24 April 2007

Delegate Liz Bobo

As a former candidate, I understand that negative campaigning is part of the deal; however, I believe the misrepresentation of my positions and mischaracterization of my actions by Delegate Liz Bobo leaves a decidedly false impression with the residents of Wilde Lake. I feel it is necessary to post her email and provide the community with my actual positions and actions to restore my name.

In a message dated 4/20/2007 2:23:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Delegate.E.Bobo@house.state.md.us writes:

Dear Friends,

I have given a lot of thought to whether to send this message to people I know who live in Wilde Lake. My conclusion is that there is too much at stake not to send it.

Lloyd and I own property in Wilde Lake, and we are voting for Phil Kirsch to be re-elected to the Columbia Association Board of Directors. Voting is a personal action, I realize, and I want to share our reasoning with you.

The future development of Downtown Columbia is by far the most important issue facing us. Phil Kirsch has been involved in the process from the beginning, attending the Charrette and then serving with me as a member of the County's Focus Group. He has made it clear that further development should benefit those of us who are already here, not just the developers.

Phil advocated with me in insisting that the county have a thorough traffic study performed before moving forward with its plans for 5500 new residential units in Downtown. That traffic study revealed that such a plan would result in gridlock. Phil played a key role in advocating for the county to designate Governor Warfield Parkway as a scenic road to protect its beautiful trees and median. As a result, the county can no longer make this road the main through way to handle Downtown traffic.

I am not aware of Phil's opponent's having contributed in any positive way to the efforts to make sure that further Downtown development enhances our community.

In sharp contrast to his opponent, Phil has been strong in his support for Mary Kay Sigaty's proposals for a 150 foot height limitation in Columbia. His opponent is on record as favoring unlimited building heights.

During this development process it will be more important than ever for the Columbia Association Board to do the people's work in an open manner. They have held too many closed meetings in recent years. More than any other member, Phil Kirsch has voted to keep CA meetings open.

As an elected representative myself, I found it quite disturbing that Phil's opponent recently publicly called for the removal of two CA Board members who had come out in support of a candidate in last fall's election. Though that candidate was of a different political party than mine, I fully support the right of all individuals to engage in the political process and to support the candidates of their choice. The two CA Board members were completely exonerated, and should never have been castigated in that way.

Phil Kirsch has demonstrated that he is a hard working, independent representative who does not seek the limelight. He has the courage of his convictions and puts the people's interest over those of the CA corporation. We need Phil to continue his fine work.

Please join us in voting for Phil at Slayton House tomorrow, Saturday, April 21, between 9am and 3pm. Please encourage your neighbors to do likewise, as turnout will be crucial in this election.

I look forward to continuing to work with you to make Columbia an even better community.



Dave Wissing said...

I'd be curious if there is any ethical issue with Ms. Bobo using her official Government email (which it appears she did from what you show) for political purposes such as this? Granted this was a non-partisan race and I don't have a problem with her advocating for a particular candidate (the merits of her argument aside), but it still seems somewhat questionable to me that she would use her official State Delegate email for this purpose....

B. Santos said...


You bring up an interesting point. The email was forwarded to me by more than one person, and each one had the government email address. My intent here is not to get into the ethics, but merely to set the record straight regarding my positions and experience.

Anonymous said...

Well, Bill, you and ethics charges are no stranger. How can we forget your misguided foray into the ethics world when you charged CA Reps Coyle and Russell with violating ethics standards when, in fact, no ethics violation existed and a simple read of CA policy would have told you this.

Anonymous said...

What about Ulman, Guzzone, Ball, Gray, and Gray? They used their time and resources (also derived from the public till) to send a postcard supporting Kennedy vs. Russell. It costs a heck of a lot more to send a postcard than to send some e-mails.

wordbones said...

The most telling comment in Delegate Bobo's email is her statement that Phil Kirsch "does not seek the limelight."

In other words, he doesn't get in her way or try to steal her spotlight.


B. Santos said...

Anon 7:24,

Thanks for your comment. I would like you to please hold your water on the subject of CA ethics. Delegate Liz Bobo brought it up in her email, and I will get to it soon enough. Stay tuned.

B. Santos said...

Anon 7:26,

I had not heard of your claim as of yet. I am focusing on the negative and misleading charges made against me by our State Delegate. If the postcard you mention referred to me, I would like to see a copy. Thanks for the input!

B. Santos said...


I can see your point, but I am concentrating on clearing my name.

Hayduke said...

Anon 7:26: Your charges are completely false and Bill should delete your ignorant comment.

Those postcards were not paid for with public funds and no public time (county or state) was spent preparing them. What's more, no public titles were used on the postcards, specifically to avoid any possible ethical issues.

Are you trying to suggest that the public owns all of the time of its elected officials, that these people have no time of their own to spend as they see fit?

But, anyway, nice red herring.

Anonymous said...

Not a red herring at all! Their money is, indeed, "derived from the public till", which pays their salaries. I did NOT say they used public money. It was their money, absolutely, and it was, absolutely, derived from the public till.

Anonymous said...

And now you favor censorship, Dukey? Proposing the deletion of comments with which you disagree? Sour grapes, my friend, sour grapes!

Anonymous said...

As to "clearing your name", let's not forget your opposition to designating Governor Warfield Parkway a scenic road. Hardly a positive contribution to downtown's development.

Hineway said...

Anon 9:10

I'm not sure what you're looking at, but if you read Bill's response to Delegate Bobo's e-mail. It clearly states in there (several times) that he was, indeed, in favor of and fully supported designating Governor Warfield Parkway as a scenic road.

...might want to get your facts straight before making comments like that...

Anonymous said...

Except that you, and apparently Bill, have your facts wrong. In his own blog last August he wrote: "So, does it make good sense to make Governor Warfield Parkway a scenic road? Regrettably, the answer is no."

hayduke said...

Red Herring: A distractor that draws attention away from the real issue.

I proposed deleting the comment because it insinuates public resources were used improperly. Libel perhaps?

Frankly, I'm growing rather sick of people playing fast and loose with their blog comments. Anonymity should not give you a pass on accountability, civility or honesty.

But let's get to the meat of your concern. Because they are public servants, the way they spend their earnings are subject to a different standards than everyone else. Is that correct? What about my earnings, paid for by a non-profit that enjoys tax benefits? Should my spending be held to different standards, too?

Someone else I know is a public servant and he gave me some money to my campaign. Should we launch an investigation?

What about Evan Coren, a federal employee? No doubt his campaign was partially financed by money from "the public till."

Bill's concerns in this post deal with a direct use of a state resource for campaign purposes. Can you really not see the difference?

B. Santos said...

As I have said before, I believe the use of a state resource for campaign purposes is a concern for many. The specific reason why I posted the email is to refute the claims made by Delegate Liz Bobo.

Tom said...

Bill, those who know you know your name is not in question and never has been and neverr will be.