Missed it the first time? I did. I wasn’t the only one.
The item seeks to put three separate aspects of election law into a single section of the election code.
These ordinances will remove all political campaign sign regulations from Chapters 3 and 40 of the Municipal Code and include them in Chapter 12 (Elections). This will put all regulations related to elections in one chapter making it convenient for the public to look an election related question up. They will also increase the allowable campaign contribution per person to $250 from the current $100 and impose a $25 removal fee for signs placed on public property.
The guise of this move is stated as “convenience.” But it also has the advantage of enabling the item to be slipped through in relative obscurity, buried at the end where few are looking for it.
The first part of the item is a public hearing on an ordinance which would allow renters to display political campaign signs. This is an item that we discussed in October that came before the UC Davis-City of Davis Student Liaison Commission.
It has full backing of ASUCD (Associated Students of UC Davis). The issue came to the commission’s attention after the ASUCD Senate passed a resolution in September, authored by Sen. Michael Lay, calling for an ordinance ensuring the right of Davis renters to post political signs. Several renters had complained to City and ASUCD officials that landlords were not allowing them to put up signs in support of certain candidates for public office.
ASUCD Sen. Andrew Peake:
“The right to free speech is a right guaranteed to everyone, not just to those who own property. When it comes to political participation, it shouldn’t matter whether you own your home or not. When certain members of the community aren’t allowed to participate in the democratic process in this way, it’s a form of disenfranchisement.”
City staff circulated a legal memorandum stating that landlords who prohibited their tenants from posting political signs were most likely out of step with the law.
Staff has now however taken the rather unusual step of putting together two relatively distinct ordinances into the same item. Therefore, having read the first part of the item, one might not notice that there is a second very distinct ordinance carried within it.
Adding to the confusion, is the fact that the second portion of the item has received little discussion leading up to its placement on the agenda. To the point where one wonders where it came from and under whose direction it was placed there.
Even in the agenda packet, the ordinance is buried and extremely brief. Unlike the political sign ordinance, the ordinance to change campaign finance laws has no background or discussion. It was a very simple single paragraph description.
It simply reads:
Campaign Contribution Limits
The current campaign contribution limit of $100 was set by ordinance 1624 on November 20, 1991. With the increase in costs to run a simple campaign over the past sixteen years, it is being recommended that consideration be given to increasing the individual limit from the current $100 to $250.
The merits of the increase aside, the fact that this was done in such a quiet manner, is of grave concern. Councilmember Lamar Heystek expressed similar concerns to me. This was the first he had heard of any proposed changes and he was unclear as to how the issue came about.
As Liaison the UC Davis-City of Davis Student Liaison Commission, he was very familiar with the political sign ordinance. The issue of renters having the same rights to place political signs around their rental units is an issue at the very basic levels of free speech.
However, the issue of campaign finance laws is a separate matter and needed to be brought up separately.
One can make arguments on both sides of the issue of increasing the amount an individual can donate in a city council race. However, that is not the point here. The point here is about open government, transparency, and having a full public discussion of this item. The item did not make the Davis Enterprise. It did not have any sort of prior discussion in a commission, and apparently even members of the council had no idea it was even being considered.
That is very alarming to me, again regardless of whether you think this is a good idea or a bad idea. What does seem clear is that three of the members of council are running for reelection. It takes thirty days for an ordinance to take effect after it’s second reading which would be the first council meeting in January, meaning that by early February, candidates facing reelection can suddenly experience a 250% increase in their available campaign funds. And let me go out on a limb and suggest that this idea did not come from the Mayor. That leaves two likely culprits who would personally benefit from changing this ordinance.
To make things even more interesting is the fact that the Mayor Pro Tem, Ruth Asmundson, will not be at the meeting on Tuesday as she is out of town. That will leave open the strong possibility that this will not pass and perhaps it will leave open the possibility that this would be delayed until January or even after the current election.
Regardless of one’s feelings on the current law or the proposed changes, the public must be heard on this issue and weigh in. Attempting to close off public input, scrutiny or debate, is a very dangerous precedent in my view. Let us have this debate with full notice in January and if the public wants to see these changes, then at least there will have been a chance for people to weigh in. My guess however is that is exactly what the timing and secretive nature of this ordinance attempted to avoid.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
You pulled the curtains back on Oz once again DPD. This is not the first time this council has tried to sneak items by on the agenda. This lack of transparency also happened under the Boyd administration where they tried to slip items by on the agenda.
It’s time for a change and the public must demand it and remember it at the ballot box.
Ann
You pulled the curtains back on Oz once again DPD. This is not the first time this council has tried to sneak items by on the agenda. This lack of transparency also happened under the Boyd administration where they tried to slip items by on the agenda.
It’s time for a change and the public must demand it and remember it at the ballot box.
Ann
You pulled the curtains back on Oz once again DPD. This is not the first time this council has tried to sneak items by on the agenda. This lack of transparency also happened under the Boyd administration where they tried to slip items by on the agenda.
It’s time for a change and the public must demand it and remember it at the ballot box.
Ann
You pulled the curtains back on Oz once again DPD. This is not the first time this council has tried to sneak items by on the agenda. This lack of transparency also happened under the Boyd administration where they tried to slip items by on the agenda.
It’s time for a change and the public must demand it and remember it at the ballot box.
