated positions on issues.

There was a recall of several City Council members in 1978, but that campaign pales in comparison to what happened this year. For one thing, the multi-media weapons that were employed in the 2010 election campaign were not around 30 years ago.

The 2008 city election saw the emergence of selective and twisted information distributed around town in a flyer disguised to look like a newspaper. It was called the Seagull Sentinel. But it did essentially stick to local issues, as opposed to personalities.

Now, in last month's election, the 2010 Sentinel shattered what was left of that tradition of civility with one candidate being targeted with unproven charges, distorted claims about her voting record on the City Council, obliquely-worded arguments, false statements about issues on which she took positions, and personal attacks implying she had lied about her qualifications and career—and nearly all of it within just a few days of the November 2 election. She was even asked to resign before the election by four former members of the Council—over nothing more than a disagreement about an issue at a Council meeting.   

The target of all this was mayoral candidate Betty Winholtz, who returned none of the fire. 

The candidate linked to the anti-Winholtz barrage was Bill Yates, her election opponent, through his campaign treasurer, Floyd Davison, who was identified in the Sentinel as chairman of a committee that produced and paid for that flyer. 

Yates had stated on his website before the June 4 primary election: 

"I will run a clean, honest, upbeat, and respectful campaign; never utter an ill word against my opponents; operate on the highest ethical plane; and focus my commentaries on the issues and how I will address them." 

And yet in spite of the fact that one of the top officials of his campaign was directly responsible for the attacks on Winholtz through the Sentinel, Yates never uttered a word deploring the attacks, much less disavowing them. 

Those attacks on Winholtz went far beyond the Sentinel.

They were packaged into a multi-media assault of emails to individual voters, postings on web sites, slickly-edited video clips on YouTube, and even phone banking with pre-recorded robocalls to home phones—a tactic typified by races for state and national offices. The four-page Sentinel was mailed to residences and left on newsstands in shopping places.

It could have cost as much as $2,800 at 35 cents a copy to mail, had it been sent to all 8000 households in the city, according to a Morro Bay post office official, who declined to divulge how many were mailed. That's not counting the expense of producing the copies.

Even George Leage, a City Council candidate, got in on the recklessness with facts via an apparently plagiarized quote in the Sentinel. And the Sentinel, on page one, contains a number identified as that of the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). An FPPC representative said it is a Secretary of State number, not an FPPC number. 

Have Tea Party tactics of dealing in half- and untruths come to Morro Bay?

One long-time observer, Dorothy Cutter, who has lived in Morro Bay for 52 years, sees a political paradigm change here. "This is also a national trend and the disturbing thing is that it is now very easy to get lies going around and people believing them because they appear in so many sources that you begin to believe it is the truth."

Cutter is an up-front Winholtz supporter, but also has a broad historical perspective shared by others in town who have been here 20, 30, or 40 years and who also see the scope and tone of this year's city campaign as unprecedented.

Some political scientists would agree. They (Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson in their book, "Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy") see the "cords of accountability" to voters being weakened "because of the deliberate efforts of political elites to make it hard for Americans to know what they are up to—to manage and distort information in ways that greatly undermine the sway of ordinary voters." Although "none of these features is unprecedented," "their scale and the frequency of their deployment are."

The scale and frequency of deployment might be an appropriate local-level characterization of the anti-Winholtz emails, web site postings, YouTube video clips, robocalls, and flyers that made their multiple debut this year.

In the past, mailers have been sent to home addresses, but they typically lacked any names or organizations responsible for their preparation.

This time some names were on the psuedo-newspapers. The most prominent was that of John Barta, who has been suspected of and/or linked to previous city campaign materials, who is a former chair of the city Planning Commission, an avid pro-development proponent, primary advocate of revising the city's General Plan to allow  more square footage of dwellings to crowd residential lots, and whose bylined article in the Sentinel this year urged a vote for Yates, who he identified as "handsdown the best choice for mayor."

Inside the Sentinel is an article with the byline of Nancy Barta, presumably Barta's wife, who claimed that on a visit to "the grocery store, I was asked if it was true that Betty Winholtz was a lawyer, if she had eighteen years business experience, or if any other number of unbelievable claims about her were true." Asked by whom? She didn't say. But her article did call Winholtz "nice." She added, however, "it may not even be a good time to vote for someone 'because they are nice.'"

