PattonLetter

							On 09/04/2012 04:55 PM, Gary A. Patton wrote:
Dear Micah:

l was quite distressed to see that you have used your campaign website to provide support for
Fred Keeley (and through your support for Fred that you have provided support for Bruce
McPherson as well) - http://www.micahforcouncil.org/keeley-hammer-and-mcpherson/.

Since you have now announced your support for Fred, I'd like to ask you whether he has done
the same for you? Fred is not listed as an endorser on your website, and I would guess that he is
probably treating you just the way he treated Ron Pomerantz. Fred came to Ron's political
event(s) for his benefit (Fred's benefit), not for Ron's benefit, and he never endorsed Ron. If you
think Fred endorses you, and you want that association, then at least make Fred make that
endorsement public. Speaking at a campaign event, and saying some nice things about you in
the presence of your friends, is not the same as endorsing you. In fact, it helps FRED, not you.

Just in case you don't get it, the fact that you are spotlighting your support for Fred on your
campaign website, and are giving him a key role at your fundraising event, builds good will for
Fred, since you are making it seem that he is associated with your (liberal and environmental)
campaign. But he does not really share the values that I think that you have - or that I have
hoped you have. Fred has served, and is still serving, as the political godfather of the current
Council majority; that is his true political allegiance. I was hoping that you'd be a different kind
of Council Member, but if you are just another apologist for Fred, I guess that's not true.

One of the basic rules of politics, in my opinion, is that you can't have it "both ways." It's a "team
sport," and you have to be on one team or the other. You can't put out highly supportive
statements about McPherson and then say you support Eric Hammer. You can't say wonderful
things about Fred, but then claim to differ with him on the issues. Your website statement is an
apology for Fred, and is supportive of McPherson, and your commitments are misplaced in both
cases, I believe.

In case you haven't focused on it, Fred and Bruce, at the statewide level, have sponsored and
qualified for the ballot the most dangerous, anti-environmental measure that has been put
before the voters in years. There is a short summary on my blog, which also talks about
McPherson's record. Why does Fred support someone with that record? I conclude it's because
that's where Fred's political commitments lie. He, like Bruce McPherson, wants to be a "nice
guy," and seem to be "liberal," but to let the people of great wealth (that 1% of which Bruce is
an able representative) get what they want. Fred, of course, is only a "wanna be" 1%er, but
that's the political team he's playing for. That's California Forward! See
http://www.gapatton.net/2012/05/147-forward.html

I was going to be at your fundraiser, but now I'm not coming. I am not on Fred's team. Again, I
am disappointed that you appear to be just like all those other Council members. They're great
supporters of Fred. I was hoping that you were going to be different!


Gary A. Patton, Of Counsel
Wittwer & Parkin, LLP
147 South River Street #221