Transparent Clayton - User contributions [en]

City Staff Departures

2024-11-02T20:20:40Z

CharlesRhine: Pabula -> Prebula

Beginning in 2019, there have been more than 25 resignations from the City's staff. Some of these resignations were expected as they were interim positions, but many departing staffers have commented on a climate of harassment and personal enmity created and maintained by councilmember [[Jeff Wan]] and several vocal residents including [[Bill Walcutt]] and [[Gary Hood]] who are prominent members of [[Save Clayton]].

== City Staff History ==
{| class="wikitable" style="margin-right:auto; margin-left: 0px;"
|+
|-
! Other staff !! Title || Status || Start || End || Notes

|-
| [[Adam Politzer]] || City Manager || Permanent || April 2024 || current ||
|-
| [[Bret Prebula]] || City Manager || Permanent || May 15, 2023 || April 12, 2024 ||
|-
| Ron Bernal || City Manager || ?? || TBD || TBD ||
|-
| Reina Schwartz || City Manager || Permanent || December 15, 2020 || February 3, 2023 ||
|-
| Frances Robustelli || City Manager || ?? || July 2020 || TBD ||
|-
| Ikani Taumeepeau || City Manager || ?? || December 9, 2019 || May 29, 2020 ||
|-
| Joe Sbranti || City Manager || Interim || August 2019 || TBD ||
|-
| Gary Napper || City Manager || Permanent || TBD || July 2019 ||
|-
| Malathy Subramanian || City Attorney || Contract || TBD || current ||
|-
| Laura Hoffmeister || City Manager || Acting || TBD || TBD || (during 2021)
|-
| Laura Hoffmeister || Assistant to the City Manager || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| Amy Walcker || Executive Assistant to the City Manager/HR Manager || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2024)
|-
| Chris Wenzel || Chief of Police || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| Elise Warren || Chief of Police || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2019)
|-
| Joseph Kreins || Chief of Police || Interim || TBD || TBD || (during 2023)
|-
| Richard McEachin || Chief of Police || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2024)
|-
| Janet Brown || City Clerk/HR Manager || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| Janet Calderon || City Clerk/HR Manager || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2019)
|-
| Sherry Hartz || City Clerk (interim) || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2024)
|-
| Kevin Mizuno || Finance Manager || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| Katherine Korsak || Finance Director || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2023)
|-
| Mindy Gentry || Community Development Director || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| David Woltering || Community Development Director || Interim || TBD || TBD || (during 2020)
|-
| Matthew Fesk || Community Development Director || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2021)
|-
| Dana Ayers || Community Development Director || Interim || TBD || TBD || (during 2022) (hired permanent in 2023)
|-
| Rick Angrisani || City Engineer || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| Scott Alman || City Engineer || Contract || TBD || TBD || (during 2019)
|-
| Bill Stracker || City Engineer || Contract || TBD || TBD || (during 2022)
|-
| Larry Theis || City Engineer || Contract || TBD || TBD || (during 2023)
|-
| Hank Stratford || City Treasurer || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| Mark Janney || Maintenance Supervisor || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2018)
|-
| Jim Warburton || Maintenance Supervisor || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2019)
|-
| Paul Rodrigues || Finance Manager || Permanent || TBD || TBD ||
|-
| Dana Ayers || Community Development Director || Permanent || TBD || April 2024 ||
|-
| Prapti Aryal || Finance Director || Permanent || TBD || April 2024 ||
|-
| Patrick Nemah || Code Enforcement Officer || Permanent || TBD || TBD ||
|-
| Gabriela Saudeco || Police Chief || Permanent || TBD || TBD ||
|-
| Jennifer Giantvalley || Accounting Technician || Permanent || TBD || TBD || (during 2024)
|-
| Richard Sanders || Accountant || Contract || TBD || TBD || (during 2024)

Anti-Holly Tillman Mailer (2024)

2024-10-21T20:35:18Z

CharlesRhine: Reduced the level of detail in the opening description of the flyers

Starting around October 11th, 2024, members of the ClaytonWatch political action committee (PAC) delivered 11"x6" full-color double-sided mailers to the doorsteps of an unknown number of Clayton homes. On one side, the mailers featured a bulleted list of claims about Ms. Tillman's record and actions, while the other side contained six text boxes claiming negative character aspects about her.

