“The congressman has told people in the district that he plans to lock her in the room, raise all of her money, and win it on her name ID,” Wilk said.

Oh no he didn’t.

Actually yes he did. The entire article is based on quotes from Wilk, who actually talked to the reporter. Patricia McKeon and her campaign “declined to comment for this story.”

So what else did Wilk say? Well he was surprised as the rest of us that Patricia McKeon, heretofore unknown in local politics, had decided to make a run for 38th Assembly.Here’s how he found out:

Wilk said the congressman didn’t call to inform him that Patricia McKeon would challenge him for the California Assembly seat. Instead, the lawmaker dispatched an aide to Wilk’s home at 9 p.m. to break the news, Wilk said. This, after Wilk’s family had donated $6,000 to McKeon’s campaign committee over the last five years.
“I started laughing because honestly that’s a scenario that never crossed my mind,” Wilk said. “Her political acumen stops at seating charts.”

No holds barred ladies and gentlemen.

The piece also goes into why Tony Strickland rescinded his endorsement from Scott Wilk. Strickland, who is no stranger to husband/wife political teams, said this:

The stature of McKeon’s husband is already a factor in the race. One of Wilk’s early backers reneged out of fear of offending the congressman. State Sen. Tony Strickland said he withdrew his endorsement after launching his own bid for Congress to replace retiring Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Calif.
“A lot of folks in the delegation feel uncomfortable going all-out to help me when I’m going against Buck’s wife,” Strickland said.

That’s kind of cowardly of Strickland in my opinion, but you know the saying about friends in Washington (you’d best get a dog).

The larger theme of the article is that Patricia’s decision to run for 38th AD is splitting the local Republican base that used to be hyper-loyal to our Pater Familias Buck McKeon. Indeed that’s accurate, but doesn’t go far enough. Buck McKeon has had a very bad few months of press in the 25th District and particularly in Santa Clarita that’s exacerbating the situation :

• The delay (real or imagined) over addressing the concerns of the father of slain US Army Sgt. Rudy Acosta who was killed in Afghanistan in 2010 by a rogue Afghan security contractor
• His refusal to address and subsequent hint that CEMEX might not be all that bad for the SCV
• The announcement of Patricia McKeon’s entry into the race just a week or two after Scott Wilk -one of a few natural local candidates for Cam Smyth’s seat- made noise about running. This insulted local Republicans who saw the move for what it is
• And last but not least, the latest news that Buck McKeon received a “Friends of Angelo” discounted mortgage ordered by the orange-faced oompa-loompa himself in 1998

We don’t have polling to be sure, but looking at the list above, it’s not hard to see how Buck McKeon has angered just about every type of loyal Republican in the SCV. Even the usual McKeon voters who don’t pay much attention to local politics have taken notice of the Rudy Acosta controversy. It remains to be seen whether Buck’s opponent, Dr. Lee Rogers, can exploit the anger and move past 40% in the newer, tighter, more red 25th District.

In the meantime, the Scott Wilk/Patricia McKeon battle will be the one to watch this spring.

One Google search led to another, and then to several more. What I found were passages lifted either directly or with minor tweaks from five separate sources. It appears that the Deputy DA/City Council candidate has committed plagiarism. We’re very curious to hear his explanation.

The offending passages are below. Some offend more than others, and I can’t be sure that this is a full accounting. Here’s a PDF with the passages highlighted and labeled, and clicking on each section links to its original source.

Exhibit A: “California’s Secret Government” by Steven Greenhut in the Spring 2011 edition of City Journal

Original:

In fact, they divert billions of dollars from traditional services, such as schools, parks, and firefighting; use eminent domain to seize property for favored developers; and run up California’s debt to pay those developers to construct projects of dubious public value, such as stadiums and big-box stores. Most Californians have long been unaware that these agencies exist. As the activist group Municipal Officials for Redevelopment Reform puts it, RDAs constitute an “unknown government” that “consumes 12 percent of all property taxes statewide,” is “supported by a powerful Sacramento lobby,” and is “backed by an army of lawyers, consultants, bond brokers and land developers.”
…
Developers don’t need subsidies and eminent domain to build in older cities;

Hatami:

