Kim’s Campaign Mailer Blatantly Denies Reality

Saratoga Springs Mayor Ron Kim recently sent out the following campaign flyer with a section ironically titled “Fact Check Alert!” that contains demonstrably false information:

In this mailer Mayor Kim shamelessly promotes the false narrative that the reason Travelers Insurance canceled the city’s liability insurance was due to expenses the city is incurring because of the Attorney General’s investigation. He has said this repeatedly at a variety of public events, and now he has included this falsehood in his mailer going out to voters in the final days of this election.

This is patently untrue and part of a regrettable pattern of false statements from Kim.

Here is the actual letter from Travelers in which they state that the actual reason they canceled the policy was that “The City of Saratoga Springs’ approach to risk and safety management creates an unacceptable increase in the hazards contemplated for the City.”

Scary Implications

So the obvious question is, does he actually believe what he’s telling voters in this mailer and in public statements he has been making?

The worst possibility is that he does. There is no sign that he has done anything to address Travelers’ actual concern.

Why would any well-run insurance company be willing to underwrite our city with a Mayor so divorced from the truth on such a critical issue? What vulnerabilities is the city subject to because of the breakdown of Risk and Safety?

18 thoughts on “Kim’s Campaign Mailer Blatantly Denies Reality”

  1. I don’t know why you are so surprised at this. It is one of many instances where Mr. Kim has taken a fact and distorted it for his own purpose. There are numerous examples. He and his campaign advisors are quite effective as spin doctors.

    Chris Mathiesen

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  4. In your article, the letter from Travelers states, “The City of Saratoga Springs’ approach to risk and safety management creates an unacceptable increase in the hazards contemplated for the City.” Then you question what vulnerabilities is the city subject to because of the breakdown of Risk and Safety? This is a question that has been bothering me since hearing the City is operating an unlicensed homeless shelter. In debates and candidate forums, it was brought up several times by multiple candidates that the shelter has not been licensed by the State and has not followed procedures at the County level.
    Section 8 of the City’s UDO requires that all homeless shelters must be licensed by and follow all regulations established by New York State. Risk and Safety okayed this contract in June knowing the shelter was not licensed as required by City code. What kind of liability does that create or continue to create? Does the lack of this Administration’s government to follow their own laws fall on the insurance company of the City, Landowner, Lessee, Agency or all of the above? Does it fall on Michael Phillips, as supposed Risk and Safety advisor to the City, for not exercising due diligence to begin with? Shouldn’t the New York State license (document) have been a requirement prior to execution of a contract? Why has the press not investigated this further?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  5. Call Me Concerned has good points.

    The mailer that John is showing us is nothing compared to the Kim mailer from the NYS Democratic Committee that arrived today. I was waiting for the last minute zingers and they came today. Of course, there will not be time to adequately respond to these outrageous attacks before November 7.

    Chris Mathiesen

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. The Times-Union is an Albany rag, so is hopelessly partisan. And the gushing endorsements of Kim given by Kirsten Gillibrand and Paul Tonko tell me all I need to know about their (and their staffs’) cluelessness and/or character. I’m not surprised – party über alles – but am sorely tired of elected and administrative and apologist people thinking it’s OK to adopt “by whatever means necessary” attitudes to serve their personal interests in dereliction of their duties to best serve their public.

      The ancientness of this problem stretches back beyond humanity’s first republics to the very first tribal systems of elections. And now, as then, the only available civil solution is to vote the old bums out and vote the new bums in. Ad infinitum.

      Like

      Reply

    2. I wish that surprised me. I lost confidence in most of the TU when it comes to politics. Wendy Liberatore is in line with the current administration and current Democratic Committee. her reporting is clearly biased. Kristi Gustafson Barlette went off on me when I didn’t agree with her on something. She was so rude, I chose to block her. Not a good look for a reporter.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    2. She knows nothing about what’s really going on, nor does she care. She was quick to have Al Fanknkin resign because of a joke from several years ago, before he was an elected official. This served her agenda well because the “me too” movement was in full swing. She wanted to be a hero. Yet, ron kim’s filthy language and behavior is ok with her??? Another glass-eyed fake .

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  9. The takeaway … Ron is in it for Ron. Not for the betterment of the city, but for his own vanity and ego. It’s disgusting. He will do and say ANYTHING to win re-election. He is the antithesis of a public servant and should be ashamed of himself.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment