What may be surprising is the caveat that comes along with his candidacy. He said he would not run if Paul Miller decides to run for reelection. But Huber hinted that he didn’t think the current mayor would seek a fourth term.

“Many people are under the impression that Mayor Miller is not going to seek reelection,” Huber said. “If he chooses to retire, I will run, and should he run again, I will support his reelection.”

Despite taking a position to support Mayor Miller should he run again, political opportunity eventually struck and Huber’s position flipped. Now he claims the Council consists of failed leadership, “reactive” behavior, and believes Mayor Miller and the Council have been asleep at the wheel. When the Council asks Huber where he’s been during the so-called passive years, he and his supporters take offense. But in Huber’s own words, he’s been a proactive adviser to our leadership for quite some time:

“But with the state taking more redevelopment funds, revenues down and economic pressures on the people of Simi Valley, I realized I could no longer sit on the sidelines and quietly advise city and community leaders. It is time to step up.”

Bob Huber believes our City and its leaders require an overhaul and he believes he’s the man for the job. He doesn’t seem to understand much about the landfill expansion, but he’s quick to publish fear-inducing ads about it. He promises more jobs with E-Verify, though with no audit program, no plan for enforcement and no way to produce measurable positive results. He disregards the fact that our City produces a balanced budget every year despite economic challenges because it doesn’t fit with his campaign message. It seems like he wants us to vote for headlines and sound bites.

I have a real concern for this City and I want the best for it. I believed in Bob Huber several months ago. Though I disagreed with him on the effectiveness of his E-Verify proposal, I believed his heart was in the right place and that he was truly in it for the City. I had many long conversations with his strongest supporters to make sure I made an informed decision on who to vote for. Ultimately, I believe a few of his supporters and some members of his campaign misled me and let me down. Shortly afterward, his campaign launched their aggressive anti-City Hall slams that, when closely examined, are blatantly misleading and sometimes outright false. I now believe Bob Huber is NOT in it for the City but is in it for himself. I cannot support such a candidate in good conscience no matter how much momentum he may have among the people I look up to and respect as community leaders. That’s a fact that I’ll get a lot of flack for admitting.

Under Paul Miller’s leadership as Mayor, I believe our City has a lot to be proud of. I believe we are fiscally stable despite outside economic challenges. We have a community where we can safely and comfortably raise our children. We do NOT have a Mayor who has conducted “secret” backroom deals, or one who refers to our city as “America’s Dump.” I feel that Huber’s message is that a vote for Bob is a vote for sending Paul Miller into retirement as a Mayor who dropped the ball, and that’s a message that I reject without hesitation.

What follows is an uncut video of the Candidates Forum put on by the Simi Valley Chamber. It’s about two hours long and since it’s completely unedited, it’s a sizable download. Put up your feet and make sure your broadband connection is as speedy as possible before you hit the play button!

[hana-flv-player
video="http://www.votesimivalley.com/video/Chamber-Candidates-Forum.flv"
height="253"
width="460"
description="Chamber Candidates Forum"
clickurl="http://www.votesimivalley.com"
clicktarget="_blank"
player="4"
autoplay="false"
loop="false"
autorewind="true"
/]

…

One can only assume where that money will go! More local television ads? More newspaper ads? More mailers? More robo-calls? Election day is just days away and it looks like Bob Huber is planning an expensive few days leading up to the vote!

This is fascinating to me to say the very least. Only a couple of years ago, campaign finance reform was discussed as an important topic leading up to future elections. Who cares about campaign finance reform when you have the means to toss $42K into your own campaign coffers?

Watch out, Sojka! Huber’s richer than you!

The letter that startled me this morning is pasted below. The basic summary is an accusation that Bob Huber has filed multiple lawsuits against the city, as many as 10 lawsuits according to this letter. Admittedly, I was aware that one or two lawsuits existed, but I was taken aback when I read the letter this morning. I have been unable to find any solid data to prove or disprove the claim.

The unedited letter that was published in the paper appears below:

Regarding the letters on Oct. 9 from the two widows supporting Bob Huber filing the lawsuit against the city of Simi Valley, while I sympathize with their position to back Huber’s opinion of the lawsuit he filed against the city, it does not justify that lawsuit. Nor does it present justification for the other nine lawsuits Bob Huber has filed (and lost) against the same city he wants to be mayor of.

Bob Huber, our former city councilman, has filed 10 lawsuits against the city of Simi Valley over the past 20 years, an average of two per year—including the case referenced in the Oct. 9 letters where a bicyclist lost his life in an unfortunate accident with a motorist. A jury did not believe there was any liability on the part of the city.

For the other lawsuits that Bob Huber filed against the city of Simi Valley over the past 20 years, the same conclusion was reached. He lost. They were unnecessary lawsuits that cost Simi Valley taxpayers who knows how many thousands of dollars to defend.