However, they really divert billions of dollars from services that benefit our community as a whole, such as schools, parks, police, health, and firefighting, and instead put money in places such as Old Town Newhall. Furthermore, they use eminent domain to seize private citizen’s property for favored developers and run up taxpayers’ debt to pay those developers to construct projects of dubious public value. Most Californians are unaware that these agencies exist. Basically, Redevelopment Agencies constitute an unknown government that consumes 12% of all property taxes statewide, is supported by a powerful Democratic Sacramento lobby, and is backed by an army of civil lawyers, consultants, bond brokers and land developers.
…
Developers don’t need subsidies and eminent domain to build in older cities;

Exhibit B: ”Governor’s Redevelopment Proposal” by the Legislative Analyst’s Office, dated Feb. 3, 2011

Original:

Unlike most other local government entities, redevelopment agencies can incur debt without voter approval. Redevelopment agencies can also redirect property tax revenues from schools and other uses without voter approval or the consent of affected public agencies.

Hatami:

Specifically, unlike other local agencies, Redevelopment Agencies can incur debt without voter approval. Redevelopment Agencies can also redirect property tax revenues from schools and other local agencies without voter approval or the consent of the local government.

Exhibit C: ”Love it or loathe it, Bakersfield’s redevelopment agency follows the rules” by Gretchen Wenner of Bakersfield Californian, April 2, 2011.

Original:

…a wide-ranging investigation of California’s redevelopment agencies and found widespread examples of corruption, questionable spending…a Sacramento bar with a swimming mermaid, for example, or the city of Palm Desert’s plan to spend $16.7 million to spruce up a luxury golf course — have made headlines. A largely critical report released last month by State Controller John Chiang’s office, which looked closely at 18 of California’s 400 or so redevelopment agencies, prompted Chiang to say in a statement: “The lack of accountability and transparency is a breeding ground for waste, abuse and impropriety.”

Hatami:

Furthermore, recent investigations of Redevelopment Agencies have discovered widespread corruption and questionable spending, including a Sacramento bar with a swimming mermaid, or the city of Palm Desert’s plan to spend $16.7 million to spruce up a luxury golf course. State Controller John Chiang stated the following about Redevelopment Agencies: “The lack of accountability and transparency is a breeding ground for waste, abuse and impropriety.”

Exhibit D: ”Subsidizing Redevelopment in California“, by Michael Dardia for the Public Policy Institute of California from January 1998.

Original:

…the author finds that redevelopment projects do not increase property values by enough to account for the tax increment revenues they receive. Overall, the agencies stimulated enough growth to cover just above half of those tax revenues.

Hatami:

But studies have shown that redevelopment projects do not increase property values by enough to account for the tax increment revenues they receive. Overall, the agencies stimulated enough growth to cover just above half of those tax revenues.

Exhibit E: ”Should California End Redevelopment Agencies?” by the Legislative Analyst’s Office, dated Feb. 3, 2011

Original:

Specifically, no state agency reviews redevelopment economic development activities or ensures that project areas focus on the program’s mission.
…
State law requires redevelopment agencies to spend 20 percent of tax–increment funds for low– and moderate–income housing.

Hatami:

And, no state agency reviews redevelopment activities or ensures that project areas focus on the program’s mission.
…
California State law requires Redevelopment Agencies to deposit 20% percent of their tax increment revenues into low income housing funds and spend these funds on affordable housing in our City!

Paul’s policies would mean turning the clock back two centuries, to a time when the United States was a trading nation but otherwise blithely cut off from the world. It would mean an unregulated free-market economy that Charles Dickens would have recognized, where big businesses would rule the roost.Most public services, including city governments, would be run by private companies, and representative democracy — the U.S. system that libertarians deride as “the tyranny of the majority” — would be cut to a bare minimum.

This is a fun exercise, especially since several of my Facebook friends have recently become Ron Paul fans. Libertarianism and maximal personal freedom are en vogue it seems.

But how would such a system work locally, here in the SCV?

I’ve done some reading and thought we could engage in a brief thought experiment on what the SCV would look like under a libertarian society as voters head to the polls today in Iowa. From my understanding, there’s a sliding scale to libertarianism that goes from “Okay, that’s not so bad,” to “OMG it really is every man for himself!” Let’s dig in:

Kinder, Friendlier Libertarianism (Statist)

This type of libertarianism isn’t so dissimilar to what we have now in the SCV. Libertarians in this school of thought recognize the value of having a government, a government that builds out, protects, and makes available public goods such as roads, parks, and other infrastructure, provides police and justice services, and enforces contracts (schools aren’t run by the City now, so let’s exclude them from this discussion).