The same individuals (ClaytonWatch) delivered similar flyers in previous elections. In 2022, they delivered flyers with the ClaytonWatch name at the bottom, outlining reasons not to vote for candidates Bridget Billeter and Ed Miller, though they were not a registered PAC at that time. To date there have been no complaints filed with the California Fair Political Practices Committee for the 2022 action while the group was unregistered.

== Bulleted List of Claims ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_2.jpeg|300px|frame|False claims from ClaytonWatch about Holly's leadership]]
=== City Budget ===
''Claim: “In 2020, she pushed a false budget deficit to support a new $400.00 per household annual parcel tax.”''
* [https://www.jeffwanforclaytoncitycouncil.net/2022/09/transparency-and-misleading-about-need.html Councilmember Jeff Wan suggested a parcel tax on his own website.]
* Holly Tillman and the rest of the City Council (including Mayor Diaz and Councilmember Wan) received the same report of an impending structural deficit from the city staff. [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=9sNgupF_-FuduOFW&t=9644 The entire Council was in agreement] that a tax of some kind would eventually be necessary.
* Both Jeff Wan and Jim Diaz expressed support for a tax that would help solve the unanimously agreed upon impending structural deficit in September 2021. Wan told council and the city a new tax was [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=E7aNoOSAmzIahNd5&t=9698 “important just for the health of the city.”]

''Claim: “She voted for a $30,000 taxpayer-funded survey to tell us what we already knew - none of us want new taxes - This survey was a waste of time and money!”''
* There was broad consensus by the City Council that a tax of some kind, either property tax or sales tax, was necessary. Imagine being upset that Holly wanted the input of constituents before making such a major decision!
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=m2pepyLc4gYqnRWB&t=9749 Jeff Wan said] “the outreach is going to be important to get people on board. Everyone I've talked to either is supportive or they started out opposed, but then they came around saying, I still hate it, but okay, so I'll take that too.”
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=Grv0AEYGaQRJiGXf&t=9893 Jim Diaz pointed out that] “outreach is gonna be real key to this thing if we come together with some, you know, reasonable language that people can support and understand why we're doing it.”
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer? Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jim mailer?

''Claim: “She supported a false budget deficit narrative and a 1% sales tax increase all the while saying ‘she did not have time’ to review the city’s budget.”''
* Jeff Wan made the motion to ask city staff to outline the steps required to put a tax on the November 2022 ballot. Jim Diaz praised Wan for pushing for it and the rest of the council was in favor. ClaytonWatch wants to sow division where there is none.
* On 9/21/21, [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=-KLZ7r79N8AWyCCH&t=9845 Jim Diaz said] of the need to put a tax on the Nov ‘22 ballot “Fundamentally, I am opposed to any taxes. In fact, I'm a proponent of reducing taxes. But from the people that I talk to, that love this community, see the need to do something. And cutting services is not what they wanna see, at least to the small circle of people that I talk to. So I agree with Jeff and I applaud him bringing this item forward.”
* Jeff earns our Mayor’s applause for proposing a sales tax, while Holly deserves to be targeted by lies? We look forward to hearing Mayor Diaz denounce this anti-Holly mailer and ClaytonWatch for producing it.

''Claim: “She’s been too busy the last two years to review and approve the city’s budget - the most important issue facing the city. What could have been more important to the citizens of this community than that?”''
* Considering the size of the impending structural deficit and the existing minimal operating budget for the city, City Council will not make up the difference by saving small amounts here and there. * All City Council members agree that cutting services is not an option, which leaves one avenue– finding new revenue sources.

''Claim: “She continues to push the false narrative that our city is going broke, yet we have over $7 million in reserves and she referenced us as ‘hoarders’ while pushing a sales tax increase at the council meeting in March.”''
* For years the city has saved while underfunding things like police, trails, and city staff salaries. The City Council is in agreement about this point.
* The choice in front of the City Council is clear– either make up the difference in spending on city staff salaries through spending reserves or seek an effective new revenue source like a tax.
2024 City Council candidate Richard Enea also thinks the size of our reserve fund is unnecessarily large, at the expense of the city’s operating budget. He has stated very plainly during his campaign that if elected he wants to spend the reserves.
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Richard mailer?

