Lakewood Dem Club Purging Members, Banning Cameras

[Ryan Salo]

20160929_191145.jpg (66.87 KiB) Viewed 2586 times

20160929_191151.jpg (73.36 KiB) Viewed 2586 times

20160929_191159.jpg (68.18 KiB) Viewed 2586 times

[Ryan Salo]

20160929_192024.jpg (67.51 KiB) Viewed 2586 times

20160929_192030.jpg (50.38 KiB) Viewed 2586 times

20160929_192121.jpg (69.48 KiB) Viewed 2586 times

[Ryan Salo]

20160929_191213.jpg (69.27 KiB) Viewed 2585 times

20160929_192621.jpg (56.49 KiB) Viewed 2585 times

20160929_193401.jpg (44.61 KiB) Viewed 2585 times

[Jim O'Bryan]

Tie Vote

No Endorsement


.

[Bridget Conant]

Except the members who were purged - didn't they get a provisional vote until the Board investigates the circumstances of the purging?

[mjkuhns]

Hey, we did endorse Meryl Johnson for State School Board.

But, yes, officially neither for or against Issue 64 achieved a required 50% of the total votes plus-one. Unofficially, I am told that there were a few abstentions—again, that's not official—and that the total for both sides was very high, which does match what seemed to be the highest turnout for a Dem Club meeting yet, in my admittedly limited experience. It was well into standing-room-only territory.

As long as I am posting, I suppose I should add that the recipients of the purge letters did end up in the meeting. I am going to guess that those (presuming that they regained basic membership) who qualified as voting members did vote… absolutely nothing was said during the meeting about this episode. We know that Sen. Skindell formally protested about the revoked memberships, so I suppose it's fair to guess that his protest was successful. (Others who have more reliable information, feel free to add!)

To round things out, I'll add that everyone received a page with some rules, including "no filming or recording of any kind without written consent of the club President" and "No media or press of any kind without written consent of the club President." I don't recall any real explanation of these or what force they have… there's nothing on the sheet, and I can't find anything in my notes. So, we may yet have questions about these policies, but that's that for now.

I just take written notes, which is apparently still okay.

[Dan Alaimo]

The purged members were able to vote provisionally, but I was told their votes won't make a difference in the result.
There was a representative of the county party there to make sure things were done properly. It was so close at the end, he ordered a recount.

Considering the effort the city put into this vote, a tie is not too bad. Not a win, but better for SLH than for the City.

It also indicates how close the real vote will be.

Overall the meeting went smoothly and was nothing like last month's.

[Dan OMalley]

I would like to know where my council person, Dan O'Malley, stands on this troubling development.

Mark -

Sorry for the delay in responding. There were some flooding issues in the neighborhood Thursday night that I needed to attend to and this got away from me.

First, I have no stance on this matter as your councilperson. You should know that I draw a distinction between my responsibilities as a public official, and my political activity. Membership in the Lakewood Democratic Club is clearly in the latter category. But I'm glad to share my views as a Democrat and a club member.

Since different individuals were removed from the club for different reasons, I want to distinguish my opinion on this generally from the situation with Tristan - someone whose work I respect a great deal and whose credentials as a progressive are unimpeachable. The Lakewood Democratic Club is just that - a club; a membership organization. There should be - and are - important criteria for membership. Among them should be 1) being a Democrat; and 2) subscription to the principles of the Democratic Party. One of the people I understand was "purged" from the group is someone who makes wildly sexist and xenophobic statements online in defense of Donald Trump on a regular basis. I am dismayed that any Democrat or club member would advocate for his reinstatement. Some others have been removed for being registered Republicans. My understanding of their argument is they only pulled a Republican ballot this past March to cast an "anti-Trump" vote. Again expecting members of the Democratic Club to be registered Democrats is a reasonable standard, though I suppose our by-laws need to be clearer on this score.

As Dan mentioned, this is a bit of a moot point in the sense that the provisional ballots would not have impacted the result of the endorsement vote.

[mjkuhns]

I second* the suggestion that our club's bylaws could stand to be clearer. I have grown pretty familiar with them, and there are a lot of rules which are vague—in addition to those customs which have become taken for granted but aren't actually present in the bylaws.

(The bylaws could also stand to be online, along with the club's entire web site, but I presume that the disappearance of both is a temporary error.)

* This is not formal procedure, though.

[Bridget Conant]

Dan O'Malley said:

First, I have no stance on this matter as your councilperson. You should know that I draw a distinction between my responsibilities as a public official, and my political activity.

Your position as a public official was the direct result of your political activity.

Sort of disingenuous trying to distance yourself by claiming your title is anything BUT political.

Further, it's rather curious that the members of the club are investigating other member's Facebook profiles. Will they now be screening potential applicants by checking their social media accounts prior to acceptance? Put those "thought oncologists" to work making sure all the members think alike - or at least follow the agenda of the insiders group running the show.

Maybe they should run background checks while they are at it?

Oh wait, the city is supposed to do that with new hires - but they don't - and that doesn't bother any of you. But god forbid your Facebook wall has anything they don't approve of!

[m buckley]

Dan, I appreciate that your attention was turned to flooding issues Thursday night.

A couple of questions:

Let's start with the situation with Tristan, who according to you is "Someone who's work I respect a great deal and whose credentials as a progressive are unimpeachable."
And what follows ... he should have been purged or this was deplorable. You sort of left us hanging on this one.