Ann
This is hardly a lack of transparency. It’s on the agenda. That’s pretty transparent. Just because it is of more importance to you doesn’t mean it has to be heralded at every corner.
You find conspiracy everywhere. This is an non-controvertial as it gets.
This is hardly a lack of transparency. It’s on the agenda. That’s pretty transparent. Just because it is of more importance to you doesn’t mean it has to be heralded at every corner.
You find conspiracy everywhere. This is an non-controvertial as it gets.
This is hardly a lack of transparency. It’s on the agenda. That’s pretty transparent. Just because it is of more importance to you doesn’t mean it has to be heralded at every corner.
You find conspiracy everywhere. This is an non-controvertial as it gets.
This is hardly a lack of transparency. It’s on the agenda. That’s pretty transparent. Just because it is of more importance to you doesn’t mean it has to be heralded at every corner.
You find conspiracy everywhere. This is an non-controvertial as it gets.
Increasing the donation limit is not free speech in reality, it is buying an election. We must have public funding to level the playing field. Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem. Of course those who support the wealthy prefer the advantage. The rest of us have to wake up to the fact that a process that insures equal access to the public will give all candidates an even hearing. Any attempt to sneak this issue through the city council should be stopped. If campaigning financing is an issue let us consider all aspects.
Increasing the donation limit is not free speech in reality, it is buying an election. We must have public funding to level the playing field. Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem. Of course those who support the wealthy prefer the advantage. The rest of us have to wake up to the fact that a process that insures equal access to the public will give all candidates an even hearing. Any attempt to sneak this issue through the city council should be stopped. If campaigning financing is an issue let us consider all aspects.
Increasing the donation limit is not free speech in reality, it is buying an election. We must have public funding to level the playing field. Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem. Of course those who support the wealthy prefer the advantage. The rest of us have to wake up to the fact that a process that insures equal access to the public will give all candidates an even hearing. Any attempt to sneak this issue through the city council should be stopped. If campaigning financing is an issue let us consider all aspects.
Increasing the donation limit is not free speech in reality, it is buying an election. We must have public funding to level the playing field. Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem. Of course those who support the wealthy prefer the advantage. The rest of us have to wake up to the fact that a process that insures equal access to the public will give all candidates an even hearing. Any attempt to sneak this issue through the city council should be stopped. If campaigning financing is an issue let us consider all aspects.
I’d say lift the $ limit then let the public decide what is out of line. Remember that Covell Village people had money to burn and it played against them during the election. To me, it means a lot more to see 300 people giving a $100, than 3 people giving $1000.
I’d say lift the $ limit then let the public decide what is out of line. Remember that Covell Village people had money to burn and it played against them during the election. To me, it means a lot more to see 300 people giving a $100, than 3 people giving $1000.
I’d say lift the $ limit then let the public decide what is out of line. Remember that Covell Village people had money to burn and it played against them during the election. To me, it means a lot more to see 300 people giving a $100, than 3 people giving $1000.
I’d say lift the $ limit then let the public decide what is out of line. Remember that Covell Village people had money to burn and it played against them during the election. To me, it means a lot more to see 300 people giving a $100, than 3 people giving $1000.
“It’s on the agenda.”
More to the point it is hidden and buried in the agenda.
The students are angry about this as well because part of the issue is a renter’s issue–quite controversial at the UCD-City Liaison meeting. When do they put it on the agenda–AFTER FINALS WEEK–when all the students are gone.
Sorry but this smells.
Just because he finds conspiracy everywhere, doesn’t mean it’s not there.
“It’s on the agenda.”
More to the point it is hidden and buried in the agenda.
The students are angry about this as well because part of the issue is a renter’s issue–quite controversial at the UCD-City Liaison meeting. When do they put it on the agenda–AFTER FINALS WEEK–when all the students are gone.
Sorry but this smells.
Just because he finds conspiracy everywhere, doesn’t mean it’s not there.
“It’s on the agenda.”
More to the point it is hidden and buried in the agenda.
The students are angry about this as well because part of the issue is a renter’s issue–quite controversial at the UCD-City Liaison meeting. When do they put it on the agenda–AFTER FINALS WEEK–when all the students are gone.
Sorry but this smells.
Just because he finds conspiracy everywhere, doesn’t mean it’s not there.
“It’s on the agenda.”
More to the point it is hidden and buried in the agenda.
The students are angry about this as well because part of the issue is a renter’s issue–quite controversial at the UCD-City Liaison meeting. When do they put it on the agenda–AFTER FINALS WEEK–when all the students are gone.
Sorry but this smells.
Just because he finds conspiracy everywhere, doesn’t mean it’s not there.
Hardly a lack of transparency? What?
The poster referring to themselves as “Looks Clear to Me,” needs to put on some reading glasses.
When there is an item that is slipped onto the agenda and all council members are not made aware of it, that is transparent?
When it comes out of “nowhere,” that is transparent?
This isn’t the first time this council or previous like-minded councils have attempted to do this.
There is no conspiracy theory, only ignorance and lack of knowledge by the voters who don’t wish to pay attention.
“Looks Clear to Me” is the type of citizen they hope for, uninformed and not paying attention.
Lens Crafters has a sale on glasses and I suggest that you purchase a pair. They may help you see things a bit better. But, then again, you may not want to.