But government would be limited in so many other areas, we’d see a radically different SCV. Perhaps fire, earthquake and other safety codes would find their place in this theoretical Santa Clarita, but no others. One Valley One Vision smacks of central planning and would have no purchase here. Codes limiting density or the height of buildings? Gone! Those heavy-handed government regulations shoved down the throats of enterprising massage parlor owners recently? What business is it of the City’s what two consenting adults do in privacy? Efforts by the city to promote local businesses probably wouldn’t remain because tax rates would be much much lower; after all spending $60,000 a year to promote Auto Row means that $60,000 was taken from local taxpayers.

Getting a little scary now (Minarchism) 

So, under this school of libertarianism, we’d still likely have a real, authentic, City of Santa Clarita government. Its role in the SCV would be drastically minimized, however. We’d probably only have a police department and a court system whose function would be to protect “individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract and fraud.”

Notice what’s missing. No more City Parks. Private individuals would pool their capital and (hopefully) buy up land and charge a fee for park use. Maybe we’d get better parks, but we’d have to pay to use them. Naturally the best parks would be in wealthier areas. Sorry skater kids, your days of persuading the City to spend $100k on a temporary skate park while they build you a world-class skatepark are gone! The same goes for roads, which would all likely become private or owned communally by HOAs or neighborhood associations. Think Placerita Canyon and its Power Posse here.

No public transit service. It’s possible under this scenario that private transport companies would spring up and offer service to those who have no cars or who choose not to drive, as this was the model early in the 20th century. But unless there was sufficient competition among private carriers, it wouldn’t be as affordable as a service subsidized by the City. We might see an exodus of middle class people who depend on the Metrolink and an influx of poorer people who take buses to get to jobs in the SCV. Demand for housing would change, in other words.

The planning commission- what’s that but a tool of government to limit the freedom of property owners? We’re entering pure free-market territory here; imagine Canyon Country/Hamburger Hill style chaos writ large; ridgelines gone, oak trees demolished, and canyons plundered. That is, if the demand was there. Ironically, local environmentalists might pine for the days of Newhall Land’s Master Plan, in which at least some open space was spared and some thought was given to organized development. But such firms would be few and far between; we’d essentially be returning to the bad old days of pre-City rule. If we didn’t like it, it’d be up to us to buy land on the open market and preserve it. Maybe that would work?

On the plus side, maybe we’d finally get faster, world-class internet access. There are no cable franchise agreements in this system; if I want Verizon FIOS, I just find a bunch of neighbors who want it too and we pay Verizon to trench our street (without a city permit!) and deliver 100mb of fiber internet directly to my house. Suck on that Time Warner!

Every man for himself (Anarcho-Capitalism) 

In this system of libertarianism, there is no City of Santa Clarita at all. Maybe Newhall Land, Waste Management, the for-profit Water Retailers, and LSSI get together quarterly to coordinate things, then again, maybe not.

Police, fire, courts, justice and prison would all be run by private companies on an open market exchange. If Westridge wants police services, they’d contract with Acme Police, Inc. If Canyon Country wants fire service, neighbors in that area would buy individual or perhaps neighborhood-wide fire insurance. Perhaps the private courts would have an agreed-upon framework for laws, perhaps not.

Of all the schools of libertarian thought, this is perhaps the most murky and the most utopian, so let’s not spend too much time discussing it. Suffice it to say, you’d pay no local taxes under this scenario, but you’d be responsible for much more.

And that’s something that’s common to all these schools of thought. More personal freedom and less taxes, but more personal responsibility for the things we take for granted now.

Do local Ron Paul fans really know what they are advocating for when it comes to libertarianism? I hope some chime in here.

The City’s otherwise commendable website, votesantaclarita.com, has a “campaign disclosures” section, but they only post partial forms, omitting all the donors. What’s the point? The city really ought to make make these campaign disclosure forms available online in their entirety. I hope they will in the run up to this election. It’s public information, after all. (Write your councilmember!)

In the meantime, you’ll just have to deal with our sporadic posts. Lucky for me, the most recent filings, covering through June 30, show little activity. Only Bob Kellar raised money in the first half of this year, but he also spent almost all of it during the same period. So in other words, don’t think of this as a progress report, but starting point. As of June 30, here’s where each campaign stood:

• Laurie Ender: $2,473.18
• Bob Kellar: $1,412.49
• TimBen Boydston: $2,926.41
• David Gauny: $209.77

It’s worth noting that Kellar’s June 30th statement lists a $2,000 payment for campaign manager Sharon Bronson, who ran Gauny’s campaign. So I don’t expect David Gauny to run in 2012, but you never know.

