Dillan Horton notes Biased Endorsement Process from Davis Firefighters Local 3494
October 19, 2024
(From press release) Throughout the campaign cycle, Dillan’s team arranged four meetings with the leadership of Davis Firefighters Local 3494. During these meetings, union leaders expressed their operations were in disarray as a result of the sudden departure of their longtime past president. Notably, there was neither a formal interview with union members nor a questionnaire for candidates, standard practice for union endorsements. If the candidates were properly interviewed and assessed, it would have revealed that Linda Deos, the endorsed candidate, has no substantial record of standing up for the right to organize, and has not presented serious plans for addressing the persistent labor rights issues that exist in Davis.
When 3494’s new leadership called the campaign to communicate their endorsement decision, they shared that union leadership already promised it to Linda in a “backroom deal” months prior. This undermined the endorsement process, which should be based on thorough evaluation. This diversion sidelined Dillan, the candidate who’s worked in solidarity with unions his entire adult life, for a candidate who’s most extensive labor experience is working as an attorney for the state correctional officers union to represent prison guards accused of wrongdoing.
As someone whose entire adult life has involved solidarity with organized labor, Dillan finds the sloppy & blatantly biased engagement in this council election troubling. It undermines the interests of 3494 members, and betrays the interests of the broader labor movement.
That really is unfair.
Posted by: Donna Lemongello | October 19, 2024 at 11:10 AM
DL - can you elaborate? Who is being unfair to who?
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | October 19, 2024 at 12:48 PM
I'm confused. Why would Dillan be seeking the endorsement of the firefighting union in the first place - given the controversy regarding that particular endorsement?
At this point, shouldn't this particular endorsement work AGAINST a candidate?
Posted by: Ron O | October 19, 2024 at 01:29 PM
Yeah, RO, I was confused a bit with what the take-away was with the way the article was written - so I was a bit more confused with what DL was specifically concerned over. Maybe I didn't read it properly, but I think it could have been taken different ways - or even contradictory? I don't know, but then again I'm just a dork who sings and plays the kazoo at City Council meetings. So maybe a smart person can explain it.
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | October 19, 2024 at 02:34 PM
My guesses:
1. Donna thinks that Dillan was treated unfairly by the firefighters union.
2. There are better and worse reasons for being endorsed by the firefighters. Standing up for the right to organize = good reason. Taking money with the suggestion that money would be given in return = bad reason.
But we'd need clarification from Donna and Dillan to see if my guesses are correct.
Of course, politicians always deny that their campaign takes money with any expectation of quid pro quo. And yet, we all know that it happens.
Posted by: Roberta L. Millstein | October 19, 2024 at 03:02 PM
Yeah, RM, so much of government corruption is technically legal. It's only the stupid who push it so far they get caught and make the news. Most of it is plausible deniability; I believe a lot of politicians don't even see themselves as having done any 'wrong', as they are just a cog in the wheel of corruption and it just magically passes right through them like prune juice.
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | October 19, 2024 at 03:14 PM
It's like interviewing for a job and finding out that they interviewed you but had already hired someone. Whether it is a positive endorsement or not is not what's relevant. Probably is to some and not others.
Posted by: Donna Lemongello | October 19, 2024 at 07:53 PM
The reality is the inside track to council involves a lot of behind the scene activity. The politics in Davis has gotten really dirty and the head to head district raises bring out the worst in the candidates and their supporters. I would feel a lot worse for Dillan if he hadn't been involved in the slimeball campaign against me when I ran 4 years ago.
So much for Davis democracy. the way things are going why would anyone not anointed by the powers that be ever bother to run for council?
Posted by: Colin Walsh | October 20, 2024 at 09:21 PM
I don't understand why Dillan didn't respond to comments here - not to single him out, of course, as this seems to be a common thing with not only press releases but opinion pieces.
Posted by: Tuvia ben Olam DBA Todd Edelman | October 21, 2024 at 10:15 AM
"why would anyone not anointed by the powers that be ever bother to run for council?"
Maybe for the same reasons "anyone" would testify in front of the City Council on a Tuesday night, even resorting singing parody songs.
Alan Miller for District 3 City Council, 2028! I won't take firefighter money, nor money from hedgehogs!
And hopefully I won't be running in a district race -- because our City Council will get rid of the districts. Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!! Just right after they stop taking firefighter money. Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!!
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | October 21, 2024 at 10:35 AM
I removed my Linda Deos lawn sign when I saw she'd been endorsed by the firefighters' union. I respect her government experience, but anyone who's followed local politics in the last few decades must know that the firefighters' union is not exactly a bunch of boy (and girl) scouts. I'm now looking more closely at the other candidates.
I was going to say that surely I'm not the only one who feels this way, but with our increasingly polarized society and the demise of the Davis Enterprise, I worry that fewer and fewer people pay attention to local politics. (I'm not saying the Enterprise was stellar, but it had some good reporters and if you paid attention, you could name all the council members and had an idea of what was happening at council meetings.)
Posted by: Julia | October 24, 2024 at 02:50 PM