So goes the old adage, “ignorance is bliss.”
Hardly a lack of transparency? What?
The poster referring to themselves as “Looks Clear to Me,” needs to put on some reading glasses.
When there is an item that is slipped onto the agenda and all council members are not made aware of it, that is transparent?
When it comes out of “nowhere,” that is transparent?
This isn’t the first time this council or previous like-minded councils have attempted to do this.
There is no conspiracy theory, only ignorance and lack of knowledge by the voters who don’t wish to pay attention.
“Looks Clear to Me” is the type of citizen they hope for, uninformed and not paying attention.
Lens Crafters has a sale on glasses and I suggest that you purchase a pair. They may help you see things a bit better. But, then again, you may not want to.
So goes the old adage, “ignorance is bliss.”
Hardly a lack of transparency? What?
The poster referring to themselves as “Looks Clear to Me,” needs to put on some reading glasses.
When there is an item that is slipped onto the agenda and all council members are not made aware of it, that is transparent?
When it comes out of “nowhere,” that is transparent?
This isn’t the first time this council or previous like-minded councils have attempted to do this.
There is no conspiracy theory, only ignorance and lack of knowledge by the voters who don’t wish to pay attention.
“Looks Clear to Me” is the type of citizen they hope for, uninformed and not paying attention.
Lens Crafters has a sale on glasses and I suggest that you purchase a pair. They may help you see things a bit better. But, then again, you may not want to.
So goes the old adage, “ignorance is bliss.”
Hardly a lack of transparency? What?
The poster referring to themselves as “Looks Clear to Me,” needs to put on some reading glasses.
When there is an item that is slipped onto the agenda and all council members are not made aware of it, that is transparent?
When it comes out of “nowhere,” that is transparent?
This isn’t the first time this council or previous like-minded councils have attempted to do this.
There is no conspiracy theory, only ignorance and lack of knowledge by the voters who don’t wish to pay attention.
“Looks Clear to Me” is the type of citizen they hope for, uninformed and not paying attention.
Lens Crafters has a sale on glasses and I suggest that you purchase a pair. They may help you see things a bit better. But, then again, you may not want to.
So goes the old adage, “ignorance is bliss.”
The students should be upset. It shows just how much they devalue students.
The students should be upset. It shows just how much they devalue students.
The students should be upset. It shows just how much they devalue students.
The students should be upset. It shows just how much they devalue students.
Those who have access to the “deep pockets”, have no problem raising campaign money now. They get as many $100 checks as they need from the employees, friends and business associates of the Council candidate’s well-heeled patrons who recruit and more often than not fund these contributions. Doesn’t Bill Emlen create the agenda format as well as the items? He needs to be publicly questioned about how this item came to appear on the agenda in this form and where the idea came from.
Those who have access to the “deep pockets”, have no problem raising campaign money now. They get as many $100 checks as they need from the employees, friends and business associates of the Council candidate’s well-heeled patrons who recruit and more often than not fund these contributions. Doesn’t Bill Emlen create the agenda format as well as the items? He needs to be publicly questioned about how this item came to appear on the agenda in this form and where the idea came from.
Those who have access to the “deep pockets”, have no problem raising campaign money now. They get as many $100 checks as they need from the employees, friends and business associates of the Council candidate’s well-heeled patrons who recruit and more often than not fund these contributions. Doesn’t Bill Emlen create the agenda format as well as the items? He needs to be publicly questioned about how this item came to appear on the agenda in this form and where the idea came from.
Those who have access to the “deep pockets”, have no problem raising campaign money now. They get as many $100 checks as they need from the employees, friends and business associates of the Council candidate’s well-heeled patrons who recruit and more often than not fund these contributions. Doesn’t Bill Emlen create the agenda format as well as the items? He needs to be publicly questioned about how this item came to appear on the agenda in this form and where the idea came from.
Two of the Council member and candidates for reelection, Don Saylor and Stephen Souza, were endorsed by ASUCD Senate during the 2004 election. In fact, the ASUCD President, Sara Henry, participated heavily in Don Saylor’s campaign and pushed the endorsement because they “were friendly to her.” These two are ASUCD’s chosen representatives. Maybe someone from ASUCD should go over there and ask what the heck they are doing to watch out for the student’s interests.
Two of the Council member and candidates for reelection, Don Saylor and Stephen Souza, were endorsed by ASUCD Senate during the 2004 election. In fact, the ASUCD President, Sara Henry, participated heavily in Don Saylor’s campaign and pushed the endorsement because they “were friendly to her.” These two are ASUCD’s chosen representatives. Maybe someone from ASUCD should go over there and ask what the heck they are doing to watch out for the student’s interests.
Two of the Council member and candidates for reelection, Don Saylor and Stephen Souza, were endorsed by ASUCD Senate during the 2004 election. In fact, the ASUCD President, Sara Henry, participated heavily in Don Saylor’s campaign and pushed the endorsement because they “were friendly to her.” These two are ASUCD’s chosen representatives. Maybe someone from ASUCD should go over there and ask what the heck they are doing to watch out for the student’s interests.
Two of the Council member and candidates for reelection, Don Saylor and Stephen Souza, were endorsed by ASUCD Senate during the 2004 election. In fact, the ASUCD President, Sara Henry, participated heavily in Don Saylor’s campaign and pushed the endorsement because they “were friendly to her.” These two are ASUCD’s chosen representatives. Maybe someone from ASUCD should go over there and ask what the heck they are doing to watch out for the student’s interests.
RL: “We must have public funding to level the playing field.”
I, too, am for public funding of campaigns.
“Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem.”
Undoubtedly, an underfinanced campaign will have trouble competing with a flush one. However, I don’t think “advertising money” is the heart of the current problem. The core problem is corruption and the appearance of corruption.
Most of the people who are giving most of the money to candidates have some kind of financial stake in the outcome. They might be real estate developers who want a favorable ear on their projects. They might be teachers in a school board election who want higher salaries or bigger benefits. They might be contractors who sell supplies to the city or county. Or they might be landscaping firms which maintain public properties.
Every time a candidate for public office accepts money from any one who does business with the government, it has the appearance of corruption. The only way to rid our selves of that stink is to have publicly financed campaigns.
Ironically, there are a large number of people in Davis who have one eye open to this appearance of corruption. Whenever real estate developers give money to a candidate, this group jumps all over it and explodes in anger that the canidate is a tool of the developers. They beat their chests and scream, “I am exposing the dark underbelly of Davis!” But that same group of watchdogs seems to have its other eye shut tight.
They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Because almost all of the money spent by government is on its own labor, this kind of influence has by far the highest potential for corruption. Yet the self-styled watchdogs sleep lazily every time the public employees associations get involved in political campaigns. And when our elected representatives give in to the unions’ demands, in secret negotiations always held out of the public arena, there is rarely a hue and cry.
RL: “We must have public funding to level the playing field.”
I, too, am for public funding of campaigns.
“Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem.”
Undoubtedly, an underfinanced campaign will have trouble competing with a flush one. However, I don’t think “advertising money” is the heart of the current problem. The core problem is corruption and the appearance of corruption.
Most of the people who are giving most of the money to candidates have some kind of financial stake in the outcome. They might be real estate developers who want a favorable ear on their projects. They might be teachers in a school board election who want higher salaries or bigger benefits. They might be contractors who sell supplies to the city or county. Or they might be landscaping firms which maintain public properties.
Every time a candidate for public office accepts money from any one who does business with the government, it has the appearance of corruption. The only way to rid our selves of that stink is to have publicly financed campaigns.
Ironically, there are a large number of people in Davis who have one eye open to this appearance of corruption. Whenever real estate developers give money to a candidate, this group jumps all over it and explodes in anger that the canidate is a tool of the developers. They beat their chests and scream, “I am exposing the dark underbelly of Davis!” But that same group of watchdogs seems to have its other eye shut tight.
They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Because almost all of the money spent by government is on its own labor, this kind of influence has by far the highest potential for corruption. Yet the self-styled watchdogs sleep lazily every time the public employees associations get involved in political campaigns. And when our elected representatives give in to the unions’ demands, in secret negotiations always held out of the public arena, there is rarely a hue and cry.
RL: “We must have public funding to level the playing field.”
I, too, am for public funding of campaigns.
“Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem.”
Undoubtedly, an underfinanced campaign will have trouble competing with a flush one. However, I don’t think “advertising money” is the heart of the current problem. The core problem is corruption and the appearance of corruption.
Most of the people who are giving most of the money to candidates have some kind of financial stake in the outcome. They might be real estate developers who want a favorable ear on their projects. They might be teachers in a school board election who want higher salaries or bigger benefits. They might be contractors who sell supplies to the city or county. Or they might be landscaping firms which maintain public properties.
Every time a candidate for public office accepts money from any one who does business with the government, it has the appearance of corruption. The only way to rid our selves of that stink is to have publicly financed campaigns.
Ironically, there are a large number of people in Davis who have one eye open to this appearance of corruption. Whenever real estate developers give money to a candidate, this group jumps all over it and explodes in anger that the canidate is a tool of the developers. They beat their chests and scream, “I am exposing the dark underbelly of Davis!” But that same group of watchdogs seems to have its other eye shut tight.
They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Because almost all of the money spent by government is on its own labor, this kind of influence has by far the highest potential for corruption. Yet the self-styled watchdogs sleep lazily every time the public employees associations get involved in political campaigns. And when our elected representatives give in to the unions’ demands, in secret negotiations always held out of the public arena, there is rarely a hue and cry.
RL: “We must have public funding to level the playing field.”
I, too, am for public funding of campaigns.
“Politics should not be determined by advertising money. That is the current problem.”
Undoubtedly, an underfinanced campaign will have trouble competing with a flush one. However, I don’t think “advertising money” is the heart of the current problem. The core problem is corruption and the appearance of corruption.
Most of the people who are giving most of the money to candidates have some kind of financial stake in the outcome. They might be real estate developers who want a favorable ear on their projects. They might be teachers in a school board election who want higher salaries or bigger benefits. They might be contractors who sell supplies to the city or county. Or they might be landscaping firms which maintain public properties.
Every time a candidate for public office accepts money from any one who does business with the government, it has the appearance of corruption. The only way to rid our selves of that stink is to have publicly financed campaigns.