=== High-Density Housing ===
''Claim: “She voted for a one-year extension for the Olivia on Marsh Creek project, which residents of this city are overwhelming [sic] against.”''
* Whether or not the city is overwhelmingly against the Olivia project, the legal situation is clear. Failure to approve the Olivia in the first place would have invited a massive lawsuit from the state for non-compliance with SB 35, which allows for a streamlined approval process for qualifying new housing.
* Considering that Mayor Diaz and Jeff Wan are in agreement that the city’s finances are in need of bolstering in order to protect our way of life, they shouldn’t be so quick to break housing laws and volunteer taxpayer funds for avoidable lawsuits.
* Many of ClaytonWatch’s vocal supporters are in favor of spending taxpayer funds on this kind of lawsuit that Clayton is almost guaranteed to lose.

''Claim: “She failed to enforce the ‘Conditions of Approval’ on the Olivia on Marsh Creek project when over 19 violations were reported and substantiated by the community.”''
* Jeff Wan was mayor for ten months leading up to ClaytonWatch’s leaders threatening to sue the city. He had plenty of time to enforce the Conditions of Approval and he did not.
Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer?

''Claim: “While reviewing the city’s Sixth Housing Element, she said Clayton is a ‘Sundown Town and promotes exclusionary zoning.’”''
* It is a well established fact that single-family zoning has gone hand-in-hand with racial discrimination since the first single-family zoned developments in Berkeley, CA more than 100 years ago.
* The creation of California’s first zoning laws themselves were the result of anti-Chinese racism of the 19th century. The legacy of exclusion has no place in our city from a legal perspective and also a moral one.

== Discussion of Character ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_1.jpeg|300px|frame|ClaytonWatch's attempts at character assassination]]
ClaytonWatch is attempting to assassinate Holly Tillman’s character for the following:
* Completely legal maneuvering with other City Council members to keep Councilmember Wan out of the Mayor’s seat
* Pointing out clear examples of [https://www.ktvu.com/news/deli-owner-in-clayton-under-fire-over-send-her-back-facebook-post hate speech] and racism in our community, organizing citizens against this, and holding the city to a higher standard of civility
* Setting her sights on expanding the Police Department
* Recognizing the fiscal malfeasance going on at our charter high school and demanding that school administrators are held to account
* At the suggestion of impropriety by others, withdrawing her support for a Planning Commissioner.

The accusations of “Mis-Information and Lies” and Holly being a “Polarizing, (sic) and Disruptive” figure strike the editors of Transparent Clayton as a lot of hot air. The actions ClaytonWatch describes above are the actions of a civic leader who takes responsibility and sticks to her convictions.

Anti-Holly Tillman Mailer (2024)

2024-10-21T20:32:37Z

CharlesRhine: Added context to indicate that they have delivered mailers like this in previous years

Starting around October 11th, 2024, members of the ClaytonWatch political action committee (PAC) delivered 11"x6" full-color double-sided mailers to the doorsteps of an unknown number of Clayton homes. On one side, the mailers featured a bulleted list of claims about Ms. Tillman's record and actions. The other side described candidate Holly Tillman's character in text boxes titled "Divisive", "Contentious Figure", "Mis-Information (sic) and Lies", "Trustworthiness in Doubt", "Polarizing, (sic) and Disruptive", and "The Real Holly Tillman" with addition text in each to support those descriptions.

The same individuals (ClaytonWatch) delivered similar flyers in previous elections. In 2022, they delivered flyers with the ClaytonWatch name at the bottom, outlining reasons not to vote for candidates Bridget Billeter and Ed Miller, though they were not a registered PAC at that time. To date there have been no complaints filed with the California Fair Political Practices Committee for the 2022 action while the group was unregistered.

