Part
2 :
Would
you hire this man?
3rd
District Candidate
David
Smyser’s record
In a previous opinion piece, based on
information on his website, we looked at 3rd District Supervisor candidate
David Smyser’s résumé, or lifetime work history. In this one, we will look at
his record as a former county planning commissioner and current candidate for
supervisor.
Candidate Smyser is running a major
promotional campaign to convince us that we should “hire” (elect) him to be our
supervisor for the next four years.
A critical issue to consider with any
candidate for any office is whether or not they really will be the officholder
their campaign represents they will be.
Candidate David Smyser says we should “check
his record” to learn what kind of a supervisor we would get. This is great
advice. Here is the public record:
Candidate Smyser claims he is not the
developer’s candidate, but his campaign finance disclosures show that he is
backed by the major development interests in the county, plus developers from
as far away as Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York.
He says he will listen to everyone, but he
evaded the candidates forum in the Santa Ynez Valley — even after being
given the opportunity to choose the date.
He says he respects neighborhoods and
communities, but his past performance has not earned him the support of a
single neighborhood or community group. In fact, as planning commissioner he
inspired multiple letters to the editors complaining about his berating
citizens for showing up to express concerns about developments they felt were
inappropriate for their neighborhoods. His planning commission actions have
gone against both the Santa Ynez Valley Community Plan and the Goleta Valley
Community Plan.
He pledges to protect the Gaviota Coast, but
as planning commissioner he bulldozed approval of the Ballantyne house, a
15,000-square-foot ridgetop home, which is a terrible precedent for the Gaviota
Coast.
This project violated the County General Plan,
the Goleta Valley Community Plan, and zoning ordinances. He ignored the advice
of planning and development and county counsel to not push forward. He
disregarded warnings of legal action from the Gaviota Coast Conservancy. He
dismissed the expressed concerns from the affected neighborhood.
He says he will protect the environment, but
his past performance has not earned him the support of a single environmental
organization.
He promises to protect agriculture, but as
planning commissioner he argued passionately for a huge sports fields complex
designed to be a gigantic tourist attraction. This was to be located off Santa
Rosa Road, on prime agricultural land, fronting the Santa Ynez River.
In pursuit of this boost to tourism, he
ignored written unanimous opposition from the county’s agricultural advisory
committee, pleas from the neighboring horse rancher, and protest from the
all-agricultural neighborhood. Despite having been a member of the committee
pushing for this project, his apparent conflict of interest did not inspire him
to recuse himself from the deliberations.
He says he will not give the Chumash a “free
pass” on casino expansion or additional annexations, but in a radio interview
said, “all the county can do” is try get compensated for impacts after the
state and the federal governments have acted. Many would see this position to
be an abandonment of the county’s rights and responsibilities to proactively
protect the interests of all of its citizens.
His campaign proclaims that he has the “integrity,
dedication and experience to be a truly outstanding county supervisor.” Those
who have seen his work history can make up their own minds as to his “dedication
and experience.”
His less-than-candid responses to questions
about his campaign financing, and his failure to recuse himself on the sports
fields issues, illuminate the integrity question.
QUESTION: Based on this
record, would you hire this man?