Ironically, there are a large number of people in Davis who have one eye open to this appearance of corruption. Whenever real estate developers give money to a candidate, this group jumps all over it and explodes in anger that the canidate is a tool of the developers. They beat their chests and scream, “I am exposing the dark underbelly of Davis!” But that same group of watchdogs seems to have its other eye shut tight.
They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Because almost all of the money spent by government is on its own labor, this kind of influence has by far the highest potential for corruption. Yet the self-styled watchdogs sleep lazily every time the public employees associations get involved in political campaigns. And when our elected representatives give in to the unions’ demands, in secret negotiations always held out of the public arena, there is rarely a hue and cry.
Rich Rifkin said,
“They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.
We all received the slick mailers telling us to vote for them and in turn Souza and Saylor paid their “thanks” by giving them big benefits in retirement.
Some of us are paying attention, but not enough people.
You won’t read any of this in the slick rag that you work for Rich.
The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.
Rich Rifkin said,
“They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.
We all received the slick mailers telling us to vote for them and in turn Souza and Saylor paid their “thanks” by giving them big benefits in retirement.
Some of us are paying attention, but not enough people.
You won’t read any of this in the slick rag that you work for Rich.
The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.
Rich Rifkin said,
“They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.
We all received the slick mailers telling us to vote for them and in turn Souza and Saylor paid their “thanks” by giving them big benefits in retirement.
Some of us are paying attention, but not enough people.
You won’t read any of this in the slick rag that you work for Rich.
The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.
Rich Rifkin said,
“They either don’t see or don’t get upset with the fact that labor unions in Davis — the teachers and the fire fighters are the worst abusers of this — are much more guilty of corrupting the process than any developer ever has. When was the last time you heard the frothy-mouthed left jump up and down and screach, “That woman is a tool of the labor unions!”?
Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.
We all received the slick mailers telling us to vote for them and in turn Souza and Saylor paid their “thanks” by giving them big benefits in retirement.
Some of us are paying attention, but not enough people.
You won’t read any of this in the slick rag that you work for Rich.
The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.
$100 is completely insufficient, an increase is needed – if for nothing, else, for the inflation that has taken place over the last 15 years.
Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”. Until that changes, public campaign funding isn’t going to happen.
Rich is also totally right. The unions in particular are as bad as the developers – if not far worse.
As for the item being thrown in the agenda – again, it’s in the agenda. Dont see conspiracies because of lack of reading comprehension.
$100 is completely insufficient, an increase is needed – if for nothing, else, for the inflation that has taken place over the last 15 years.
Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”. Until that changes, public campaign funding isn’t going to happen.
Rich is also totally right. The unions in particular are as bad as the developers – if not far worse.
As for the item being thrown in the agenda – again, it’s in the agenda. Dont see conspiracies because of lack of reading comprehension.
$100 is completely insufficient, an increase is needed – if for nothing, else, for the inflation that has taken place over the last 15 years.
Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”. Until that changes, public campaign funding isn’t going to happen.
Rich is also totally right. The unions in particular are as bad as the developers – if not far worse.
As for the item being thrown in the agenda – again, it’s in the agenda. Dont see conspiracies because of lack of reading comprehension.
$100 is completely insufficient, an increase is needed – if for nothing, else, for the inflation that has taken place over the last 15 years.
Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”. Until that changes, public campaign funding isn’t going to happen.
Rich is also totally right. The unions in particular are as bad as the developers – if not far worse.
As for the item being thrown in the agenda – again, it’s in the agenda. Dont see conspiracies because of lack of reading comprehension.
Nobody is worse than the developers?
Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election? That machine was oiled to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.
LET US LOOK AT THE FACTS:
Developers & Real Estate Interests include:
RAMOS
WHITCOMBE
NISHI
YAKZAN
GIDARO
others…
Unions Include:
Fire Fighters Association
Davis Police Officers Association
others
I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.
Nobody is worse than the developers?
Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election? That machine was oiled to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.
LET US LOOK AT THE FACTS:
Developers & Real Estate Interests include:
RAMOS
WHITCOMBE
NISHI
YAKZAN
GIDARO
others…
Unions Include:
Fire Fighters Association
Davis Police Officers Association
others
I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.
Nobody is worse than the developers?
Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election? That machine was oiled to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.
LET US LOOK AT THE FACTS:
Developers & Real Estate Interests include:
RAMOS
WHITCOMBE
NISHI
YAKZAN
GIDARO
others…
Unions Include:
Fire Fighters Association
Davis Police Officers Association
others
I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.
Nobody is worse than the developers?
Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election? That machine was oiled to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.
LET US LOOK AT THE FACTS:
Developers & Real Estate Interests include:
RAMOS
WHITCOMBE
NISHI
YAKZAN
GIDARO
others…
Unions Include:
Fire Fighters Association
Davis Police Officers Association
others
I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.
You’re forgetting pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc. still. And while they may be less influential than the Police and Fire unions in terms of their endorsements, they certainly have and spend a lot more money.
You’re forgetting pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc. still. And while they may be less influential than the Police and Fire unions in terms of their endorsements, they certainly have and spend a lot more money.
You’re forgetting pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc. still. And while they may be less influential than the Police and Fire unions in terms of their endorsements, they certainly have and spend a lot more money.
You’re forgetting pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc. still. And while they may be less influential than the Police and Fire unions in terms of their endorsements, they certainly have and spend a lot more money.
