Maybe I can shed some light on why Christy Lozano refused to sign the League of Women Voter’s release form, which resulted in the League canceling their forum.
In the release form, there was language prohibiting Christy from basically making any references to the current superintendent’s activities or record during her time in office. This should have been titled the “League of Women Voters Incumbent Protection Rule.” The reason why Christy is running is because she feels the incumbent has a failed record. So why would she sign a statement that doesn’t allow her to talk about that record? It doesn’t make sense.
It would have been very easy and sensible for the League to let the candidates answer the questions any way they like, within the time constraints given to them. Give the voters as much information as possible and let them decide if the candidates’ answers are credible. We don’t need the League to decide what the voters get to hear.
It is quite ironic that League of Women Voters proudly states on its letterhead that they empower voters. I would say the Santa Barbara chapter disempowers voters with their overly restrictive rules. Even other chapters disagree with the approach taken by the local chapter. Another chapter’s website states, “a good format should make it easy for the candidates to discuss the issues and respond to opponents.” Maybe it would be enlightening for the people running the Santa Barbara chapter to consult with their brothers and sisters in the organization as to how to conduct a substantive and informed candidate forum.