== Bulleted List of Claims ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_2.jpeg|300px|frame|False claims from ClaytonWatch about Holly's leadership]]
=== City Budget ===
''Claim: “In 2020, she pushed a false budget deficit to support a new $400.00 per household annual parcel tax.”''
* [https://www.jeffwanforclaytoncitycouncil.net/2022/09/transparency-and-misleading-about-need.html Councilmember Jeff Wan suggested a parcel tax on his own website.]
* Holly Tillman and the rest of the City Council (including Mayor Diaz and Councilmember Wan) received the same report of an impending structural deficit from the city staff. [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=9sNgupF_-FuduOFW&t=9644 The entire Council was in agreement] that a tax of some kind would eventually be necessary.
* Both Jeff Wan and Jim Diaz expressed support for a tax that would help solve the unanimously agreed upon impending structural deficit in September 2021. Wan told council and the city a new tax was [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=E7aNoOSAmzIahNd5&t=9698 “important just for the health of the city.”]

''Claim: “She voted for a $30,000 taxpayer-funded survey to tell us what we already knew - none of us want new taxes - This survey was a waste of time and money!”''
* There was broad consensus by the City Council that a tax of some kind, either property tax or sales tax, was necessary. Imagine being upset that Holly wanted the input of constituents before making such a major decision!
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=m2pepyLc4gYqnRWB&t=9749 Jeff Wan said] “the outreach is going to be important to get people on board. Everyone I've talked to either is supportive or they started out opposed, but then they came around saying, I still hate it, but okay, so I'll take that too.”
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=Grv0AEYGaQRJiGXf&t=9893 Jim Diaz pointed out that] “outreach is gonna be real key to this thing if we come together with some, you know, reasonable language that people can support and understand why we're doing it.”
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer? Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jim mailer?

''Claim: “She supported a false budget deficit narrative and a 1% sales tax increase all the while saying ‘she did not have time’ to review the city’s budget.”''
* Jeff Wan made the motion to ask city staff to outline the steps required to put a tax on the November 2022 ballot. Jim Diaz praised Wan for pushing for it and the rest of the council was in favor. ClaytonWatch wants to sow division where there is none.
* On 9/21/21, [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=-KLZ7r79N8AWyCCH&t=9845 Jim Diaz said] of the need to put a tax on the Nov ‘22 ballot “Fundamentally, I am opposed to any taxes. In fact, I'm a proponent of reducing taxes. But from the people that I talk to, that love this community, see the need to do something. And cutting services is not what they wanna see, at least to the small circle of people that I talk to. So I agree with Jeff and I applaud him bringing this item forward.”
* Jeff earns our Mayor’s applause for proposing a sales tax, while Holly deserves to be targeted by lies? We look forward to hearing Mayor Diaz denounce this anti-Holly mailer and ClaytonWatch for producing it.

''Claim: “She’s been too busy the last two years to review and approve the city’s budget - the most important issue facing the city. What could have been more important to the citizens of this community than that?”''
* Considering the size of the impending structural deficit and the existing minimal operating budget for the city, City Council will not make up the difference by saving small amounts here and there. * All City Council members agree that cutting services is not an option, which leaves one avenue– finding new revenue sources.

''Claim: “She continues to push the false narrative that our city is going broke, yet we have over $7 million in reserves and she referenced us as ‘hoarders’ while pushing a sales tax increase at the council meeting in March.”''
* For years the city has saved while underfunding things like police, trails, and city staff salaries. The City Council is in agreement about this point.
* The choice in front of the City Council is clear– either make up the difference in spending on city staff salaries through spending reserves or seek an effective new revenue source like a tax.
2024 City Council candidate Richard Enea also thinks the size of our reserve fund is unnecessarily large, at the expense of the city’s operating budget. He has stated very plainly during his campaign that if elected he wants to spend the reserves.
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Richard mailer?

=== High-Density Housing ===
''Claim: “She voted for a one-year extension for the Olivia on Marsh Creek project, which residents of this city are overwhelming [sic] against.”''
* Whether or not the city is overwhelmingly against the Olivia project, the legal situation is clear. Failure to approve the Olivia in the first place would have invited a massive lawsuit from the state for non-compliance with SB 35, which allows for a streamlined approval process for qualifying new housing.
* Considering that Mayor Diaz and Jeff Wan are in agreement that the city’s finances are in need of bolstering in order to protect our way of life, they shouldn’t be so quick to break housing laws and volunteer taxpayer funds for avoidable lawsuits.
* Many of ClaytonWatch’s vocal supporters are in favor of spending taxpayer funds on this kind of lawsuit that Clayton is almost guaranteed to lose.