Anonymous 12/17/07 11:24 – You must not be a long-time resident of Davis.
You said “pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc.” Those are working class people and if they can even afford to, can only contribute $100 that’s it.
They have not contributed big in previous elections, so that makes no sense.
If you were a long-time resident you would know that it’s the real estate and developer interests in town that bank roll their money.
Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.
The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong. Don’t make the same mistake.
Anonymous 12/17/07 11:24 – You must not be a long-time resident of Davis.
You said “pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc.” Those are working class people and if they can even afford to, can only contribute $100 that’s it.
They have not contributed big in previous elections, so that makes no sense.
If you were a long-time resident you would know that it’s the real estate and developer interests in town that bank roll their money.
Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.
The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong. Don’t make the same mistake.
Anonymous 12/17/07 11:24 – You must not be a long-time resident of Davis.
You said “pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc.” Those are working class people and if they can even afford to, can only contribute $100 that’s it.
They have not contributed big in previous elections, so that makes no sense.
If you were a long-time resident you would know that it’s the real estate and developer interests in town that bank roll their money.
Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.
The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong. Don’t make the same mistake.
Anonymous 12/17/07 11:24 – You must not be a long-time resident of Davis.
You said “pipefitters, electrical workers, seiu, etc.” Those are working class people and if they can even afford to, can only contribute $100 that’s it.
They have not contributed big in previous elections, so that makes no sense.
If you were a long-time resident you would know that it’s the real estate and developer interests in town that bank roll their money.
Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.
The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong. Don’t make the same mistake.
Campaign Watcher, those endorsments don’t reflect who is on the Senate today. I wouldn’t go as far to call them a mistake but those two individuals are not working on behalf of the students.
I am not a conspiracy person, but when the council always happens to consider matters relevent to students when students aren’t in town, it doesn’t smell right.
As a student, this situation really demonstrates how the city views me. Our voice isn’t desired. We are not expected, and often discouraged openly from voting in the city. There are a few exceptions, Lamar is one of them, but the majority of the council ingores a sizable chunk of the town.
I have been trying to organize students to attend the meeting, and I hope community members will show up and speak up for their student neighbors.
Campaign Watcher, those endorsments don’t reflect who is on the Senate today. I wouldn’t go as far to call them a mistake but those two individuals are not working on behalf of the students.
I am not a conspiracy person, but when the council always happens to consider matters relevent to students when students aren’t in town, it doesn’t smell right.
As a student, this situation really demonstrates how the city views me. Our voice isn’t desired. We are not expected, and often discouraged openly from voting in the city. There are a few exceptions, Lamar is one of them, but the majority of the council ingores a sizable chunk of the town.
I have been trying to organize students to attend the meeting, and I hope community members will show up and speak up for their student neighbors.
Campaign Watcher, those endorsments don’t reflect who is on the Senate today. I wouldn’t go as far to call them a mistake but those two individuals are not working on behalf of the students.
I am not a conspiracy person, but when the council always happens to consider matters relevent to students when students aren’t in town, it doesn’t smell right.
As a student, this situation really demonstrates how the city views me. Our voice isn’t desired. We are not expected, and often discouraged openly from voting in the city. There are a few exceptions, Lamar is one of them, but the majority of the council ingores a sizable chunk of the town.
I have been trying to organize students to attend the meeting, and I hope community members will show up and speak up for their student neighbors.
Campaign Watcher, those endorsments don’t reflect who is on the Senate today. I wouldn’t go as far to call them a mistake but those two individuals are not working on behalf of the students.
I am not a conspiracy person, but when the council always happens to consider matters relevent to students when students aren’t in town, it doesn’t smell right.
As a student, this situation really demonstrates how the city views me. Our voice isn’t desired. We are not expected, and often discouraged openly from voting in the city. There are a few exceptions, Lamar is one of them, but the majority of the council ingores a sizable chunk of the town.
I have been trying to organize students to attend the meeting, and I hope community members will show up and speak up for their student neighbors.
“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
I don’t think that you can put the Davis Police Officers Association in the same group as the Davis Fire Fighters. The DPOA endorses as one entitiy and sends over $100 to the endorsed candidate.
The Fire Fighters endorse, then have union members contribute $100 whether they live in the city or not. They walk pricincts and publish their own mailers & door hangers, etc. It is unwise for any politician to question the goings on in the department. We will have to see if the union endorses Sue Greenwald again after she voted against the last budget request by the department. They endorsed her twice so far, but her no vote may be a deal breaker. This is also why Souza and Saylor seem to go along with whatever the fire fighters want regardless if it is fiscally prudent to do so. A large majority of fire fighters do not live in Davis and do not vote in city elections so you’d think that the endorsement wouldn’t matter so much, yet an endorsement by the Fire Union means $3000 + in campaign contributions and a group of workers. It is a big deal for council members who desire re-election.
I don’t think that you can put the Davis Police Officers Association in the same group as the Davis Fire Fighters. The DPOA endorses as one entitiy and sends over $100 to the endorsed candidate.
