The Los Angeles County Democratic Party (LACDP) endorsement recommendations for the 2024 general election were voted on Monday, September 9.
By Melissa Michelson
The LACDP endorsement recommendation of Tina Fredericks in the Pasadena Unified School District 6 school board race was challenged, leading to no endorsement in the District 6 race between Tina Fredericks and Lisa Kroese for school board.
The process
A local endorsement sub-committee interviews candidates and then makes a recommendation to the wider body of the LADCP. The final vote on Monday, September 9, was the determining factor as to who would formally receive the LACDP endorsement.
This meeting is an opportunity for the county-wide Democratic body to approve or challenge the sub-committee’s recommendations, leading to either an endorsement of a candidate or a no endorsement outcome if a candidate does not achieve 60% of the body’s vote.
When a sub-committee’s recommendation is challenged, there are typically three opportunities for members to speak either in support or in opposition to the recommendation, after which the entire body votes.
Here is what happened for the PUSD District 6 race, which has two candidates
Tina Fredericks, the incumbent, had been recommended for the endorsement over Lisa Kroese.
The three challenges were:
1. Pro – Michael Soto
1. Con – Michael Leon, Business Representative, California Teamsters Local 911
2. Pro – Jonathan Gardner, UTP president
2. Con – Diane Orona, former school board liaison for the Pasadena Unified School District, read by Suzie Abajian
3. Pro – Tina Fredericks, PUSD Board Trustee (speaking for herself)
3. Con – Michelle Bailey, PUSD Board Trustee
Then the voting began. A total of 198 votes were cast, with 53 abstentions. Of the 145 votes, there were 80 Yes votes. 65 No votes.
The recommendation by the endorsement committee was not upheld because the 60% threshold was not met, and there was therefore no endorsement in the PUSD District 6 School Board race.
See video of the LACDP meeting with relevant action starting at 4:41:05 on YouTube.
Diane Orona, retired PUSD Administrative Services Manager and former school board liaison for the Pasadena Unified School District, explained her reason for a “no endorsement”:
…I worked for the District for over 20 years with five different boards.
Never during all those years have I witnessed a board member as ineffectual as Tina Fredericks. She is a weak team player, disrespectful and argumentative, which led to her hiring an attorney and suing the school district.
Protocols were created for our board to enable them to avoid pitfalls and work efficiently and effectively. One of the protocols involved board members working with staff prior to writing any articles that would be published so that facts were checked – a fairly common procedure.
Ms. Fredericks, unable to effectively negotiate with other board members to change the language in this protocol, rushed to sue the school board and the district, costing the district approximately $35,000 in attorney fees to defend the suit.
The fees were taken from the general fund – monies which directly support students. She defends herself proudly, stating that no costs were involved, which is simply untrue.”
Aftermath
In the subsequent newsletter sent by Tina Fredericks to supporters, the subject line spun the negative outcome: “Thank You LA County Democratic Party!.” Someone with no prior knowledge of the details, or who may not open the email, may be led to think she got the endorsement.
Local candidates spinning their losses may be a running trend.
Earlier this month in a now-removed Instagram post, Je-Show Yang running for Alhambra City Council District 4 seat, included Alhambra Democratic Club’s logo and the message “Thank you! I’m honored to have been the top vote-getter at the Alhambra Democratic Club!” He also put out an email with the subject line “Je-Show Yang Emerges as Top Vote Getter in Alhambra Club Membership Poll,” referring to the Alhambra Democratic Club’s endorsement proceeding. Like Tina Fredericks, he did not meet the threshold to be endorsed.
One piece of information that should be included in this article. At the meeting, one of the committee members, prefacing her request to pull the Fredericks endorsement from the consent calendar for separate discussion and vote, stated that she had never requested a pull before; however, to support her request, this committee member stated that Fredericks lacks confidentiality with closed session information and also supports charter schools. Had she not made this request, the endorsement would have gone through with a rubber stamp.