Lorri Galloway continues to use the death of baby Samantha Rose Gutierrez for her own Public Relations promotions. http://ocblog.typepad.com/ocblog/2006/10/lorri_galloway_.html
She uses the baby’s death for an excuse for everything from why she supports another politician to why she ran for office. She has even shamelessly been photographed at the grave (twice). www.ocregister.com/.../abox/article_1281039.php
Let’s look at what really happened to baby Samantha. Lorri Galloway complains that while there was evidence that baby Samantha was being abused and neglected, Social Services agencies did nothing to protect her. If one takes the time to review the story, Baby Samantha Rose Gutierrez was being raised in a garage converted to living space. http://articles.latimes.com/2003/may/11/local/me-samantha11
There is no provision in the Building Code for this type of conversion, it is against the law. Had the City of Anaheim’s Code Enforcement division been called in to deal with the illegal conversion, the Gutierrez family would have been removed from that garage. Eli Home counselors appear to have visited the home. Had the family been reported to Code Enforcement for dangerous living conditions, Samantha Rose may still be alive today. One would think that in light of the death of a baby that Lorri Galloway claims as “her own”, she would be in support of Code Enforcement, in an effort to maintain safe and viable housing for other children being raised in dangerous circumstances. Instead, almost immediately upon taking office (Spring 2005) Lorri Galloway voted to take authority away from the Code Enforcement division. Lorri Gallloway helped to decimate the one City law enforcement division that could have helped baby Samantha Rose Gutierrez escape her dangerous and illegal living conditions. In Anaheim today, many families are living in converted garages, conditions that are nothing short of firetraps. Within the last year, a young man died in a garage on Harbor Blvd, where he was sleeping while being warmed by a space heater that caught fire. Had the Code Enforcement division been given the authority they once had, that young man may still be alive. How many innocents must die because Lorri Galloway wished to make Code Enforcement “friendlier”?
It is time to elect Councilmembers who respect public safety. It is time to vote “NO” on Lorri Galloway.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Depends on Who is Subsidized
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/union-police-disney-2125361-disneyland-leaders
This week, Lorri Galloway attended a demonstration where Police arrested twenty-eight leaders of Unite Here 681, a labor union heavily aligned with Lorri Galloway. This Union has staged 14 public protests, while only sitting down at the bargaining table 11 times. It appears the Galloway supported Union is more interested in press attention than actually working out an agreement with their employer. While this Union has the right to demonstrate, the expenditure of public safety employees to respond to these repeated demonstrations, where Union workers deliberately block public streets, disrupting the flow of traffic, and endangering others, is irresponsible at best. Lorri Galloway’s involvement in this activity shows a disregard for those taxpayers who are paying for those public safety employees. Lorri Galloway has a long history of Police response to her Union supporting tactics. In April 2007, Police responded when Disney security caught Lorri Galloway, Unite Here 681 Union leader Ada Briceno, and an LA Times reporter trespassing on Disney property. While the PR machine spun the story as Disney retaliation, the reality is that Galloway’s press party failed to check in with Disney security before conducting a behind-the-scenes interview on Disney property. All press is required to follow the same security measures, even press accompanied by a Councilwoman. Any corporate Security team would have responded to reporters tresspassing in a secure area without permission. http://ocblog.typepad.com/ocblog/2007/04/i_spoke_today_w.html It takes the expense of public safety personnel to respond to Galloway and her Union antics. Is this the behavior we want from our Council representation?
Earlier this week, Lorri Galloway voted against City funding for the Chamber of Commerce, saying, “"I do have a philosophical belief that the city should not be subsidizing private business,". http://www.ocregister.com/articles/city-chamber-contract-2122906-year-events
Obviously, Lorri Galloway does support using public funding to subsidize the activity of private business, as long as the private business is her Union supporters.
This week, Lorri Galloway attended a demonstration where Police arrested twenty-eight leaders of Unite Here 681, a labor union heavily aligned with Lorri Galloway. This Union has staged 14 public protests, while only sitting down at the bargaining table 11 times. It appears the Galloway supported Union is more interested in press attention than actually working out an agreement with their employer. While this Union has the right to demonstrate, the expenditure of public safety employees to respond to these repeated demonstrations, where Union workers deliberately block public streets, disrupting the flow of traffic, and endangering others, is irresponsible at best. Lorri Galloway’s involvement in this activity shows a disregard for those taxpayers who are paying for those public safety employees. Lorri Galloway has a long history of Police response to her Union supporting tactics. In April 2007, Police responded when Disney security caught Lorri Galloway, Unite Here 681 Union leader Ada Briceno, and an LA Times reporter trespassing on Disney property. While the PR machine spun the story as Disney retaliation, the reality is that Galloway’s press party failed to check in with Disney security before conducting a behind-the-scenes interview on Disney property. All press is required to follow the same security measures, even press accompanied by a Councilwoman. Any corporate Security team would have responded to reporters tresspassing in a secure area without permission. http://ocblog.typepad.com/ocblog/2007/04/i_spoke_today_w.html It takes the expense of public safety personnel to respond to Galloway and her Union antics. Is this the behavior we want from our Council representation?
