Endorsement: The Times rescinds its endorsement of Danielle Sandoval for L.A. City Council, calling her “not qualified”
The editorial board of The Times rescinded its endorsement of the Latina candidate for Los Angeles City Council tonight following a series of stories in the Los Angeles Times about the candidate’s past, including her support for Proposition 68, the law that allowed developers to build affordable housing and homeless services in public areas, and that she is now under investigation in federal court for bribery after she allegedly gave a homeless veteran $1,000 to promote her candidacy. Here’s who we endorsed:
Danielle Sandoval: This person is not qualified. Her lack of experience, her lack of knowledge of the city and what she’s doing has to be disqualifying. This is an awful, awful mistake.
Dani Soto: The Times supports an excellent Latina leader who is on the ground, getting things done and is well versed in city issues. She’s also been well vetted.
Raul Castaneda: I am a first-generation American, a third-generation Mexican American. I am deeply offended by the Times’ decision to revoke its endorsement of Danielle Sandoval.
Carla Marinucci: I support Danielle Sandoval because she is one of the few candidates brave enough to speak out for what our city desperately needs — a compassionate mayor and city council.
Gavin Newsom: We have a good person running in the race, a leader who is doing good things for the city and will work to achieve those results, but that doesn’t mean she’s qualified.
Vincent Sotomayor: This was a decision that only the editorial board could have made. We spoke to a number of people and the people who wrote the endorsement were clear that this person would not be a good mayor.
Here’s what we’re reading:
Aldermanic race in L.A. has long been described as an unwinnable fight by the candidates on both sides
The Times’ first editorial since Sandoval’s stunning ouster of her opponent is a piece that’s a must-read for anyone who believes that voters should be allowed a true democratic choice in the race for City Council, especially in light of the fact that a majority of the panel believes that she is not qualified as an elected official.
In her column, Marinucci writes: