SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
Indybay About Contact Newsletter Calendar Publish Community

Santa Cruz Indymedia | Government & Elections

Mike R's Anti-Campaign
by Mike R's Anti Fanclub
Sunday Nov 5th, 2006 7:50 PM
We're not associated with any parties and don't advocate any candidates. Honestly, we don't even advocate voting. But IF you vote, for fuck sake don't vote for Mike.

Yes, I know electorial politics can be a big bore. And certainly we agree that no so-called representative can represent your or my interests in all their complexity and contridictions.

That said, there are some people who claim to represent you who are worse than others. Some duplicitous souls who get elected year after year by convincing hapless youth that he and they share the same values.

For one city council candidate in particular, we read his carefully-worded campaign statements, many of whose positions "neither oppose not support" this issue or that and wonder what about several months ago when he was opposing the minimum wage law? What about last year when he supported police spying and supported hotel development? What about the two decades of anti-homeless, anti-poor, and anti-youth laws he's supported?

We're talking about Mike Rotkin. Is this really the best we can do? Is this really our "progressive" candidate? With progressive candidates like this, even ones who claim to be "Marxist-Feminist," who needs conservative opposition?

Frankly, for some of us old and young who've lived here for years, decades, we're sick to death of it and we'd like to set the record straight. Tepid, ambivalent, and safe campaign period positions aside:

  • Mike Rotkin Opposes Minimum Wage Hike (Santa Cruz Sentinel, May 25, 2006)
  • Mike Rotkin Supported Anti-Homeless Laws (San Francisco Chronicle, February 24, 1994)
  • Mike Rotkin Supported Downtown Ordinances (San Francisco Chronicle, February 24, 1994)
  • Mike Rotkin Voted To Pave Arana Gulch (Santa Cruz Sentinel, June 21, 2006)
  • Mike Rotkin Supported Police Spying (Santa Cruz Sentinel, January 24, 2006)
  • Mike Rotkin Supported Coast Hotel Development (Santa Cruz Sentinel, February 23, 2005)
  • Mike Rotkin Opposed Downtown Plaza (Santa Cruz Sentinel, September 23,1999)
  • Mike Rotkin Axed Citizen Police Review Board (San Jose Mercury News, February 13, 2003)
  • Mike Rotkin Refuses To Limit Police Power (Santa Cruz Sentinel, January 24, 2006)
  • Mike Rotkin Supported Outdoor Sleeping Ban (Santa Cruz Sentinel, May 9, 2002)
  • Mike Rotkin Supports Marijuana Enforcement (San Jose Mercury News, October 30, 2006)
  • Mike Rotkin Supported Anti-Party Laws (Santa Cruz Sentinel, June 14, 2005)
  • Mike Rotkin Limits Public Voice In City Council (Santa Cruz Sentinel, August 14, 2005)
  • Mike Rotkin Blocked Call For Bush Impeachment (Santa Cruz Sentinel, July 26, 2006)
  • Mike Rotkin Opposed Metro Bus Strike (Santa Cruz Sentinel, August 30, 2005)
  • Mike Rotkin Supported Boardwalk Expansion (Santa Cruz Sentinel, October 3, 1998)

We're not associated with any parties and don't advocate any candidates. Honestly, we don't even advocate voting. But IF you vote, for heaven's sake, don't vote for Mike.

He doesn't represent you.


Feel free to post this flier about. We did. 6000 of them on the westside, downtown, UCSC, and some of the eastside.

AS AN ASIDE: We witnessed campaigners with the Progressive Coalition methodically tearing legally hung political fliers off of poles and streetlights. SC Muni Code says you can hang fliers on utility poles as long as you don't permantently harm the pole and remove them after the event.

So in a town with a "progressive" focus on free speech, the Progressive Coalition works to silence voices opposed to the status quo. A formal complaint has been made with the SC County Elections Board and the County Clerk.

§CORRECTION: Not the Progressive Coalition
by Anti-Mike Fanclub Monday Nov 6th, 2006 6:36 PM
Correction.

