Mary England, the president and CEO of the La Mesa Chamber of Commerce and longtime member of the Lemon Grove City Council, confirmed today for SD Rostra that she is running for the open 79th State Assembly District seat. England is the first Republican to enter the race.
“As a city councilmember and a small business owner, I have grown increasingly frustrated with the fiscal mismanagement and political game-playing in our state capitol,” England said. “The politicians in Sacramento continue to increase the tax and regulatory burdens on California businesses, seemingly unconcerned about the harm it does to our state’s employment rate.”
Recently reconfigured during the redistricting process, AD 79 includes the cities/communities of La Mesa, Lemon Grove, and some of Spring Valley, as well as portions of the cities of San Diego and Chula Vista, including Bonita and Otay. Party registration in the district is about 43 percent Democratic and 29 percent Republican, with just under 23 percent decline-to-state. Assemblyman Marty Block (D), who lives in the area, is running for Senate, making this year’s open seat race a potential barn-burner.
Democrats already announced for the seat include Chula Vista Councilmember Rudy Ramirez, Sid Voorakkara, on leave from The California Endowment, Pat Washington, a member of the City of San Diego Human Relations Commission, and former San Diego Unified School Board Trustee Shirley Weber. La Mesa Councilmember Dave Allan announced as an independent in November of last year, but subsequently had a change of heart.
England also provided a formal statement:
“I believe that our state urgently needs leaders with real world experience and the strength to make the tough decisions necessary to restore the luster of our Golden State. After much consideration, I have decided to step up and join the reform effort by entering the race for the 79th State Assembly District.
“My priorities will be to encourage private sector job growth, balance the state budget without raising taxes and reform of the state’s public pension system. Fixing California so that it works again for all citizens is a daunting task. But it’s a challenge that I am prepared to meet.
“My experiences as a businesswoman, as a member of the Lemon Grove City Council and my role as a chamber of commerce executive have given me valuable perspective on what we need for a healthy, vibrant economy.
“I will formally announce my candidacy for Assembly in a few weeks, but I am working already to build a successful campaign to bring common sense and real world experience to our state capitol.
“I hope you will join me in that fight.”
# # #
This also appears at the FlashReport.
Comments 15
FYI, Jantz is quoted here on the story…
http://lamesa.patch.com/articles/upset-with-sacramento-mary-england-says-she-ll-seek-assembly-seat
Barry Jantz, a former La Mesa councilman who blogs for the conservative SDRostra website, says…
“Given the party registration in the district, the 79th is viewed by many as an uphill battle for anyone other than a Democrat,” Jantz said via email.
“But given the high percentage of those independents who decline to state a registration—at 23 percent—this seat is more competitive than it appears, especially for a sitting councilmember known fairly well in two cities within the district.”
Jantz says England is a popular figure in Lemon Grove and is known in a positive light for her Chamber of Commerce work in La Mesa.
“Her decision to run makes the campaign for the seat exceedingly more interesting,” he said.
Time to fact check: Is Mary England “the first Republican to enter the race?” Secretary of State lists her as a “non-partisan” and Matt Mendoza appears to be the only GOP candidate in the race.
http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Candidates/List.aspx?view=intention&sort=RACE&electid=25
Since when do Republicans endorse “non-partisans”? Like Mary England?
http://cagop.org/pdf/Final.pdf
http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Candidates/List.aspx?view=intention&sort=RACE&electid=25
Thanks, Jefferson. Please note the page also shows Derrick Roach, running in AD 80, as non-partisan. He is a local party officer, so how can that possibly be? Answer: The “top-two open primary” allows for candidates to list their party or not on the ballot. The linked page you show does not necessarily show party registration, it apparently shows how the candidates will be listed on the ballot. A check with the Registrar of Voters will prove that indeed Ms. England and Mr. Roach are both registered Republicans.
My answer here is not to address the strategy behind opting one way or the other to list one’s actual registration on the ballot. But, I can see how both of the candidates noted — running in leaning or heavy Democratic districts — would choose to do so.