As for the " the wildly xenophobic and sexist comments on line in defense of Donald Trump" member of the Democratic Club, how long were the good Dems from the Lakewood Democratic Club putting up with this . I mean did this just come to everyone's attention on Monday?

Finally, there was nothing even remotely moot about any of this on Thursday afternoon when I first addressed the issue to you. The vote was hanging in the balance. Matters of principle were at stake. You had sought and accepted The Lakewood Democratic Club's endorsement . You were on line Thursday afternoon. And you sat silent.

[Michael Deneen]

Thanks to Dan for responding.

I am deeply amused at the board's "Republican" concerns for many reasons:

1. As I've pointed out a billion times, Mike Summers is a Republican who only joined out of political expediency. He was NEVER challenged by anyone.

2. Odious bigotry has infected the club for many years.....so it's comical that the current board is suddenly concerned about Facebook comments.
Tom Bullock, for example, was first elected to City Council in 2007 on a platform of "protecting our borders". That is "Trump Speak 101".
Fitzy got elected Mayor by campaigning on dog whistle racism like "Section 8 housing" and "crime is rampant". Again, "Trump Speak 101".
Many of your "liberal" predecessors embraced the thinly-veiled racism of the Pit Bull ban, which was itself a racist backlash of changing Lakewood demographics during the 2000s.
There is much more, but you get the point.
It's no accident that the club is whiter than the GOP Convention that was held downtown this summer.

3. I first joined the club in 1991. The only rules that have ever existed or been enforced are "pay your dues and attend three meetings". This purge was a knee-jerk reaction by "Team Summers" to push out Hospital defenders and Bernie folks. Their "original" hit list was even more absurd.

Dan-- If the current board runs for re-election, will you vote for them? I think they should be removed.....failure to do so will only reinforce the fact that the club is an establishment tool for wealthy white folks.

[Dan Alaimo]

Thanks Dan for looking into this.
In Tristan's case, he was purged for violating a non-existent rule. There was something about being disruptive, but as I recall he and his colleagues sat at a table the whole time and took a video that they later posted. He also wrote about the meeting in Daily KOS. Now they have a rule against media reportage, but I personally think that's a very bad idea for the Democratic Club.

The case of Charles Milsaps is harder to understand. He was responsible for bringing many new members into the club, perhaps more than anyone else. Most were pro-hospital, but the club willingly took their membership fees. I think it was also established that he was a registered Democrat, although the FedEx letter said otherwise.

I have sympathy for those who changed registrations to vote against Trump in the primary, but it seems to me it does violate a basic membership requirement of the club. Perhaps someone should have looked at how many years prior to this one they had been registered Democrats in making the decision to purge.

However, no one is talking about whether the club investigated other members with equal scrutiny, and I see nothing about the guy who started the disturbance in August that caused the police to come in. The pro-hospital people were challenged, so let's challenge the others.

[Bridget Conant]

Why be polite?

The leadership of the Dem Club was anything BUT, but here we are trying not to upset Mr O'Malley while he gives us his wishy-washy response that, in essence, makes excuses for the actions of the Club while pretending to be above the fray.

You are not, Mr O'Malley, you are just as complicit unless you call them out on it.

This was a blatant attempt to manipulate the vote so that the Club could endorse Issue 64.

What prompted these "investigations" of members? I heard it was Ron Petrie who "challenged" the members. Petrie is treasurer of the Pro 64 campaign and he was treasurer of Build Lakewood, hardly a neutral party.

Why weren't these questions raised earlier? Why weren't the members notified of the challenge and given a chance to explain? Why did they all receive letters the day of the vote?

And since when is it disruptive to record a meeting? Or write an article about what transpired during a meeting?

My goodness, the secrecy and stealth.

And you call yourselves the DEMOCRATIC Party? What a joke.

[Lori Allen _]

I would concur with Mike that the Lakewood Democratic Club, since the election of Summers', was a private club for Summers' friends. When Summers was elected mayor, they may as well have remodeled the women's pavilion with a Jacuzzi and full-service bar and called it the Lakewood Democratic Headquarters.

As an aside, I don't think the lack of endorsement either way for Issue 64 is any major loss. Almost everyone in this city knows that the Democratic Club is a private club for Lakewood's most elite. Even my neighbors who are union people and staunch democrats refused to join the club. They called it a "clique". Now that's saying something.

Since we are on the topic of wealthy white people, I will say that I have been speaking to residents on Lakewood's east end and in Ward 4. They concur that the entire City Hall is a wealthy, multi-million dollar white man's club. They feel that they are discriminated against, ignored, and sometimes even harassed by the city administration. Many of them are also aware of the alleged housing scam that mainly seems to target the poor, elderly, terminally ill, Black, Hispanic, and Arabic. They are also very upset about the housing conditions and lack of attention to landlords. Many of their houses have porch floors that a heavy person could fall through. I spoke with a war veteran that lived in an apartment building here in Lakewood. He was upset that City Hall would not address the bedbug, roach, and mold problem in his building. Those that were not already aware are outraged when I show them my evidence. It is high time to get everyone involved in City Hall, not just Summers' elite friends. Does anyone remember when Ward 4 had a councilperson that lived south of Clifton? I went back over sixty years and found none.

I think it is time for everyone at City Hall (esp. Mayor and Council) to start getting these people involved at City Hall and helping them. In my opinion, they have been ignored for far too long. Living south of Clifton and east of City Hall does not make anyone less of a person.