It was NOT the progressive coalition doorhnager people who were ripping down the political fliers.

It was the people who were hanging the "Santa Cruz Voter Guide" who were systematically pulling down fliers critical of Rotkin. This is the doorhanger distributed Sunday afternoon that reads "Democrats and Locally Owned Businesses Recommend..." One of the people they recommend is Mike Rotkin who walks the fence between the two groups.

So as campaigners were hanging the Santa Cruz Voter Guide, they were also stifling the free speech of others.

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by another poster
Sunday Nov 5th, 2006 11:08 PM
In response to our truly grassroots anti-campaign, we witnessed campaigners with the Progressive Coalition methodically tearing legally hung political fliers off of poles and streetlights. While hanging the Progressive Coalation's famous and influencial door hangers with Mike Rotkin's name, they were removing anti-Rotkin fliers.

Fliers were removed on California, Mission, King Street, and twice on Laurel.

They want to silence the people's voice. The message is clear: If your daddy doesn't own a radio station or a newspaper and if you are not kowtowing the progressive santa cruz line: -- shut your mouth.

We set out on this experiement to see if the power of the people was greater than the power of money and influence. We won't be quiet.

If you are sick and tired of Mike's bullying pseudo-progressive reign as we are, please print the fliers and post them around your neighborhood.
by Sentinel Repost
Monday Nov 6th, 2006 7:51 AM
From 'Cops and Courts' in Monday's Santa Cruz Sentinel

Fliers attack candidate Rotkin

Reports were made Sunday of people posting political fliers around downtown streets that painted City Council candidate Mike Rotkin in a bad light.

Rotkin said he saw copies of the fliers "full of ridiculous stuff" after some friends of his removed them from telephone poles and took some to his house.

The fliers were stapled onto telephone poles around noon and stated he supports police abuse and doesn't support the homeless, Rotkin said.

His friends told him they followed the people that were distributing the fliers, two men between the ages of 18 and 20, and took the fliers down right after they were posted. The men reportedly hit Center, Chestnut, Washington and Cedar streets, then ended up inside a downtown area home.

"The point is they're not signed by anybody," Rotkin said. "It's not the way to do politics."
by Robert Norse
Monday Nov 6th, 2006 9:39 AM
"Rotkin said he saw copies of the fliers 'full of ridiculous stuff' "

Ridiculous stuff? * Opposes Minimum Wage Hike (Santa Cruz Sentinel, May 25, 2006)
* Supported Anti-Homeless Laws (San Francisco Chronicle, February 24, 1994)
* Supported Downtown Ordinances (San Francisco Chronicle, February 24, 1994)
* Voted To Pave Arana Gulch (Santa Cruz Sentinel, June 21, 2006)
* Supported Police Spying (Santa Cruz Sentinel, January 24, 2006)
* Supported Coast Hotel Development (Santa Cruz Sentinel, February 23, 2005)
* Opposed Downtown Plaza (Santa Cruz Sentinel, September 23,1999)
* Axed Citizen Police Review Board (San Jose Mercury News, February 13, 2003)
* Refuses To Limit Police Power (Santa Cruz Sentinel, January 24, 2006)
* Supported Outdoor Sleeping Ban (Santa Cruz Sentinel, May 9, 2002)
* Supports Marijuana Enforcement (San Jose Mercury News, October 30, 2006)
*Supported Anti-Party Laws (Santa Cruz Sentinel, June 14, 2005)
* Limits Public Voice In City Council (Santa Cruz Sentinel, August 14, 2005)
* Blocked Call For Bush Impeachment (Santa Cruz Sentinel, July 26, 2006)
* Opposed Metro Bus Strike (Santa Cruz Sentinel, August 30, 2005)
* Supported Boardwalk Expansion (Santa Cruz Sentinel, October 3, 1998)

"The fliers were stapled onto telephone poles around noon and stated he supports police abuse and doesn't support the homeless, Rotkin said."

