The Dossier: A Desperate Smear to Protect the Status Quo
Yesterday, some residents received an anonymous email dossier claiming our slate are criminals and fringe extremists. This is a desperate, 11th-hour smear attempt. It arrived just hours after our mailer dropped, which exposed some things as well.
Did you receive one of these emails? We want to know where the email list came from. Let us know via the "Contact Candidates" button below.
This is an orchestrated hit job by a faction terrified of losing its grip on the District's checkbook. Here are the facts:
Linda: Censured for Telling the Truth
The dossier highlights Linda’s past censures for "decorum." In reality, these censures were political cover-ups to protect the status quo.
- The Failure: We just learned the District's operator (Inframark) failed to perform basic maintenance (testing fire hydrants and valves) for six years (2020-2025). The District paid for it, but didn't get the service.
- The Protection Racket: After the Hatch lift station failed, the board unanimously voted to fire Inframark. Yet months later, incumbents Beth Jones and Hanoi Avila reversed course to keep them (Watch Beth Jones praise them here and Hanoi Avila sit on important information until the clock ran out).
- The Fake Crime: Linda was censured because she refuses to play along with protecting cushy contractor gigs and called it out: "Whereas, during a meeting of the Board, Director Fabre openly commented that the District's General Manager was unqualified..."
David: The $370,000 Witch Hunt
The dossier tries to paint David as a criminal and a "Sovereign Citizen" because people have called the police on him.
- The Reality: David holds a government job requiring a clear criminal background check. Sovereign Citizens do not submit to background checks, and it's hard to hide income when it's public record.
- The Tactics: David is trying to end the rich feast for the District’s contractors. Because the incumbents can't beat his math, they want to paint him as a criminal.
- The Price Tag: The police can't stop David because he engages in Constitutionally protected activities. So, the MUD board burned $370,000 of our tax dollars in civil court to silence the guy who won't stop looking at their ledgers.
The Bottom Line
To protect their racket, the incumbent board wants you to doubt constitutional freedoms. They want you to believe the legal system is flawed because it won't lock David up. It's a classic case of 'rights for me, but not for thee.' Publishing police reports is their protected right. Filming public officials and demanding accountability are David's protected rights. The Constitution is a two-way street.
Is David a polished, polite politician? No. He is a bulldog. Sometimes his aggressive advocacy offends polite sensibilities, by his own admission. He isn’t running for a congeniality award; he is running to fix a broken system. You don't hire a diplomat to clean out the gutter. I accept David's rough edges because his record of protecting the District's finances is what we need.