''Claim: “She failed to enforce the ‘Conditions of Approval’ on the Olivia on Marsh Creek project when over 19 violations were reported and substantiated by the community.”''
* Jeff Wan was mayor for ten months leading up to ClaytonWatch’s leaders threatening to sue the city. He had plenty of time to enforce the Conditions of Approval and he did not.
Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer?

''Claim: “While reviewing the city’s Sixth Housing Element, she said Clayton is a ‘Sundown Town and promotes exclusionary zoning.’”''
* It is a well established fact that single-family zoning has gone hand-in-hand with racial discrimination since the first single-family zoned developments in Berkeley, CA more than 100 years ago.
* The creation of California’s first zoning laws themselves were the result of anti-Chinese racism of the 19th century. The legacy of exclusion has no place in our city from a legal perspective and also a moral one.

== Discussion of Character ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_1.jpeg|300px|frame|ClaytonWatch's attempts at character assassination]]
ClaytonWatch is attempting to assassinate Holly Tillman’s character for the following:
* Completely legal maneuvering with other City Council members to keep Councilmember Wan out of the Mayor’s seat
* Pointing out clear examples of [https://www.ktvu.com/news/deli-owner-in-clayton-under-fire-over-send-her-back-facebook-post hate speech] and racism in our community, organizing citizens against this, and holding the city to a higher standard of civility
* Setting her sights on expanding the Police Department
* Recognizing the fiscal malfeasance going on at our charter high school and demanding that school administrators are held to account
* At the suggestion of impropriety by others, withdrawing her support for a Planning Commissioner.

The accusations of “Mis-Information and Lies” and Holly being a “Polarizing, (sic) and Disruptive” figure strike the editors of Transparent Clayton as a lot of hot air. The actions ClaytonWatch describes above are the actions of a civic leader who takes responsibility and sticks to her convictions.

Anti-Holly Tillman Mailer (2024)

2024-10-21T20:22:37Z

CharlesRhine: Changed "Analysis of Claims Made" to "Bulleted List of Claims" to differentiate it from the "Discussion of Character" and reordered sentences at the top to match

Starting around October 11th, 2024, members of the ClaytonWatch political action committee (PAC) delivered 11"x6" full-color double-sided mailers to the doorsteps of an unknown number of Clayton homes. On one side, the mailers featured a bulleted list of claims about Ms. Tillman's record and actions. The other side described candidate Holly Tillman's character in text boxes titled "Divisive", "Contentious Figure", "Mis-Information (sic) and Lies", "Trustworthiness in Doubt", "Polarizing, (sic) and Disruptive", and "The Real Holly Tillman" with addition text in each to support those descriptions.

== Bulleted List of Claims ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_2.jpeg|300px|frame|False claims from ClaytonWatch about Holly's leadership]]
=== City Budget ===
''Claim: “In 2020, she pushed a false budget deficit to support a new $400.00 per household annual parcel tax.”''
* [https://www.jeffwanforclaytoncitycouncil.net/2022/09/transparency-and-misleading-about-need.html Councilmember Jeff Wan suggested a parcel tax on his own website.]
* Holly Tillman and the rest of the City Council (including Mayor Diaz and Councilmember Wan) received the same report of an impending structural deficit from the city staff. [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=9sNgupF_-FuduOFW&t=9644 The entire Council was in agreement] that a tax of some kind would eventually be necessary.
* Both Jeff Wan and Jim Diaz expressed support for a tax that would help solve the unanimously agreed upon impending structural deficit in September 2021. Wan told council and the city a new tax was [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=E7aNoOSAmzIahNd5&t=9698 “important just for the health of the city.”]