Winholtz flatly denies ever claiming anything other than her long experience as a math tutor with a BA in special studies and an MA in counselor education. And there is no record of anyone leveling such a charge of or even hinting about such fraud against Winholtz before.

John Barta, in his article, also said that "Betty is a nice person who is capable of projecting a sense of caring to others. But, after eight years on the council her record at producing positive results for the community is very weak. Simply put, Betty votes 'NO' on almost everything, unless, of course, 'yes' means 'no' in which case she may vote 'yes.'" That last sentence, some have remarked, is a good example of the confusion that the Sentinel and cohorts attempted to inject into the campaign. 

Her alleged voting "no" on almost everything was apparently tied to a box on page two of the Sentinel headed "Winholtz 'NO' Votes," which lists 38 issues, each described in a few words and therefore left unclear, that she allegedly voted no on. That's 38 out of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of votes during her eight years on the Council, which the article equated with no "on almost everything." Does it mean everything listed as issues or literally everything she voted on as a Council member? 

To "balance" out those no votes, a separate box listed three things that Winholtz allegedly voted yes on, including "Letting County take away our Sphere of Influence." No explanation of those eight words was provided.

Sentinel Implications Misleading

Lack of explanation, information, and context runs throughout the Sentinel, likely leaving even the most informed voters unable to understand the nature of the allegations. Anyone who listens to national political rhetoric—whatever the stripe—can probably see the similarity in ambiguity. 

In John Barta's praise of Yates, he said, "We prospered when he was mayor before and he can do it again." But no mention was made of his voting record while he was mayor, which, if he was a good mayor, would have been choice evidence to prove the case for Yates.

The final, official results from the election show Yates winning by 72 votes or a margin of .01% out of 5,084 votes cast in Morro Bay, with Nancy Johnson and George Leage winning the two open City Council positions. All three are scheduled to be sworn in at 6 p.m. on December 8 in the Vets Hall.

The Sentinel dated November, 2010, introduces itself on page one with nonpartisan articles encouraging people to vote and stating that the "Seagull Sentinel is dedicated to helping you become an informed voter in matters that effect (sic) our lives here in Morro Bay," misleading readers as to what is to follow on subsequent pages.

Abraham Lincoln is quoted as saying "elections belong to the people." The names of all the mayoral and council candidates are in large print. Pictures of both Winholtz and Yates are there—Winholtz's is even above the fold and Yates' is below. And a reminder to vote for two for Council. 

But inside, everything changes. Most of page two is taken up with the wastewater treatment plant controversy involving the Morro Bay City Council and the Cayucos Sanitary District, which own and operate the plant under a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) and board. It is laid out under the headline, "Sewer Plant Foibles." The misinformation hardly misses a sentence, but most of it is aimed at PERC Water, the company that was seeking to be allowed to present its sewer plant design to the JPA as a possible alternative. 

Under the headline "Late Breaking News-October 8th," it claims that "PERC refuses to provide numbers and pulls out of Morro Bay process!"

PERC Water has emphasized publicly that it had never planned to present specific costs of building a new wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) at its meeting on September 23 with Morro Bay city staff. It had planned to present its design for a plant it could build but declined to do so when the staff refused to agree to a nondisclosure statement regarding the information. The Sentinel made no mention of those facts.

However, Winholtz and the Council are also involved in those PERC Water accusations.

(See "Responses to allegations in the Seagull Sentinel Involving PERC Water")

Here are references to Winholtz and fellow Council member Noah Smukler:

—Accusation: "Following the selection of the technology and favored design and construction firm (Montgomery, Watson, Harza, or MWH, the current plant design contractor), a different company, PERC Corporation (the actual name is PERC Water), approached two council persons who then began to lobby the city to change course and use their (PERC Water's) different technology. The two involved council persons, Betty Winholtz and Noah Smukler, have repeatedly claimed that PERC (Water) offers superior and less expensive technology than the proven technology method already selected by the City Council."

Fact: PERC Water has consistently said it initially approached the city's staff, not any Council members, the record shows.

