Last week, my mom received an email from Alameda County Supervisor David Haubert, sent in his official capacity as a county supervisor. In the email, Haubert strongly criticized SB1193, a bill introduced by State Sen. Aisha Wahab to require Alameda County supervisors to approve discretionary spending by a majority vote of the full board. Wahab argues this bill would increase public transparency.
Haubert has the right to say whatever he wants about a bill that affects his official powers. But his public opposition to it was less shocking than his email’s mention that Melissa Hernandez’s congressional campaign was endorsed by a majority of Alameda County supervisors, including Haubert.
Hernandez is a high-ranking employee in Haubert’s county office, as the email footer noted. She is also running against Wahab for Congress in a district that overlaps with the area Haubert represents on the Board of Supervisors.
Which raises an important question: did David Haubert use taxpayer-funded government resources to send electronic communications to his constituents that could have the effect of influencing a federal election?
My mom, the most apolitical person I know, concluded that Wahab’s bill would harm the community and that Hernandez was therefore more deserving of a seat in Congress. Having read the email myself, as someone who spent years working on political campaigns, I can see why she drew that conclusion from the email alone.
Now imagine how many other people drew the same conclusion because our county supervisor blurred the already-thin line between government communications and campaign rhetoric.
I don’t know whether Haubert broke any laws by sending this email. Still, if this email isn’t corrupt and unethical, then I don’t know what is. This is a betrayal of the public’s trust, and the Tri-Valley deserves better from this so-called public servant.