Unless the page you link is incorrect (and thus my answer wrong), it does bring up an interesting scenario, of course. Those Republicans going to vote in an open primary who will vote for a Republican regardless — they will see only Mendoza listed that way. This first such open primary may provide a test of something, one which remains to be seen.
The San Diego Registrar of Voters candidate list tells a different story from that of “Jefferson”:
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/voters/Eng/election/0612candlist.pdf
On Page 6, it lists Mary England as a Republican. Same thing for Derrick Roach, Republican, at the bottom of page 6. The Registrar of Voters prints the Ballots, so there you are.
Thanks Barry and Sam. June certainly will yield some new experiments in listed party preference and so forth. How has the Party responded? Can a Republican candidate that lists “No Party Preference” on the ballot qualify for the CRP endorsement? Wouldn’t it be embarrassing to endorse someone who ran from the Party brand?
Regarding the party designation, a similar incident occurred in Ventura county, where “Republican” supervisor, Linda Parks, attempting a congressional run to replace Elton Gallegly, tried to run as a non-partisan, while retaining her Republican party membership. She was informed that to run as a non-partisan/decline to state, she had to be registered as one. As such, she was forced to change her party membership in order to run as a non-partisan/decline to state.
Unless the laws are different for federal versus state campaigns, I would think that Derrick Roach and Mary England, would have to do the same as Linda Parks.
While I think this is a dumb strategy by both, especially Mary England, since IMO she has an actual chance to win, this is another example of the stupidity of the Maldonado Prop.
I can’t speak to the Linda Parks situation, but certainly one of the outcomes of candidates opting to not list their party registration, is some party folks being offended by their view of that strategy. Other party organizations likely get it as simply another strategy to an end. All results of the Maldo “experiment,” yes.
This entire discussion apparently comes down to the info simply being incorrect. From a local consultant, that I trust as completely credible…
“Mary and Derrick are registered Republicans and both ‘declared’ as Republicans when they filed their candidate statements. I have no idea why the Secretary of State lists Mary as Non Partisan, but it’s not consistent with the paperwork filed with the Registrar.”
As Sac Sam notes above, then.
You got the facts wrong, Jefferson, trying to make a lame point against Republicans. Then you had a chance to acknowledge your error, like an adult, but didn’t do that either. Instead you asked how embarrassing it would be if a hypothetical Republican candidate ran from the Brand!
“Embarrassing” is someone who calls himself Jefferson, but opposes about everything Thomas Jefferson stood for (Limited government, state and local rights, low taxes).
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Back it up. Beep, beep, beep.
No need for potshots. I was merely pointing out that the Secretary of State listed (and still lists, as of the writing of this comment at 4:13 p.m.) Mary England as “non partisan” on the campaign finance page. Go ahead and click it and find out for yourself.
I thank you and Barry for clarifying the situation. It looks like the Secretary of State needs to correct its post — I just happened upon it like any other junkie on this site who loves limited government, state and local rights and low taxes. 😉
I don’t seem to be the only one who found the mistake:
http://lemongrove.patch.com/articles/gop-backed-mary-england-is-listed-as-nonpartisan-for-assembly-rac
If’ it’s in pill form, I’ll have what Jefferson is ingesting. Let’s call it fluoride and put it in the water supply!
I too didn’t view Jefferson’s original questions as an attack, rather than a legitimate inquiry that came from the Secretary of State’s listing, confusing to say the least. All was clarified today, in that the consultant I quoted the other day was correct that England will be listed as a Republican, but still had no idea what was up with the state listing. As the Patch article mentions, the paperwork filed with the state was marked incorrectly. This was the 501, aka the Intention of Candidacy. That form has nothing to do with the way one appears on the ballot, but you can see what kind of disconnect is caused by such an error, especially when there are multiple places to look at such records. As a side note, the Patch story originally indicated today that England was not running as Republican; I let the reporter know that was incorrect and after further research, the confusion was sorted out and the story corrected. A lesson here to all candidates: Check your paperwork before signing, even if you have professionals filling it out for you. See Kindee Durkee for a primer on worst case scenarios.
I hope the little boy got the therapy he needed after that experience.
—-
This spam comment is too funny to take down, but it would have been funnier had it been posted on a recent mayoral race blog entry – Admin