How can you tell if candidates are NONpartisan? They tell you.
We have two; here is one.
Jon Gustafson, Facebook
September 23, 2016
(Emphasis by USC)
I've had a few people ask why I am not participating in the "debate" being hosted by the Political Action Committee called LOCAL. While they claim to be a non-partisan group, LOCAL has a history of almost exclusively supporting Republican candidates. They also have a history of misrepresenting my positions. (To be fair, they did get one point right. I supported Streetcar and Foothills) For that reason, I don't consider them an impartial organization. There are also at least four other debates or forums where you'll have the opportunity to hear me share my vision for Lake Oswego's future and I look forward to seeing you at one of those. In the meantime, I'm going to skip this debate and knock-on-doors instead. Just wish me luck, because LOCAL took the last mayoral candidate with a vision for the future and had his head severed and placed on the back of bicycle that was about to be hit by a streetcar. Yikes!
"Severed" head? "Hit" by a streetcar? It was a humorous ad that put Jack Hoffman and Greg Macpherson on a bicycle - they advocated more bike paths as a primary transportation option, with a streetcar in the background, which they also wanted for Lake Oswego. These positions represent(ed) a Metro-centric agenda, not a partisan one. Too bad Jon can't see the difference but continues his habit of painting the world in vivid shades of red and blue.
Is LOCAL a partisan, Republican group? NO!
LOCAL is a non-partisan, agenda-driven group whose purpose crosses party lines. It's members board and come from liberal and conservative backgrounds, plus a healthy melange of mixed views and undeclared voters. The common issues that unite LOCAL members are the preservation of Lake Oswego as a small town that does not follow Metro's Smart-Growth agenda, and a fiscally responsible budget that prioritizes core services.
Jon should read LOCAL's website to get an idea of who they are. Instead, he immerses himself in party politics, identifying himself as a Democrat, and perpetuates political divisions that are divisive and toxic. Municipal elections are supposed to be non-partisan, but that's not the way he is playing the game.
This is suburbia. Why do people move here and then want to radically change it?
Jon wants to re-create the glory days of the early 2000s (2000-2012) when a single group's vision dominated the city without regard for the interests of the "silent majority". The more active, well-organized and well-funded new-urbanists (Jon's constituency)) have been chomping at the bit to re-take the city down the high-high-density, urban, Utopian, elitist path that has already been rejected by the majority - a streetcar to Plrtland, a densely developed Foothills area, and more.
In his Facebook post, Jon confirms my previously stated opinion that his campaign is partisan and non-inclusive. At the LOCAL forum he had the opportunity to talk to people who may not agree with his visions, and persuade them his were superior ideas. Instead, Jon brushed off a group of CITIZENS (the forum was open to the public) because he PRE-JUDGED THEY WEREN'T WORTH HIS TIME TO BOTHER WITH. And this he wants to be their mayor?!?
It looks like Jon only wants to be mayor of the people who agree with him. His Facebook page is anything but non-partisan or inclusive of other points of view. His administration would be just as divisive and destructive as those of Judie and Jack - people he reveres and said were his role models to follow for his term as mayor.
I have declared in the past that
I support LOCAL -
an organization by and for the people of Lake Oswego.