Voice of San Diego Needs to Follow Up on Councilwoman Emerald’s Interview

Criticus Criticus 3 Comments

Share

I went back this morning and re-read the Voice of San Diego. A number of Marti’s answers look… disingenuous… after Mr. Murphy’s last post. For example:

“She said she cited the group in her endorsement of a new downtown library and City Hall because its support for the capital projects “surprised” her.”

Given that either most or all of the original 20 people Emerald met with were campaign insiders and donors, who she obviously knows very well, why was she ‘surprised’?

“I don’t want to get myself cut off from the community.”

Since these are the very example of insiders – campaign donors and activists – how exactly is meeting with these individuals, whose opinions already largely mirror your own, preventing you from being cut off from the community?

Why didn’t Emerald tell the Voice of San Diego reporter that the members of the Advisory Council was largely, or wholly made up of campaign contributors?

Simply put, unless Emerald revealed to the reporter that the members of the Advisory Council were largely campaign contributors, this is a lie by omission – information that any reasonable person would know would be part of the story if discovered.

The who, what, and where of Emerald’s Advisory Council is contradictory, and unclear.

The original release clearly states that there are 20 members in the Advisory Council. Four days later the Emerald office claims there were 34. When did the 20 become 34? Further, it’s unclear just which of the 20 met with the Mayor’s office and voted to support Emerald’s position on the library and city hall. Which 20 people were there? Were these 20 all campaign contributors?

Emerald’s office refused to answer press questions up front, stating that they needed to ask the City Attorney first.

What questions did Emerald’s office ask the City Attorney?

“Everyone brings a little something to the group,” Emerald said. “This is just a little more independent and across the entire district.”

This is perhaps the most outrageous comment I’ve read in a while. With either most or all of these Advisory Group members having a direct financial relationship with Marti Emerald’s campaign how are they ‘independent’ in any way?

Share

Comments 3

  1. Oh I’d love to hear Emerald, on the record, answering these questions. I went back and read the Voice articles and this reporter and he should be furious since she was misleading, at least.

  2. I APOLOGIZE TO READERS – THIS AFTERNOON I HAD TO SHUT DOWN COMMENTS FOR SEVERAL HOURS. I CAN SEE THERE WERE A LARGE NUMBER OF ATTEMPTED COMMENTS, BUT BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEM I WAS UNABLE TO REPOST THEM.

    INDIVIDUALS WHO POST OVER AND OVER WILL BE BANNED, REGARDLESS OF OPINIONS.

    MIGHTY THOR

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.