Editorial

To the editor:

I would like to point inaccuracies in the Call article published Jan. 11, wherein former candidate Erica Hoffman cites reasons for her loss in the recent election for 96th District state representative.

Ms. Hoffman’s claim that the David Gregory campaign spent $300,000 in the election cycle is erroneous by a very wide margin.

In fact, the David Gregory campaign budgeted $120,000 less than the amount Ms. Hoffman claims. All those funds were donated by people and organizations that support his conservative Republican agenda of family values, less government and lower taxes.

In addition, Ms. Hoffman claims that the Gregory campaign was not a grassroots effort but primarily swayed by advertising exposure. Ms. Hoffman overlooks the fact that David and his team knocked on more than 15,000 doors to introduce him to 96th District residents to hear their concerns and points of view. He made many public appearances in the 96th District to visit and talk with people of all ages and walks of life. He held a town-hall meeting that was very well attended.

Dozens of volunteers and interns donated their time and efforts to support his campaign for election to 96th District representative for a second term. Also, his candidacy was endorsed by many prominent officials in business, politics and community service.

I do not begrudge Ms. Hoffman for her inaccurate and exaggerated remarks that appeared in the Call citing reasons for her campaign loss by such a wide margin. It is unfortunate that many of Ms. Hoffman’s remarks are not accurate.

John Judd
Concord
Editor’s note: Mr. Judd serves as Rep. Gregory’s district director. According to Rep. Gregory’s campaign filing, he raised $306,671.75 and spent $265,526.20.