I’m saddened by the case referenced in the Oct. 9 letters where a bicyclist lost his life in an unfortunate accident with a motorist. To the widows—I, along with the members of our community, am terribly sorry for your loss.

The lawsuits Bob has launched, and lost, against our city have had nothing to do with anything to make Simi Valley a better place—they appear to have one purpose only—to enrich Bob Huber.

The changes to that roadway were planned before the mishap and would have happened regardless of whether or not the lawsuit was filed.

Take the proven and successful track record of our current Simi Valley leadership team, then compare it to the documented litigious history Bob Huber has against our city, and it becomes crystal clear—there is only one candidate involved and interested in improving the Simi Valley quality of life.

Bob Huber is not worth the risk. The city of Simi Valley cannot afford Bob Huber’s leadership.
Don Norris
Simi Valley

Mike Judge's Ad for his Simi Valley City Council Campaign

Election Day is getting closer! Click the image above to see Mike Judge’s Ad for his Simi Valley City Council Campaign.

Click here for thoughts on the Bob Huber for Mayor Campaign

One of the unfortunate facts about politicians is the way they count on the electorate to cast their votes based on mythology over facts.  And there’s no better way to mythologize an important issue than to publish an ad with a dramatic headline.  A politician counts on the headline weighing more on voters than the content itself. Take Bob Huber’s ad on the landfill expansion, complete with “trash can” bullet points, that reads “Welcome to Simi Valley, Home of America’s Dump,” an unusual headline from a candidate hoping to be Mayor of Simi Valley.

The ad begins with a quote from the landfill taskforce that the landfill expansion will serve as a permanent barrier to White Face Mountain.  The landfill elevation already obscures the view of White Face Mountain when traveling on the 118 freeway from Moorpark into Simi Valley. When traveling at normal speeds, the view is obstructed for approximately 2 seconds.  That current obscurity will increase in height per the expansion.  White Face Mountain WILL NEVER BE HIDDEN from view for the City of Simi Valley.  For more perspective, the maximum proposed height of 1270 feet is actually lower in elevation than the upper half of Big Sky, and the mountains behind the landfill are approximately 1000 feet taller than the proposed max.

The ad indicates that Waste Management will triple the number of trucks.  That is incorrect.  To start, Waste Management will increase their total daily trips to the landfill by 70 from their current permitted count of 822.  This will bring their permitted count to 892 daily trips to the landfill.  The expansion authorizes the total number of trips to 1297, however that is over the course of their entire build out period and is representative of all of their divisions (i.e. dumping, green energy, recycling, etc.).  This does NOT mean that when the landfill expansion is approved, 1297 trucks will start climbing the hill every day.  Also, 405 of those daily trips represent Waste Management employees, as part of the expansion includes locating all employees at the landfill site.

The ad suggests that annexation must start immediately to authorize the City to approve the landfill expansion.  What the ad fails to mention is the annexation process takes approximately 3 – 4 years to complete, and during that time period as space becomes limited, Waste Management is already authorized to begin making use of land they own that is visible from the 118 freeway.  One purpose of the expansion is to allow for landfill operations to expand behind the mountains, out of view, while also providing for new facilities to park their trucks at the landfill location instead of the separate structure on Easy Street, ultimately reducing traffic on Madera.  Not to mention, Waste Management as the land owner MUST AGREE to be annexed and is unlikely to do so to enhance anyone’s political agenda.

The ad mentions that we don’t want Los Angeles trash. I suppose it would be ideal if our landfill contained strictly Simi Valley trash, but being a regional landfill, that’s not the case.  Suppose we insist that the landfill close when capacity is reached.  Then we will need our garbage shipped out to a landfill outside of our area, much like the Los Angeles trash the ad is referring to.  Packaging and transporting trash comes at a cost, a cost that would likely be passed to customers. Isn’t a better use of our time to approach Waste Management and request added benefits like discounted rates due to any measureable environmental impact of the expansion rather to insist that it be halted at a potential cost to residents?

Lastly, in a blatant attempt to stir emotions, the ad mentions that the City is carrying on “secret back room negotiations.”  This is nonsense.  As it stands currently, the City has practically no leverage for mutually beneficial “back room” negotiations.  Furthermore, City Council has committed to updating the public on record of the progress of their discussions Waste Management.  Due to the lengthy and complex nature of the discussions which involve detailed reviews of the environmental impact report, the discussions are NOT being held during public City Council meetings.  To date, Waste Management has met with all Neighborhood Councils, has been before the Planning Commission twice, been before the City Council twice, participated in many City Council meetings regarding the expansion, has participated in two draft  EIRs and has encouraged public commentary on both EIRs.  Where are the secret back room negotiations?

In an attempt to give his campaign a boost, Bob Huber hastily published this advertisement that serves to mislead and misinform the reader.  His suggestions would actually force Waste Management to begin dumping in areas that are visible to the freeway!  Finally, he is alienating a valuable member of our business community who has cooperated with City officials and landfill taskforce representatives voluntarily for several years.  This ad serves as an example of political mythology with the aim of striking fear in voters. It is the worst kind of politics.

Like clockwork, at 4:30 a.m. a man removed the signs—including ones for council incumbent Glen Becerra—putting them in the back of his pickup truck.

When Arabian confronted the man, he discovered he wasn’t a thief, but a property maintenance worker, clad in a McDonald’s shirt.

Though permission to post the signs had been granted, this worker was apparently just unaware.

It’s the nature of the crime that prompts a stakeout by the Simi Valley Police. The dollar amount of the damage combined with the identifiable pattern of the crime offers an investigator an opportunity to solve it. The signs were apparently expensive and enough were stolen to qualify this as a felony.

Santino said it’s been frustrating to see sign after sign taken down. At $65 a piece, it easily adds up to felony theft, which requires $400 or more in damages.

“We knew we were going to lose signs, but the frequency and the vast amount has just been a huge surprise,” he said. “In my opinion, some of our signs have been systematically removed because they don’t want our message out there.”

Though Santino didn’t say it, Huber’s supporters have insinuated that Sojka’s camp is behind the thefts. Sojka, who has also had dozens of signs removed, said that is “totally out of line and unfair.”

Naturally, the question I asked when I first heard this story was were they expecting to find a Steve Sojka supporter creeping around at night stealing their signs? I may never get a straight answer to that question. I can tell you that a few evenings ago, a Huber supporter was discussing his stolen signs on Facebook and is suggesting that his opponent’s supporters are the perpetrators.

And just when you think it can’t get any uglier, the phrase “inappropriate use of resources”  is heard. The Acorn article goes on to discuss the fact that an outspoken Huber for Mayor supporter volunteered to conduct the stakeout, and that his salary range and overtime pay resulted in a relatively expensive night.

Read the article at the Simi Valley Acorn by clicking here.

Was the stakeout a success? That may be a matter of perspective. The signs will likely stop disappearing now that the truth is revealed. No one pressed charges. And if you were hoping a Sojka supporter would be caught and arrested, then this was a stakeout gone awry.

As an added note, I also think City Manager Mike Sedell shows good judgment by choosing not to investigate this until after the election. While it’s easy to draw the conclusion of a conflict since the detective who chose to conduct the stakeout is a known Huber supporter, Sedell opts not to make it into an election issue. I appreciate that he can make that decision despite being a frequent target of criticism by Huber supporters.

Huber said Monday that he was “shocked” at the allegations and needed time to look into them. By Wednesday, Huber had dismantled the Huber & Takasugi website and issued a statement announcing the dissolution of their business relationship.

“I have informed Russell that our formal relationship has ended immediately,” Huber said. “Russell’s actions and decisions are not those I can approve, condone or accept.”

Huber said he and Takasugi were in an association, not a partnership, meaning they kept separate trust accounts, files and clients. Huber said his name was not on the trust account in question.

“Russell has numerous cases and clients, most of whom I do not know about,” he said. “He has his clients and I have mine.”

Huber hired Takasugi as his law clerk 27 years ago. Takasugi began having ethical problems with the state bar in 1996, records show. A total of five complaints have been filed against him, several for failure to act competently. The most recent complaint resulted in Takasugi being placed on a two-year probation that began in June 2009, according to the bar.

Huber said he was aware of the disciplinary problems but hoped Takasugi had learned his lesson.

If something shady were happening under Huber’s nose and he simply turned a blind eye, then I’d say we have an election worthy issue. To me, this seems more like a partner or “associate” gone rogue and getting caught screwing up at a very bad time. Huber was smart to drop his relationship with Takasugi, and tearing down the website is actually the responsible thing to do. For Huber, I think this issue will be dead by tomorrow.  Probably not so for Mr. Takasugi…

Read the full article by clicking here.

This decision was reached after careful consideration and discussion by our Executive Board members and the SEIU Committee on Political Education (COPE)… We will be paying special attention to the work that you do in your capacity as a public official, especially as it pertains to our members.

As a former City of Simi Valley employee, Mitch was delighted to receive the endorsement. Regarding the announcement, Mitch said, “These are the folks I hung out with and represented while at City Hall. In that regard, this really means a lot to me.”

If you check his campaign statements, you won’t find thousands of dollars worth of donations for Mitch Green. Nevertheless, he’s moving his campaigning efforts forward. His car was pretty easy to spot, wrapped with his campaign slogan and logo, and he is armed with a collection of signs hot off the press. “My campaign materials were all provided by local vendors,” Mitch pointed out, a fact that means a great deal to him.

For those interested in learning more about Mitch Green or if you’re interested in getting one of his new yard signs, stop by the Democratic Election Headquarters at 2904 Cochran Street.