''Claim: “She voted for a $30,000 taxpayer-funded survey to tell us what we already knew - none of us want new taxes - This survey was a waste of time and money!”''
* There was broad consensus by the City Council that a tax of some kind, either property tax or sales tax, was necessary. Imagine being upset that Holly wanted the input of constituents before making such a major decision!
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=m2pepyLc4gYqnRWB&t=9749 Jeff Wan said] “the outreach is going to be important to get people on board. Everyone I've talked to either is supportive or they started out opposed, but then they came around saying, I still hate it, but okay, so I'll take that too.”
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=Grv0AEYGaQRJiGXf&t=9893 Jim Diaz pointed out that] “outreach is gonna be real key to this thing if we come together with some, you know, reasonable language that people can support and understand why we're doing it.”
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer? Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jim mailer?

''Claim: “She supported a false budget deficit narrative and a 1% sales tax increase all the while saying ‘she did not have time’ to review the city’s budget.”''
* Jeff Wan made the motion to ask city staff to outline the steps required to put a tax on the November 2022 ballot. Jim Diaz praised Wan for pushing for it and the rest of the council was in favor. ClaytonWatch wants to sow division where there is none.
* On 9/21/21, [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=-KLZ7r79N8AWyCCH&t=9845 Jim Diaz said] of the need to put a tax on the Nov ‘22 ballot “Fundamentally, I am opposed to any taxes. In fact, I'm a proponent of reducing taxes. But from the people that I talk to, that love this community, see the need to do something. And cutting services is not what they wanna see, at least to the small circle of people that I talk to. So I agree with Jeff and I applaud him bringing this item forward.”
* Jeff earns our Mayor’s applause for proposing a sales tax, while Holly deserves to be targeted by lies? We look forward to hearing Mayor Diaz denounce this anti-Holly mailer and ClaytonWatch for producing it.

''Claim: “She’s been too busy the last two years to review and approve the city’s budget - the most important issue facing the city. What could have been more important to the citizens of this community than that?”''
* Considering the size of the impending structural deficit and the existing minimal operating budget for the city, City Council will not make up the difference by saving small amounts here and there. * All City Council members agree that cutting services is not an option, which leaves one avenue– finding new revenue sources.

''Claim: “She continues to push the false narrative that our city is going broke, yet we have over $7 million in reserves and she referenced us as ‘hoarders’ while pushing a sales tax increase at the council meeting in March.”''
* For years the city has saved while underfunding things like police, trails, and city staff salaries. The City Council is in agreement about this point.
* The choice in front of the City Council is clear– either make up the difference in spending on city staff salaries through spending reserves or seek an effective new revenue source like a tax.
2024 City Council candidate Richard Enea also thinks the size of our reserve fund is unnecessarily large, at the expense of the city’s operating budget. He has stated very plainly during his campaign that if elected he wants to spend the reserves.
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Richard mailer?

=== High-Density Housing ===
''Claim: “She voted for a one-year extension for the Olivia on Marsh Creek project, which residents of this city are overwhelming [sic] against.”''
* Whether or not the city is overwhelmingly against the Olivia project, the legal situation is clear. Failure to approve the Olivia in the first place would have invited a massive lawsuit from the state for non-compliance with SB 35, which allows for a streamlined approval process for qualifying new housing.
* Considering that Mayor Diaz and Jeff Wan are in agreement that the city’s finances are in need of bolstering in order to protect our way of life, they shouldn’t be so quick to break housing laws and volunteer taxpayer funds for avoidable lawsuits.
* Many of ClaytonWatch’s vocal supporters are in favor of spending taxpayer funds on this kind of lawsuit that Clayton is almost guaranteed to lose.

''Claim: “She failed to enforce the ‘Conditions of Approval’ on the Olivia on Marsh Creek project when over 19 violations were reported and substantiated by the community.”''
* Jeff Wan was mayor for ten months leading up to ClaytonWatch’s leaders threatening to sue the city. He had plenty of time to enforce the Conditions of Approval and he did not.
Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer?

''Claim: “While reviewing the city’s Sixth Housing Element, she said Clayton is a ‘Sundown Town and promotes exclusionary zoning.’”''
* It is a well established fact that single-family zoning has gone hand-in-hand with racial discrimination since the first single-family zoned developments in Berkeley, CA more than 100 years ago.
* The creation of California’s first zoning laws themselves were the result of anti-Chinese racism of the 19th century. The legacy of exclusion has no place in our city from a legal perspective and also a moral one.