The flyer texts are quoted above; none of them state what Rotkin and the Sentinel claim.

This is standard procedure for Rotkin at City Council when he dismisses criticis (frequently with repetitively false or misleading stats).

Folks should be advised that Mayor Mathews, Rotkin's running mate and faithful echo, has voted virtually identically on all these issues.

Vote No on Rotkin and Mathews.

Organize to fight the Rotkin-Mathews Council!
by revochick
Monday Nov 6th, 2006 9:57 AM
Mike Rotkin gave his offical endorsement to Dale Skillcorn for District 7 City Council Watsonville election. Dale Skillicorn is a racist...only outreached to white voters, had no spanish is his literature and is slinging mud like crazy against his opponent. MIreya Gomez who is a honest campaining hometown girl with a degree from UCSC and over 10 years of community organizing experience.

MIKE ROTKIN IS A SCAM ARTIST! HE IS PHONY...HE IS SUPPORTING THE MOST INTOLERANT ASS ON THE WATSONVILLE COTY COUNCIL.
by local
Monday Nov 6th, 2006 12:33 PM
I saw the flyers all around downtown and UCSC. You guys rock! Thanks so much for doing this. So many of us are working so hard on all kinds of issues, that it's been really tough to take on *yet another* struggle. So thank for doing yo thang.

I'd like to see Rotkin disqualified for pulling down candidates flyers... hahaha.
by Becky Johnson
Monday Nov 6th, 2006 4:22 PM
councilmembermikerotkinapril112006.jpg
councilmembermikerotkinap...

MIKE ROTKINS SAYS IN THE SENTINEL: ""The point is they're not signed by anybody," Rotkin said. "It's not the way to do politics."

BECKY: Apparently it was an ad hoc group that distributed the flyer. There is no law saying you have to put your name on a flyer, and many flyers don't. But the content was right on the money with each claim backed up by a Sentinel, SF Chronicle, or SJ Mercury news article. Who printed it is not really relevant if everything on the flyer was accurate.

Here is what Rotkin's campaign flyer says:

(2 colors, 2 folded 8" x 11" format with 9 photos--mailed to my home)

MIKE ROTKIN IS WORKING ON THESE ISSUES:

Greenbelt Protection
Coastal Protection
Alternative Energy & Green Building
Neighborhood Involvement and Planning
Regional Traffic Management
Public Transit Expansion
Responsible UCSC growth (yes on i & j)

HERE IS HOW MIKE ROTKIN "DOES POLITICS":

Greenbelt Protection = busting homeless for "camping" while refusing to open a legal campground
Coastal Protection = pushing for a HUGE hotel to be built on OUR BEACH by an out of state developer in Idaho!
Alternative Energy & Green Building = supported busting homeless recyclers for taking recyclables out of people's containers even with their permission!!

Neighborhood Involvement and Planning = rush it thru behind closed doors, spend a ton of money on it, and when it comes time to vote plead "but we've already invested so much!"
Also: he CUT city commissions in half (only meet once every TWO months) claiming a "budget problem" and worked with Emily Reilly to axe completely the Civilian Police Review Board. He also cut public comment on ALL AGENDA ITEMS to five minutes TOTAL (no restriction on HIM though!) to drastically cut back public comment which he called "wasting our time."

Regional Traffic Management = speed bumps, potholes, and considerable disrepair to streets amounting to decades of neglect on the part of the city administration. Rotkin has been on and off the council since 1979.

Public Transit Expansion = failed to avert the bus drivers strike; costs for users have been rising steadily with routes being cut

Responsible UCSC growth (yes on i & j) = doing virtually nothing in 20 years to affect UCSC growth and strain on our cities infrastructure and housing stock.