Since we only have one candidate and eight donors, I’m going to make my efforts worthwhile and look closely at these donors. Fair warning, what follows is some hair-splitting, disproportionate ridiculousness.

Dick Jefferey of Saugus, retired: $100. Dick is often representing the SCV Veteran’s Memorial Committee and seems like a longtime Friend of Bob.

Andrew Fried of Agua Dulce, retired: $500. Notable for his leadership in the TMC/Cemex mine fight. Andrew donated $150 each to Marsha McLean and Laurene Weste in the 2010 election. He also made history here with the first recorded donation that exceeded the old campaign donation limits. Kellar was the lone dissenting vote against raising these limits, but he’ll certainly benefit under the new law.

The Barnyard of Acton: $1,000. How about that? The first max donation of $1,000 in city history. The Barnyard is that business between Sierra Hwy. & the 14 that sells all those oversized trinkets. This donation isn’t categorized (it should be marked as OTH because it’s a business), but whatever.

William Reynolds of Valencia, retired: $400. Talk about burying the lead! Our old frenemy, Bill Reynolds, star of television and radio, best known to the SCVtalk community for his NotAFerryFan videos. If Bob and Bill are now political allies, that can’t sit well with the rest of council.

Alice Consulting (?) of Stevenson Ranch, $360. This is an odd entry. Two categories are checked, Individual and Recipient Committee, but a donor can only one. It’s undated. If “Alice Consulting” is an individual, there should be an occupation listed, but there isn’t. According to votesantaclarita.com here isn’t a recipient committee listed by that name. According to the Los Angeles County registrar, and the Secretary of State, “Alice Consulting” is not a business name. Google doesn’t fin an “Alice Consulting” in Steventon Ranch, either. But the address on the form matches that of Alice Khosravy, local tea party activist and organizer of the SCV Constitution Day. Not sure who’s responsible for the error here, but they ought to fix it.

George Pederson of Valencia, retired $100. George is a former council member and was our Mayor at the time of the Northridge earthquake. George also gave $100 to David Gauny in 2010.

Spence Leafdale of Canyon Country, LAPD officer: $300. Spence is well-regarded community volunteer who is Kellar’s appointee on the Open Space Preservation District and Accountability Panel. He’s even posted down in the SCVtalk comments from time to time. Last time around, Spence gave the same amount to David Gauny.

John Dortch of Valencia, LA County Assessor’s Office: $100. John ran for the COC board in 2009 and for the LA County Assessor in 2010. In the 2010 race, John gave $200 to TimBen Boydston.

And there you have it. This is what happens when you have too much time on your hands. The candidates have held some fundraisers in the second half of this year, so expect to learn a lot more after the December 31 former are filed.

Keep in mind that even through December of 2009, David Gauny had only raised $205, and he wound up nearly winning.

I think the reason why some of us find his candidacy so interesting is that he really represents a different type of candidate. He’s not running so much that he’s upset with the politics of the City Council, but rather because he’s upset with the way things are – the net result of things. Call it “The Rent is Too Damn High” approach.

It fits in with our romantic view of the regular guy who wants to take on City Hall. That makes him a lot more like the average resident than most candidates, who are typically insiders, gadflies at city hall or who run out of self-delusion.

The challenge for nontraditional candidates is that the average resident is less likely to vote than wonks like us. Many of our neighbors aren’t all that mad or scared, either. They look around and like the way things are, and they just want more of the sweet stuff: parks, trails, pools, sports, concerts, etc.. These are your Laurie Ender voters, in a nutshell.

With a wild-eyed anti-crime platform,Hatami is after a different type of resident. It’s an interesting angle and there are plenty of people who will eat it up, so I think he’ll find a niche. But even if I agreed with his policy goals, I think there’s a problem at the core of this kind of candidacy that transcends ideology.

There is, as Tim mentioned, a problem with those of us “in the weeds” where our view of what’s possible isn’t broad enough. But if we make some slight adjustments to our thinking, it isn’t too difficult to separate our cynicism from our informed sense of what can and can’t be done within the boundaries that our city council operates.

