 |
|
|
|
|
Fluoridation opponents continue to question city ballot tactics
Former mayor challenges council's last-minute moves
By Daniel Hindin
The argument over the future of Sunnyvale's water heated to boiling point last week.
Former Sunnyvale Mayor Stan Kawczynski on Aug. 25 filed a petition with the Superior Court of California challenging the way the city of Sunnyvale has handled the election process in regards to Measure S. The measure asks the citizens of Sunnyvale whether they want their water to be fluoridated. City council added the measure to the Nov. 7 ballot on Aug. 8.
The fluoridation issue has been swept up in a whirlwind of controversy since it was first brought before council. Members of the antifluoridation camp argued on Aug. 8 that Mayor Pat Vorreiter censored their arguments against fluoridation. When discussion of the item, a resolution calling for a special Nov. 7 municipal election regarding water fluoridation, began, Vorreiter specifically told the public that their comments must only involve arguments for or against putting the measure on the ballot--not for or against the practice of fluoridation in general.
More controversy was created when the wording of the measure was changed at the subsequent council meeting. The original wording had stated that a switch to fluoridated water would be of no cost to the residents of Sunnyvale. However, on Aug. 15, the council voted to delete that wording from the measure, allowing the city to tax its residents for the potentially fluoridated water.
At that same Aug. 15 meeting, Vice Mayor Jack Walker and Councilman Tim Risch presented their written ballot argument in favor of Measure S. With the deadline for ballot arguments set for the very next day, the writers of the argument against the measure had to rush to change their argument to include the new wording of the measure.
Members of this group accused the council of knowing about the change of wording in advance. The writers of the argument against fluoridation felt that they were at a disadvantage because they didn't know about the change in wording until just 18 hours before the argument was due, while Walker and Risch had the entire week to work on theirs.
Nonetheless, both sides managed to get their arguments in to the elections official and city clerk Linda Kelly before the 5 p.m. deadline. However, upon further review, some antifluoridation advocates, who did their homework, realized that one of the three people Walker and Risch got to join in and sign the argument in favor of fluoridation actually lives in Los Gatos. Accusations have also been made regarding the impartiality of Armento's "impartial analysis of Measure S."
Wesley, who is a citizen of Mountain View, believes Sunnyvale's "misconduct" has gone far enough. Because he is not a resident of Sunnyvale, Wesley could not sue the city by himself as he did in Mountain View over the same fluoridation issue. In an Aug. 25 ruling on this case, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Mary Jo Levinger found the Mountain View City Council guilty of violating the Brown Act.
Because he could not carry out the Sunnyvale suit by himself, Wesley had to find a worthy Sunnyvale resident who was as passionate about fluoridation as he is and who was willing to put his name on a legal document accusing his own town of misconduct.
That man, he discovered, was Kawczynski. Kawczynski, who served on Sunnyvale City Council from 1991 to 1999 and on the Planning Commission from 1985 to 1989, is on the November ballot for a position on the California State Assembly representing District 22.
Kawczynski says that Walker and Risch's argument for fluoridation is a "fallacious, misleading misrepresentation of facts. They don't tell taxpayers how much it will cost them. I've worked with everyone on the council and they've made many other misleading statements in the past."
Wesley described Armento's "impartial analysis" of the measure as "junk." "Her basic purpose was not to be impartial, it was to convince voters that fluoridation is good. Sunnyvale has a city attorney who wants to be a politician," he said.
Armento disagrees. "My analysis gives the facts; Wesley and Kawczynski don't want facts," she says.
The two councilmen responsible for rewording the measure don't seem to be taking Kawczynski's petition very seriously.
"The lawsuit has no merit. The Court will eventually find that the argument we submitted is correct, and it will be placed on the ballot," Risch said.
Walker said Wesley and Kawczynski are nitpicking. "They have a weak case in the political arena," he says. "They're suing for grammatical problems. They might challenge my grammar, but there's no law against bad grammar. They're just going to end up costing taxpayers money."
Walker said Kawczynski is using the Measure S issue to generate public exposure for his State Assembly campaign. "This is a political battle," Walker says. "Stan is a funny guy. He was an outsider on the council, and his solutions are draconian."
Kawczynski agrees. "It could affect the race," he says.
|
|
|
|
Sunnyvale, California Since 1994
