LETTERS TO THE EDITOR POLICY: To submit a letter to the editor for possible inclusion in the paper, e-mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org or send it to 34932 Calle del Sol, Suite B, Capistrano Beach, CA 92624. Dana Point Times reserves the right to edit reader-submitted letters for length and is not responsible for the claims made or the information written by the writers.
ANNETTE SZLACHTA MCGINN, Dana Point
I initially supported by-district voting, thinking that residents who feel underrepresented may be emboldened to run for City Council from smaller districts in which they know their neighbors. However, I changed my mind when I saw the way in which the city attorney, his firm and the majority of the City Council members handled this transition. District four, with the highest Latino population, and district five, with estimated Latino voter registrations equal to or greater than those in other districts (source: Tan VI map and demographics), won’t get to field a candidate or vote for a representative until 2020. Viczorek’s and Muller’s justifications for selecting districts to vote in 2018 are risible and, to me, disingenuous. It’s regrettable that four Council members voted to deny the residents whom the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) is supposed to enfranchise a voice and a seat at the council’s table. Dare I conclude that the districting votes of Viczorek, Muller and Tomlinson, coupled with their votes to condemn the CVRA and earn Dana Point a prominent place on the social media platforms of the hate group Patriot Movement AZ, are motivated by racial animus? Or is their goal to deny the vote to residents who may not support their candidacies and grant the vote to those who do? As for Muñoz and Rutan and Tucker, LLC, isn’t it better for them to have Council members who refuse to allow bidding for the city’s contracted legal services?
Discussion about this post