Earlier this week, Lorri Galloway voted against City funding for the Chamber of Commerce, saying, “"I do have a philosophical belief that the city should not be subsidizing private business,". http://www.ocregister.com/articles/city-chamber-contract-2122906-year-events
Obviously, Lorri Galloway does support using public funding to subsidize the activity of private business, as long as the private business is her Union supporters.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Lorri Galloway and CSUF rumor
In the past, accusations against Lorri Galloway did not stick with voters, primarily because they were unfounded rumors, which this site seeks to dispel. Lorri has plenty of baggage that can be verified without bringing up things that cannot.
One of those past rumors was the accusation that while Lorri Galloway flaunts her membership in the CSUF Alumni Association, it was a ruse to hide the fact that she had never completed a university degree. That rumor is untrue. Lorri Galloway did complete her B.A. in Health and Human Services in 1987, according to the CSUF website.
The question here is, does a degree in social work help or hinder her qualifications for City Council? Is the Anaheim City Council a social services agency? Lorri Galloway’s continued commitment to provide taxpayer subsidized housing to those employees who have voluntarily chosen careers in the City of Anaheim appears to indicate that she believes it is. Do the voters agree? While compassion is something we hope all residents would strive for, are social service programs an appropriate use of tax dollars, or is that task best left to private charitable organizations?
The City of Anaheim is reportedly asking departments to cut expenses by at least 10%. Revenue streams from sales tax and property tax are performing below expectations, and only the Galloway-opposed Resort district is producing its share of revenue. While City departments tighten belts, Lorri insists on spending more money for subsidized social programs. Is this what the voters of Anaheim want? That question will have to be answered in November.
One of those past rumors was the accusation that while Lorri Galloway flaunts her membership in the CSUF Alumni Association, it was a ruse to hide the fact that she had never completed a university degree. That rumor is untrue. Lorri Galloway did complete her B.A. in Health and Human Services in 1987, according to the CSUF website.
The question here is, does a degree in social work help or hinder her qualifications for City Council? Is the Anaheim City Council a social services agency? Lorri Galloway’s continued commitment to provide taxpayer subsidized housing to those employees who have voluntarily chosen careers in the City of Anaheim appears to indicate that she believes it is. Do the voters agree? While compassion is something we hope all residents would strive for, are social service programs an appropriate use of tax dollars, or is that task best left to private charitable organizations?
The City of Anaheim is reportedly asking departments to cut expenses by at least 10%. Revenue streams from sales tax and property tax are performing below expectations, and only the Galloway-opposed Resort district is producing its share of revenue. While City departments tighten belts, Lorri insists on spending more money for subsidized social programs. Is this what the voters of Anaheim want? That question will have to be answered in November.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
The Signs Are Up and The Gloves are Off
Today’s post shows a giant campaign sign for Lorri Galloway, posted on Redevelopment Agency property, at the “Sinkin’ Lincoln” site at Lincoln and Beach Blvd. As a campaign veteran, Lorri and her staff know better than to illegally post on public property.
Letters to the Editor in The OC Register, Monday August 11, 2008 says it all.
“Awful Campaign Graffiti
All over our Anaheim neighborhood large campaign ads for Lorri Galloway are sprouting up. With more than 100 days until voting takes place, her insensitivity to our neighborly quality of life is as callow as any ignorant graffiti tagger. Names and slogans are splashed over private and public property without regard to the aesthetic that the city works hard to maintain. If the councilwoman thinks so little of the city environment, how ignorant is she of other important issues facing Anaheim? City ordinances should restrict the display of campaign posters and billboards to within a month of upcoming elections.
Tony Baxter
Anaheim”
Letters to the Editor in The OC Register, Monday August 11, 2008 says it all.
“Awful Campaign Graffiti
All over our Anaheim neighborhood large campaign ads for Lorri Galloway are sprouting up. With more than 100 days until voting takes place, her insensitivity to our neighborly quality of life is as callow as any ignorant graffiti tagger. Names and slogans are splashed over private and public property without regard to the aesthetic that the city works hard to maintain. If the councilwoman thinks so little of the city environment, how ignorant is she of other important issues facing Anaheim? City ordinances should restrict the display of campaign posters and billboards to within a month of upcoming elections.
Tony Baxter
Anaheim”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)