== Discussion of Character ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_1.jpeg|300px|frame|ClaytonWatch's attempts at character assassination]]
ClaytonWatch is attempting to assassinate Holly Tillman’s character for the following:
* Completely legal maneuvering with other City Council members to keep Councilmember Wan out of the Mayor’s seat
* Pointing out clear examples of [https://www.ktvu.com/news/deli-owner-in-clayton-under-fire-over-send-her-back-facebook-post hate speech] and racism in our community, organizing citizens against this, and holding the city to a higher standard of civility
* Setting her sights on expanding the Police Department
* Recognizing the fiscal malfeasance going on at our charter high school and demanding that school administrators are held to account
* At the suggestion of impropriety by others, withdrawing her support for a Planning Commissioner.

The accusations of “Mis-Information and Lies” and Holly being a “Polarizing, (sic) and Disruptive” figure strike the editors of Transparent Clayton as a lot of hot air. The actions ClaytonWatch describes above are the actions of a civic leader who takes responsibility and sticks to her convictions.

Anti-Holly Tillman Mailer (2024)

2024-10-21T20:17:07Z

CharlesRhine: Added intro text at top and changed "Claims and rebuttals" to "Analysis of Claims Made" for more neutral language

Starting around October 11th, 2024, members of the ClaytonWatch political action committee (PAC) delivered 11"x6" full-color double-sided mailers to the doorsteps of an unknown number of Clayton homes. On one side, the mailers described candidate Holly Tillman in text boxes titled "Divisive", "Contentious Figure", "Mis-Information (sic) and Lies", "Trustworthiness in Doubt", "Polarizing, (sic) and Disruptive", and "The Real Holly Tillman", with each text box containing a small supporting narrative or quotes. The other side featured a bulleted list of additional claims about Ms. Tillman.

== Analysis of Claims Made ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_2.jpeg|300px|frame|False claims from ClaytonWatch about Holly's leadership]]
=== City Budget ===
''Claim: “In 2020, she pushed a false budget deficit to support a new $400.00 per household annual parcel tax.”''
* [https://www.jeffwanforclaytoncitycouncil.net/2022/09/transparency-and-misleading-about-need.html Councilmember Jeff Wan suggested a parcel tax on his own website.]
* Holly Tillman and the rest of the City Council (including Mayor Diaz and Councilmember Wan) received the same report of an impending structural deficit from the city staff. [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=9sNgupF_-FuduOFW&t=9644 The entire Council was in agreement] that a tax of some kind would eventually be necessary.
* Both Jeff Wan and Jim Diaz expressed support for a tax that would help solve the unanimously agreed upon impending structural deficit in September 2021. Wan told council and the city a new tax was [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=E7aNoOSAmzIahNd5&t=9698 “important just for the health of the city.”]

''Claim: “She voted for a $30,000 taxpayer-funded survey to tell us what we already knew - none of us want new taxes - This survey was a waste of time and money!”''
* There was broad consensus by the City Council that a tax of some kind, either property tax or sales tax, was necessary. Imagine being upset that Holly wanted the input of constituents before making such a major decision!
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=m2pepyLc4gYqnRWB&t=9749 Jeff Wan said] “the outreach is going to be important to get people on board. Everyone I've talked to either is supportive or they started out opposed, but then they came around saying, I still hate it, but okay, so I'll take that too.”
* [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=Grv0AEYGaQRJiGXf&t=9893 Jim Diaz pointed out that] “outreach is gonna be real key to this thing if we come together with some, you know, reasonable language that people can support and understand why we're doing it.”
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer? Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jim mailer?

''Claim: “She supported a false budget deficit narrative and a 1% sales tax increase all the while saying ‘she did not have time’ to review the city’s budget.”''
* Jeff Wan made the motion to ask city staff to outline the steps required to put a tax on the November 2022 ballot. Jim Diaz praised Wan for pushing for it and the rest of the council was in favor. ClaytonWatch wants to sow division where there is none.
* On 9/21/21, [https://youtu.be/i1ZUTr1rLek?si=-KLZ7r79N8AWyCCH&t=9845 Jim Diaz said] of the need to put a tax on the Nov ‘22 ballot “Fundamentally, I am opposed to any taxes. In fact, I'm a proponent of reducing taxes. But from the people that I talk to, that love this community, see the need to do something. And cutting services is not what they wanna see, at least to the small circle of people that I talk to. So I agree with Jeff and I applaud him bringing this item forward.”
* Jeff earns our Mayor’s applause for proposing a sales tax, while Holly deserves to be targeted by lies? We look forward to hearing Mayor Diaz denounce this anti-Holly mailer and ClaytonWatch for producing it.