A lot of Hatami’s proposals simply aren’t achievable because there are genuinely immovable pieces that stand in the way. It might be the budget, jurisdiction, state law, federal law, the constitution or just political reality.

He’s offering solutions that over-promise on outcomes, solutions to problems that don’t exist and solutions to things already solved.

What’s wrong with a little dreaming? Don’t we want someone who thinks big? Sure, but there’s a line between thinking big and having your head in the clouds. There’s a line between populism and pandering. There’s a real problem when your campaign is built on promises that you can’t deliver. If you are playing to the average, uninformed resident, you really shouldn’t come selling a bill of goods or re-selling us things we’ve already bought.

It’s been said by many and I think it’s true here as much as anywhere: politics is the art of the possible. Work within the limits of your power, compromise as needed, do the best with what you have.

It should go without saying, because usually it does. Our council and the notable challengers over the years, despite their policy disagreements, get it.

Say what you will about David Gauny (and I’ve said plenty), but he understands the rules of the game. Jon Hatami has brought a hockey stick to a game of chess.

The game isn’t unknowable and Hatami might learn it in time, if he cares to. When he learns the rules it might not even want to play. Until then, I’m taking a pass on Team Hatami.

11. If I win this year, I’m running for mayor next time.

12. Bring back plastic bags and ban the paper bag tax.

13. SCV gets to draw its own legislative districts.

14. All crossing guards should be armed. When the marijuana gangsters pull out their AKs to do a drive by on a local school, it’s too late.

15. Paseos in Valencia will be linked by “paseo bridges” that will soar across our boulevards.

16. We will raise API scores by 20 points per school by increasing the cop-to-student ratio in all K-6 schools in the SCV.

17. An immediate 10°F reduction to daily high temperatures between May and September.

18. Establish a Cheesecake Factory on Town Center Drive.

19. Opposition to the new Mann Theaters and the “Cinema Drive” project.

20. Three words: snow on Christmas.

I found Jon Hatami intelligent and articulate. When comparing him with the current sitting council members he certainly has the best education. (He went to an accredited law school unlike Frank Ferry.) I believe strongly that he would probably test highest on the Wonderlic test if it were given simultaneously to him and all the sitting City council members, but…..

Jon exhibits a certain charming naivete about the City of Santa Clarita and the issues facing it. He reminds me of the time years ago before the Lakers acquired Pau Gasol and Kobe Bryant went on his off season “deep sigh” media tour asking to be traded. Laker “superfans” would complain on talk radio about team management’s “lack of effort” in acquiring impact players, as if their acquisition could be facilitated just by adding them to the roster and the issues surrounding contracts, salary caps and general availability could be ignored. This shows in his preliminary “platform” discussed below.

Jon and his campaign brain trust have been extremely busy over the holiday weekend and on his Facebook page he delineated a kind of “Contract with Santa Clarita,” to wit:

You’re Invited to a Reception in Honor of

PATRICIA MCKEON
CANDIDATE – CALIFORNIA 38^TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT

With Special Guest

The Honorable Buck McKeon

Monday, October 3, 2011

5:30pm to 6:30pm Reception

Capitol Hill Club

300 First Street, SE

Washington, DC  20003

Suggested Contribution:

$2,500 per Co-Host

$1,000 per PAC

$500 per Individual

Mail Contributions to:

Patricia McKeon for Assembly 2012

P.O. Box 220576
Newhall, CA 91322-0576

ID# 1341424

Here’s what she her representative told The Signal just last month:

“For too long, Sacramento has been controlled by the lobbyists and special interests and the politicians who do their bidding,” McKeon said in a news release sent by her spokesman, Joe Justin.

“I’m committed to reforming state government, and I’m committed to winning the right to do so by bringing my conservative message to our neighbors and the working families throughout the 38th Assembly District.”

Am I crazy to say that it’s in poor taste to raise funds for your campaign from people who don’t even live in the District you’re running for? And what SCV “working family” would have the $500 to buy a seat at this fundraiser? She wouldn’t even have an audience in DC if it weren’t for her husband, and let’s be honest: no one would donate to the Patricia McKeon campaign unless they expected to earn Congressman McKeon’s good graces.

Maybe this signals something else: perhaps the well has gone dry in the SCV. Consider the huge list of endorsements Scott Wilk has earned or the good-will being shown to Paul Strickland, the third candidate in the race. Maybe district residents aren’t opening their pocketbooks to Patricia McKeon, so she has to run to DC to get funding.