MIKE ROTKIN HAS THE PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE NECCESSARY TO REVITALIZE OUR DOWNTOWN:

Sustainable Economic development
A Safe and Attractive Downtown
Citizen Involvement with all Planning Decisions
Creating High-Tech Westside Industrial Zone
Meaningful Job Opportunities
Supporting the Farmer's Market
Linking the beach and the downtown
Expanding eco-tourism and the arts

HERE IS HOW MIKE ROTKIN DOES POLITICS:

Sustainable Economic development = special give-aways for favored merchants such as parking perks

A Safe and Attractive Downtown = police state practices of removing seating space, criminalizing sitting, lying down, begging, playing music, political tabling, or even blowing bubbles or hackysacking, and arresting folks for small amounts of weed.

Citizen Involvement with all Planning Decisions = like the Coast Hotel Project rush job which triggered a citizen initiative to stop? Or maybe the coastal tidelands suit? He CUT citizen comment to a TOTAL of 5 minutes on all agenda items---an action not taken by any other mayor in the state---and had Pat Ring arrested for 5 days for yelling at him in a public place. Pat was released and no charges were filed.
--Tried to get the grounds at City Hall closed at night to stop a vigil being held there.

Creating High-Tech Westside Industrial Zone = Texas Instruments is gone. Lipton is gone. Intel is gone. So far, his plan is going backwards!!

Meaningful Job Opportunities = as long as they can be paid the minimum wage!! Supported hiring contractors rather than using city employees for city services since they wouldn't need to be paid a living wage or benefits. Supports Charles Canfield and the Seaside Company despite being anti-union.

Supporting the Farmer's Market = by trying to pass the 15-minute rule in the parking lot next to it, which would have banned the Food Not Bombs feeding there every Wed.

Linking the beach and the downtown = supported the curfew on the riverbank and the youth curfew

Expanding eco-tourism and the arts = ???? and the 48 million dollar Saltz Tannery Project for the artsie types. In a major budget crisis in which they have to ask for MORE TAXES even as they pay golden parachutes to elite city staff members upon their retirement!


BTW --- I have signed this message with my real name.
by Tim Rumford
Tuesday Nov 7th, 2006 7:39 AM
Its our right to put up election material!
by Tim Rumford
Tuesday Nov 7th, 2006 7:41 AM

Its our right to put up election material!
by Tim Rumford
Tuesday Nov 7th, 2006 8:07 AM

Side two - get it out. You should be able to right click and save the image.

by Cholito
Tuesday Nov 7th, 2006 2:46 PM
I must say, that "I dont like Mike" button is great. Props to whoever came up with it.
by Mr. Cantstandrotkin
Tuesday Nov 7th, 2006 5:38 PM
This is unbelievable. I thought I was the only person who thinks Rotkin sucks. Good job on the campaign of fliering; however, there should have been more communication to get people (such as me) aware and involved. I would have gladly helped. Let's hope he doesn't win and continue to rule Santa Cruz as if he owns the place. Down with Rotkin.
by local
Wednesday Nov 8th, 2006 1:31 AM
As you can see, Rotkin (and Matthews) got themselves re-elected tonight. But consider this campaign a good starting point for a long term campaign to make the city council more accountable to the people. Rotkin and Matthews hide behind progressive images while damaging the city. Make this election the start of something new rather than the end of a good idea.
by Becky Johnson
Wednesday Nov 8th, 2006 8:16 AM
Charles Canfield of the Seaside Company must be dancing a jig today!!

Not only did all THREE councilmembers who are slavishly devoted to anything the Seaside Company wants win, but he can continue to pay his workers extremely low wages!!

What were the so-called "progressive" voters doing voting for continued exploitation by the Seaside Company?

Why did Neil Coonerty misrepresent Measure G as "anti-family business' when HE KNEW it contained a provision EXEMPTING family members from the ordinance? Fear-mongoring and misleading the public are OKAY to him, I guess.

Between Ryan and Neal we have some pretty disingenous politicians running our local government.

by Rico
Wednesday Nov 8th, 2006 8:54 AM
Politics is just a distraction from where we really vote -- out in the streets. I'm voting today and every day thereafter.

Look for every opportunity possible to resist the oppressive city council and SCPD. They have little power over you the moment you realize they are just hot air.

We refuse to ask permission to live our lives.