Fact: There is no evidence that Winholtz and Smukler lobbied the city to change course and use PERC Water's different technology. What they—and many others—did was urge the city and the JPA to allow PERC Water to present to them its ideas for a new sewer plant. And the Council and JPA agreed to do so. But PERC Water pulled out in October after a dispute developed over the process. (See Slo Coast Journal Article)

Fact: There is no evidence that Winholtz and Smukler claimed that PERC Water offers superior and less expensive technology. It is PERC Water that has offered a general estimate of the cost of a plant it could build and has described the technology it could offer, both of which would clearly appear to be superior to MWH if compared directly.

—Accusation: "Candidate Winholtz and her supporters for months have continued to claim that PERC (Water) will build the plant for $10 million less than the $28 million estimate currently in process with the City." 

Fact: There is no evidence that Winholtz or her supporters have claimed that PERC Water would build a plant for $10 million less than the $28 million estimate of MWH. It is PERC Water that has in the past provided an estimated cost of not $10 million less but between $8 million and $16 million below the $28 million estimate for a plant with the MWH design. But that PERC Water estimate was five months ago, and PERC Water has not provided an estimate lately since the scope and the design of the plant is changing as MWH develops the plan. The up-to-date estimate of building an MWH-designed plant was provided by MWH at an Oct. 14 meeting of the JPA board, and it was $34.5 million. 

—Accusation: On page three of the Sentinel, Winholtz is accused of preventing a lot in the Cloisters from being sold and losing proceeds to improve the city's existing fire stations because she insisted that a study be completed of protecting eucalyptus trees on the lot.

Fact: She says she has no memory of it, and no evidence is provided by the Sentinel that she even attempted to do so.

—Accusation: "A big chunk of the extra sales tax you have been paying is being used to fund the new fire station instead of money which should have come from the sale of the San Jacinto lot."

Fact: Winholtz says residents have not been paying extra money to fund the new fire station. Rather, voters approved a one-quarter-cent sales tax to fund fire and other city services. Until the Cloister's lot is sold, the Council is borrowing from that tax fund to pay for the new fire station and that fund will be reimbursed when it is sold.

—Accusation: The lot was valued at $2.3 million when it was first offered for sale, and now it is valued at less than $1 million.

Fact: No evidence of those figures is provided.

Winholtz provided some of her own responses to Sentinel accusations.

Stooping Lower

In addition to the Sentinel, email messages were distributed to voters supporting Yates and Leage. One directed people to a website called VoteMorroBay.com (now unaccessible), which had attractive pictures of Yates, Johnson, and Leage and complimentary information. Below those were photographs of Winholtz as well as D'Onna Kennedy and Jack Smith, who were candidates for the Council, that appeared to have been modified to give them a kind of green-grey cast. Visitors said it also contained negative comments about Winholtz, Kennedy, and Smith.

Another email message was distributed from "Morro Bob" with an email address of bob@votemorrobay.com, who was never identified. It asked readers to "Please check out this website before you vote in the Morro Bay City Council and Mayoral races on Tuesday. It contains important information about the candidates, including video links to their own statements regarding their accomplishments, lives, plans, and philosophies." Again, the website was VoteMorroBay.com.

The videos were accessed on YouTube where, among other things, one showed Winholtz in an uncomplimentary excerpt from a candidates debate that provided no explanation or context. 

VoteForMorroBay.com

The robocalls directed voters to a website promoting Yates, but also to one named VoteforMorroBay.com, which contained a letter calling on Winholtz to resign over her request to the city attorney and police chief to review an action by the Council on November 22. The letter was from former Council members John Baker, John Lemons, Bill Peirce, and Rick Grantham, whose term just expired.

Winholtz's letter said: "This is a formal complaint against certain members of the City Council of Morro Bay for violating the Morro Bay Municipal Code regarding joint meetings between the City Council and Planning Commission. This violation occurred November 22, 2010, during the regular City Council Meeting held at the Veterans Hall. At the close of discussion on agenda item D-4, during which council members and mayor acknowledged knowing the relevant ordinance, a vote was taken to violate the code, and the motion passed. In addition, City Council has caused the city’s Planning Commission to violate their obligation.

