Diamond Bar councilwoman Chang already on notice
Welcome to the big leagues, Diamond Bar councilwoman Ling-Ling Chang.
You won a council seat in November and have occupied it a mere four weeks.
But you've already done something to irk some people.
Already, a group (or what appears to be one) is bent on keeping tabs on you.
A recent example: "Citizens Watching Councilmember Ling-Ling Chang" has been circulating e-mails about a recent Chang vote.
(We received a couple this week.)
At a Dec. 15 meeting, the city council approved the contract of a city consultant Gary Neely by a vote of 3-2 with Chang voting in favor.
The problem, however, the group alleges, is that Chang took $198 in contributions from Neely in her successful council run.
She did, according to her campaign finance statements. A review of the other Nov. city council candidates -- from current council members Steve Tye and Ron Everett to newcomers David T. Liu, Robert Velazquez, Lucy Huang and Shawn "S" Dhand -- didn't reveal any other Neely contributions.
The group didn't return two follow-up e-mails seeking comment and more importantly, questions of who they are.
But there is one telling paragraph in their e-mail to us that shows we likely won't be getting a response:
Unfortunately, we are not willing to disclose our names out of fear of political retaliation and rebuke by the New Diamond Bar Council Majority, because we will be ridiculed by the Councilmembers Herrera and Tye on the truth that we are trying to convey if anyone would listen and wake up!
Neely is a field representative for Bob Huff. He spoke out against the National Park Service study of the Puente-Chino Wildlife Corridor (Huff wrote a letter against it). Herrera stated during the last council meeting that she is opposed to the NPS study and wants to keep control of the lands--but for what ends and whose benefit? Neely has also done consulting work for City of Industry. Preserving and leaving the wildlife corridor as a national legacy would benefit everyone. Whose interest is Neely's service going to benefit? It does not seem to be the general public's.
Gary Neely is a field representative for Bob Huff who wrote a letter against the National Park Service study of the Puente-Chino Wildlife corridor. Neely spoke out against the study in the NPS study session. Herrera stated at the Dec. 15 meeting that she is opposed to the NPS study's inclusion of the wildlife corridor because she thinks the land should stay in "local control." But which locals would be in control and for what purpose? Who would benefit from this? Whose interest is Neely serving? He has also been used as a consultant by City of Industry in the past. It is doubtful that his work is for the general good since preserving the wildlife corridor as a national legacy would benefit all of us--rich or poor. It is shameful that Ms. Chang did not recognize the conflicts of interest in her vote, which made such a difference. I hope that this matter is examined more closely, and more light is shed into Neely's relationship with our city.
"Citizens Watching Councilmember Ling-Ling Chang" need to get a life. It is not illegal or improper to receive a campaign contribution from someone and later vote to hire that person/group for a needed service. Unless these folks can prove a quid pro quo (one thing in return for another) they are just sore losers. If anyone's vote can be bought for $198 they are more than corrupt, they're also stupid.
Fully 90% of Ling Ling Chang’s campaign financing came from outside Diamond Bar according to The 460 Statement, on file with the City of Diamond Bar. Of the nearly $ 44,000.00 Ms. Chang amassed, 58 outside contributors, spending $37,000, want to have a voice in Diamond Bar’s future.
No other candidate
(1.) spent $9,875.00 for Wilson Research Strategies in Okalahoma to map a campaign far beyond Diamond Bar’s election.
(2.) received $ 2,500 from Shawn Steel, Republican National Committeeman, who is responsible for “recruiting a new cadre of candidates for the Republican Party.
(3.) received $ 3,500 from Majestic Realty the irony being Chang’s endorser Steve Tye promised to take none of Majestic’s contributions.
Is it stupid and corrupt to wonder what can be learned from the contributors who want a broader agenda in national politics for Ms. Chang?
This is news? An "anonymous" group tipped off the SGVT that Chang received a $198 contribution from Neely and then voted in favor of Neely? ONE HUNDRED. NINETY. EIGHT. DOLLARS! Again, this is news? The innuendo of impropriety over $198 is utterly laughable and clearly shows the ignorance of the "anonymous" group. The thought that anyone would think this required Chang's recusal is ridiculous.
And the fear of retaliation? Get a grip. This is DB CITY COUNCIL not the Cosa Nostra.
I know Ling. I know she's an incredibly honorable person. She has a sharp intellect and is able to stay above the petty bickering to find the real issues. I know she'll always vote in the best interest of DB residents. To malign her character is insulting to all who know her. DB residents voted wisely in electing Ling to represent them. I hope she does seek higher office. This country could use someone as thoughtful, wise, and honorable as her.
This is news? An "anonymous" group tipped off the SGVT that Chang received a $198 contribution from Neely and then voted in favor of Neely? ONE HUNDRED. NINETY. EIGHT. DOLLARS! Again, this is news? The innuendo of impropriety over $198 is utterly laughable and clearly shows the ignorance of the "anonymous" group. The thought that anyone would think this required Chang's recusal is ridiculous.
And the fear of retaliation? Get a grip. This is DB CITY COUNCIL not the Cosa Nostra.
I know Ling. I know she's an incredibly honorable person. She has a sharp intellect and is able to stay above the petty bickering to find the real issues. I know she'll always vote in the best interest of DB residents. To malign her character is insulting to all who know her. DB residents voted wisely in electing Ling to represent them. I hope she does seek higher office. This country could use someone as thoughtful, wise, and honorable as her.
This is EXTREMELY disturbing.
The comments about "only $198" miss the point - obviously at this level of government the sums of cash are comparably low.
The information about external campaign funding is more disturbing, a definite clue that Ling-Ling is putting personal political interests before the interests of our fine city.
I would love to see this come up publicly during a meeting.. perhaps get some comment from previous trusted representatives like former mayor Wen Chang?