The Fire Fighters endorse, then have union members contribute $100 whether they live in the city or not. They walk pricincts and publish their own mailers & door hangers, etc. It is unwise for any politician to question the goings on in the department. We will have to see if the union endorses Sue Greenwald again after she voted against the last budget request by the department. They endorsed her twice so far, but her no vote may be a deal breaker. This is also why Souza and Saylor seem to go along with whatever the fire fighters want regardless if it is fiscally prudent to do so. A large majority of fire fighters do not live in Davis and do not vote in city elections so you’d think that the endorsement wouldn’t matter so much, yet an endorsement by the Fire Union means $3000 + in campaign contributions and a group of workers. It is a big deal for council members who desire re-election.
I don’t think that you can put the Davis Police Officers Association in the same group as the Davis Fire Fighters. The DPOA endorses as one entitiy and sends over $100 to the endorsed candidate.
The Fire Fighters endorse, then have union members contribute $100 whether they live in the city or not. They walk pricincts and publish their own mailers & door hangers, etc. It is unwise for any politician to question the goings on in the department. We will have to see if the union endorses Sue Greenwald again after she voted against the last budget request by the department. They endorsed her twice so far, but her no vote may be a deal breaker. This is also why Souza and Saylor seem to go along with whatever the fire fighters want regardless if it is fiscally prudent to do so. A large majority of fire fighters do not live in Davis and do not vote in city elections so you’d think that the endorsement wouldn’t matter so much, yet an endorsement by the Fire Union means $3000 + in campaign contributions and a group of workers. It is a big deal for council members who desire re-election.
I don’t think that you can put the Davis Police Officers Association in the same group as the Davis Fire Fighters. The DPOA endorses as one entitiy and sends over $100 to the endorsed candidate.
The Fire Fighters endorse, then have union members contribute $100 whether they live in the city or not. They walk pricincts and publish their own mailers & door hangers, etc. It is unwise for any politician to question the goings on in the department. We will have to see if the union endorses Sue Greenwald again after she voted against the last budget request by the department. They endorsed her twice so far, but her no vote may be a deal breaker. This is also why Souza and Saylor seem to go along with whatever the fire fighters want regardless if it is fiscally prudent to do so. A large majority of fire fighters do not live in Davis and do not vote in city elections so you’d think that the endorsement wouldn’t matter so much, yet an endorsement by the Fire Union means $3000 + in campaign contributions and a group of workers. It is a big deal for council members who desire re-election.
The difference between union and developer support for candidates has to do with transparancy. Literature sent out is identified as coming from the union and phone bank calls,I believe, are similarly identified. Developers, on the other hand, have their $100 contribution listed but the rest of their support remains hidden from the voters.
The difference between union and developer support for candidates has to do with transparancy. Literature sent out is identified as coming from the union and phone bank calls,I believe, are similarly identified. Developers, on the other hand, have their $100 contribution listed but the rest of their support remains hidden from the voters.
The difference between union and developer support for candidates has to do with transparancy. Literature sent out is identified as coming from the union and phone bank calls,I believe, are similarly identified. Developers, on the other hand, have their $100 contribution listed but the rest of their support remains hidden from the voters.
The difference between union and developer support for candidates has to do with transparancy. Literature sent out is identified as coming from the union and phone bank calls,I believe, are similarly identified. Developers, on the other hand, have their $100 contribution listed but the rest of their support remains hidden from the voters.
The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.
The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.
The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.
The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.
Paying Attention: “Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.”
My using the term “woman” was meant to be neutral. I first typed “candidate” and it sounded wrong to my literary ear. Normally I use “man” as the neutral form, but occassionally I’ll use the female to mix things up a bit. Your inferring I was referring to any one person is incorrect.
“You won’t read any of this in the excellent newspaper that you work for Rich.”
Actually, if you read my Enterprise column, you would read exactly this kind of thing. However, I don’t work for The Enterprise. I am merely a contributor. The content of my columns is not changed or challenged by its editors. I am never assigned any topics.
“The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.”
I don’t recall The Vanguard ever reporting on the untoward influence of the public sector unions.
ANON: “Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”.
You are probably right about the unwillingness of passing such a tax. But I believe it would be the right thing to do.
Looking at the facts: Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election?
That was an upfront ballot measure, not an election for public office.
No one who voted on Measure X was unaware that the developers of Covell Village were financing the Yes on X campaign. They clearly stood the most to gain by its passage. You can fairly argue that they spent obsene amounts of money to try to persuade voters. But your argument on this issue is tangential to the corrupting influence privately financed campaigns can have on elected officials, who then make decisions on development questions.
By accepting money with developers (or city contractors or unions, etc.), an elected official puts himself (or herself) in a compromised position. Even if he/she would have voted exactly the same on the issue, it has the aroma of corruption when he/she has taken money from a party who benefits from his/her decision.
(By using him/her and he/she, I do not mean to point to a spefic transgendered person in Davis. It is simply meant to be neutral 3rd person.)
Paying Attention: “Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.”
My using the term “woman” was meant to be neutral. I first typed “candidate” and it sounded wrong to my literary ear. Normally I use “man” as the neutral form, but occassionally I’ll use the female to mix things up a bit. Your inferring I was referring to any one person is incorrect.
“You won’t read any of this in the excellent newspaper that you work for Rich.”
Actually, if you read my Enterprise column, you would read exactly this kind of thing. However, I don’t work for The Enterprise. I am merely a contributor. The content of my columns is not changed or challenged by its editors. I am never assigned any topics.
“The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.”