We learned something at last week’s Council meeting. It takes just a few cranks during Public Comments to derail/delay a City plan to sign onto a largely ceremonial set of environmental principles, yet when hundreds of people show up, three lawsuits are filed, and multiple people voice their outrage in newspapers, blogs, and public forums about ….you know what…the public is ignored, the item is approved, and we’re told to get over it and move on.

It should be the exact opposite right? In the grand scheme of things there’s not much the City of Santa Clarita and its five council members can do to stop the scheming, malevolent United Nations and its jackbooted henchmen. But they could have at least slowed down that thing we’ve been talking about for a year because people had real concerns about it.

An impressive list of business, political, and community leaders have announced their support for Santa Clarita Community College Trustee Scott Wilk for the 38th State Assembly seat.  The 38th District is centered around the Santa Clarity Valley and Stevenson Ranch, and includes Castaic, Val Verde, Aqua Dulce, and Simi Valley.

“I am honored and thrilled to endorse Scott’s campaign for the state Assembly,” said Congressman Tom McClintock.  “California needs Scott desperately.”

“I can’t think of a better battle tested conservative candidate than Scott Wilk,” said Senator Tony Strickland.  “That’s why I support Scott Wilk for Assembly.”

Local government leaders including Ventura County Supervisor Peter Foy, Santa Clarita Mayor Marsha McLean, Santa Clarita Mayor Pro Tem Laurie, Santa Clarita City Councilman Bob Kellar, Santa Clarita City Councilwoman Laurene Weste, College of the Canyons Board President Michele Jenkins, College of the Canyons Board Member Joan MacGregor, College of the Canyons Board Member Mike Berger, Hart School Board Member Steve Sturgeon, Hart School Board Member Joe Messina, Newhall School Board Member Phil Ellis, Castaic Union School Board Member Susan Christopher, Castaic Union School Board Member Steve Teeman, Santa Clarita Parks Commissioner Chris Fall, Castaic Lake Water Agency Director Bill Cooper, Castaic Lake Water Agency Director Ed Colley, Newhall County Water District Board President Dan Mortensen, and Newhall County Water District Director Kathy Colley.

Phew! That’s a lot of names. Let’s look at it visually stacked up against Patricia McKeon’s endorsements:

This is a pretty impressive list. Not only did Wilk get endorsed by multiple SCVers, but he pulled in favors from powerhouse GOPers like Tom McLintock and Tony “Hoops” Strickland, and he’s apparently on the radar of of Lou Sheldon, an ardent Theocrat and Dominionist.

Why announce this on a Friday? Not sure, but the Constitution event is tomorrow and lots of Tea-friendly political types plan to attend.

So what’s Wilk have to say about this? Well, if you were a GOP-curious liberal in the SCV, pondering a fun vote against McKeon next spring, his first public statement might give you pause. Yep. Wilk is drinking the Tea:

“California is facing a watershed moment and the decisions we make in the next few years will dramatically impact the future of our state, economically and culturally.  We need to stop the bizarre policies like mandating hotels use fitted sheets and that public schools teach gay history and get back to what we are supposed to be doing – getting government out of the way of small business, educating our children, and balancing the budget.  I am committed to these principles and will be a trusted voice for our community.”

On a side note, both McKeon and Wilk’s opening volleys disappoint me. I don’t think that many parents in the SCV are worried about “gay history” being taught, and if they are, they probably gave up on public schools a long time ago anyway.

They’re probably more worried about the fact that the UC system just announced it will be raising tuition 16% per year for the next four years. Or maybe the fact that California’s unemployment continues to rise. Or maybe they’re concerned about cuts to local schools or the fact that their kids can’t get into COC as easily anymore.

In any event, this promises to be one of the more exciting elections in these parts in many years. I can’t wait for the spring when these two sides challenge each other.

Edit: Just noticed that the phone number attached to the press release resolves to a political firm named Revolvis Consulting, with offices in DC, Sacramento, and San Diego

*The GodFather analogy is especially apt when you considered Scott Wilk used to be one of McKeon’s capos, or perhaps even a close consigliere. The SCV family of Republicans has been torn asunder by this race, the vows of omerta are off, and it looks like most of the capos will soon line up against each other to determine whether the Family McKeon extends its reach.