''Claim: “She’s been too busy the last two years to review and approve the city’s budget - the most important issue facing the city. What could have been more important to the citizens of this community than that?”''
* Considering the size of the impending structural deficit and the existing minimal operating budget for the city, City Council will not make up the difference by saving small amounts here and there. * All City Council members agree that cutting services is not an option, which leaves one avenue– finding new revenue sources.

''Claim: “She continues to push the false narrative that our city is going broke, yet we have over $7 million in reserves and she referenced us as ‘hoarders’ while pushing a sales tax increase at the council meeting in March.”''
* For years the city has saved while underfunding things like police, trails, and city staff salaries. The City Council is in agreement about this point.
* The choice in front of the City Council is clear– either make up the difference in spending on city staff salaries through spending reserves or seek an effective new revenue source like a tax.
2024 City Council candidate Richard Enea also thinks the size of our reserve fund is unnecessarily large, at the expense of the city’s operating budget. He has stated very plainly during his campaign that if elected he wants to spend the reserves.
* Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Richard mailer?

=== High-Density Housing ===
''Claim: “She voted for a one-year extension for the Olivia on Marsh Creek project, which residents of this city are overwhelming [sic] against.”''
* Whether or not the city is overwhelmingly against the Olivia project, the legal situation is clear. Failure to approve the Olivia in the first place would have invited a massive lawsuit from the state for non-compliance with SB 35, which allows for a streamlined approval process for qualifying new housing.
* Considering that Mayor Diaz and Jeff Wan are in agreement that the city’s finances are in need of bolstering in order to protect our way of life, they shouldn’t be so quick to break housing laws and volunteer taxpayer funds for avoidable lawsuits.
* Many of ClaytonWatch’s vocal supporters are in favor of spending taxpayer funds on this kind of lawsuit that Clayton is almost guaranteed to lose.

''Claim: “She failed to enforce the ‘Conditions of Approval’ on the Olivia on Marsh Creek project when over 19 violations were reported and substantiated by the community.”''
* Jeff Wan was mayor for ten months leading up to ClaytonWatch’s leaders threatening to sue the city. He had plenty of time to enforce the Conditions of Approval and he did not.
Where is ClaytonWatch’s anti-Jeff mailer?

''Claim: “While reviewing the city’s Sixth Housing Element, she said Clayton is a ‘Sundown Town and promotes exclusionary zoning.’”''
* It is a well established fact that single-family zoning has gone hand-in-hand with racial discrimination since the first single-family zoned developments in Berkeley, CA more than 100 years ago.
* The creation of California’s first zoning laws themselves were the result of anti-Chinese racism of the 19th century. The legacy of exclusion has no place in our city from a legal perspective and also a moral one.

== Discussion of Character ==
[[File:Anti-Holly_Mailer_Image_1.jpeg|300px|frame|ClaytonWatch's attempts at character assassination]]
ClaytonWatch is attempting to assassinate Holly Tillman’s character for the following:
* Completely legal maneuvering with other City Council members to keep Councilmember Wan out of the Mayor’s seat
* Pointing out clear examples of [https://www.ktvu.com/news/deli-owner-in-clayton-under-fire-over-send-her-back-facebook-post hate speech] and racism in our community, organizing citizens against this, and holding the city to a higher standard of civility
* Setting her sights on expanding the Police Department
* Recognizing the fiscal malfeasance going on at our charter high school and demanding that school administrators are held to account
* At the suggestion of impropriety by others, withdrawing her support for a Planning Commissioner.

The accusations of “Mis-Information and Lies” and Holly being a “Polarizing, (sic) and Disruptive” figure strike the editors of Transparent Clayton as a lot of hot air. The actions ClaytonWatch describes above are the actions of a civic leader who takes responsibility and sticks to her convictions.