"I turn to you as a last resort having not faced so blatant a violation of the municipal code by this body."

City attorney Rob Schultz replied to Winholtz, in part: "As I have repeatedly stated to you, if you do not like an ordinance, than change it instead of trying to interpret it or manipulate it to serve your desired result." (See Schultz' Full Reply)

A more temperate response was contained in a press release to local media (See Press Release), which took the same position but failed to include Winholtz's complaint itself. 

Leage got into it with a rip at Winholtz in an email that said: 

"Sad News: One of the candidates for office has tried to take our local democracy straight off the tracks just before the election. Our local democracy works this way - You elect five members to the city council (four council seats - two each election - plus a mayor). These five elected officials sit down in a public forum and discuss the needs of our community. When the discussion ends a vote is taken and the majority position is respected as the  voice of the community. Unfortunately, one mayoral candidate just can't accept majority rule when things don't go her way in a vote. Last Friday she made a formal criminal complaint against the council majority because a vote didn't go her way last Monday at a council meeting. How on earth will we ever get anything done at a city council meeting when one member keeps threatening the others based on how they vote?...The whole thing reeks of banana republic mentality."

Leage also was quoted in the Sentinel as saying "A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation." That exact saying is widely attributed to James Clark (1854 - 1916) preacher, author and politician.

The multi-media attacks also took a few swipes at D'Onna Kennedy and Jack Smith, Council candidates. In an email to supporters, Kennedy said Morro Bay Bob accused her of voting irregularities, and she responded in an email to friends that she has never missed voting and has always voted properly. Although she didn't name Yates as the culprit, she said he "wears two faces." 

"Shame on you and shame on the groups conducting themselves in such a manner."

As far as the accusations against her, she said to Morro Bay Bob, "I am so shocked that your side has launched such smear campaigns and have failed to stand on your own merit and honesty . . . what happened to your integrity, honor and faith . . . I am so shocked that your side have launched such smear campaigns and have failed to stand on your own merit and honesty . . . what happened to your integrity, honor and faith . . .  Shame on you and shame on the groups conducting themselves in such a manner."

In an op-ed, Smith took strong issue with the things said about him in the Sentinel. One was the allegation he and Winholtz shared their campaigns, commonly known as "running as a slate." And being in "lock step" with Winholtz. He agreed that she and many others encouraged him to become a candidate but denied sharing campaigns. And no one has reported any evidence they did. In fact, it is commonly known that they don't agree on all issues, which he noted in his article.

The Sentinel said Smith "has been pushing for the PERC Corporation as the best thing since sliced bread for the wastewater treatment plant." What he did say, Smith emphasized, was that "the city needs to look at alternative wastewater technologies/options and choose what's best for Morro Bay." He said the video of the candidates forum on October 5 will confirm it.

Did all this Barta/Yates/Leage diatribe affect the outcome of the election?

Without a followup survey of voters or exit polling, there is no way to know. It could have hurt as much as helped the perpetrators, since a growing number of voters may be wising up to such tactics elsewhere.

Winholtz was considered by some as a favorite because she has always walked all precincts, meeting prospective voters, and has won two terms on the Council doing that. Rarely, if ever, has a Morro Bay mayoral or Council candidate lost after walking all precincts. 

But she was unable to walk them all leading up to the November 2 election, which might have lost her the edge she had in the primary when she finished first among four mayoral candidates. Smith was expected to walk many, if not most precincts, and may not have. 

In letters to editors Winholtz's supporters did their own accusing of Yates as a bully, based on first-hand reports of women who have been around him while he was mayor. And he is remembered by some as a very unpopular mayor, more due to his demeanor in presiding over meetings. 

But those who had and have those opinions based them on what they saw and experienced first hand, and not on concocted accusations that won't stand up to facts.

Name recognition is probably the most important factor in getting elected, so it may be that Yates, having served for three two-year terms as mayor, had an edge over Winholtz, serving her second four-year term as a member of the Council. An edge that turned out to be .01% in the final results.

Send your thoughts on this article to Slo Coast Journal Editor. We value your opinion.

Belted Kingfisher image on banner by Cleve Nash