I don’t recall The Vanguard ever reporting on the untoward influence of the public sector unions.
ANON: “Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”.
You are probably right about the unwillingness of passing such a tax. But I believe it would be the right thing to do.
Looking at the facts: Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election?
That was an upfront ballot measure, not an election for public office.
No one who voted on Measure X was unaware that the developers of Covell Village were financing the Yes on X campaign. They clearly stood the most to gain by its passage. You can fairly argue that they spent obsene amounts of money to try to persuade voters. But your argument on this issue is tangential to the corrupting influence privately financed campaigns can have on elected officials, who then make decisions on development questions.
By accepting money with developers (or city contractors or unions, etc.), an elected official puts himself (or herself) in a compromised position. Even if he/she would have voted exactly the same on the issue, it has the aroma of corruption when he/she has taken money from a party who benefits from his/her decision.
(By using him/her and he/she, I do not mean to point to a spefic transgendered person in Davis. It is simply meant to be neutral 3rd person.)
Paying Attention: “Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.”
My using the term “woman” was meant to be neutral. I first typed “candidate” and it sounded wrong to my literary ear. Normally I use “man” as the neutral form, but occassionally I’ll use the female to mix things up a bit. Your inferring I was referring to any one person is incorrect.
“You won’t read any of this in the excellent newspaper that you work for Rich.”
Actually, if you read my Enterprise column, you would read exactly this kind of thing. However, I don’t work for The Enterprise. I am merely a contributor. The content of my columns is not changed or challenged by its editors. I am never assigned any topics.
“The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.”
I don’t recall The Vanguard ever reporting on the untoward influence of the public sector unions.
ANON: “Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”.
You are probably right about the unwillingness of passing such a tax. But I believe it would be the right thing to do.
Looking at the facts: Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election?
That was an upfront ballot measure, not an election for public office.
No one who voted on Measure X was unaware that the developers of Covell Village were financing the Yes on X campaign. They clearly stood the most to gain by its passage. You can fairly argue that they spent obsene amounts of money to try to persuade voters. But your argument on this issue is tangential to the corrupting influence privately financed campaigns can have on elected officials, who then make decisions on development questions.
By accepting money with developers (or city contractors or unions, etc.), an elected official puts himself (or herself) in a compromised position. Even if he/she would have voted exactly the same on the issue, it has the aroma of corruption when he/she has taken money from a party who benefits from his/her decision.
(By using him/her and he/she, I do not mean to point to a spefic transgendered person in Davis. It is simply meant to be neutral 3rd person.)
Paying Attention: “Woman? Look at who the fire fighters and DPOA (Davis Police Officer’s Association) endorsed last time around: Saylor and Souza.”
My using the term “woman” was meant to be neutral. I first typed “candidate” and it sounded wrong to my literary ear. Normally I use “man” as the neutral form, but occassionally I’ll use the female to mix things up a bit. Your inferring I was referring to any one person is incorrect.
“You won’t read any of this in the excellent newspaper that you work for Rich.”
Actually, if you read my Enterprise column, you would read exactly this kind of thing. However, I don’t work for The Enterprise. I am merely a contributor. The content of my columns is not changed or challenged by its editors. I am never assigned any topics.
“The only place anyone can read about what is truly going on in Davis is The Vanguard. Thank you once again DPD.”
I don’t recall The Vanguard ever reporting on the untoward influence of the public sector unions.
ANON: “Public funding would be even more ideal. The problem is, the city does not have the money to provide that funding, and people are for the most part against paying a “campaign tax”.
You are probably right about the unwillingness of passing such a tax. But I believe it would be the right thing to do.
Looking at the facts: Who do think funded the YES ON X / COVELL VILLAGE election?
That was an upfront ballot measure, not an election for public office.
No one who voted on Measure X was unaware that the developers of Covell Village were financing the Yes on X campaign. They clearly stood the most to gain by its passage. You can fairly argue that they spent obsene amounts of money to try to persuade voters. But your argument on this issue is tangential to the corrupting influence privately financed campaigns can have on elected officials, who then make decisions on development questions.
By accepting money with developers (or city contractors or unions, etc.), an elected official puts himself (or herself) in a compromised position. Even if he/she would have voted exactly the same on the issue, it has the aroma of corruption when he/she has taken money from a party who benefits from his/her decision.
(By using him/her and he/she, I do not mean to point to a spefic transgendered person in Davis. It is simply meant to be neutral 3rd person.)
Looking:“The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.”
I don’t think any developer in Davis — save possibly Steve Gidaro in his one ill-fated foray — has ever spent as much money and effort on a council election as the fire fighters spend on just about every election.
And this makes sense. The fire fighters (and other city employees) make 100% of their incomes based on the decisions of the city council. For developers and contractors and so on, decisions of the council can be important: but usually they are marginally important, not amounting to their entire livelihoods.
“I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.”
On what?
Mark“Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.”
Please tell me any specific “misinformation” I have put out.
“The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong.”
If you could point out those wrong facts, it would be helpful. Granted, I’m human, and I’ve made mistakes. But you haven’t pointed out one, so it’s impossible to respond to your calumny.
ANON:“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
I honestly meant to imply no one individual. It was simply third person singular neutral.
Looking:“The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.”
I don’t think any developer in Davis — save possibly Steve Gidaro in his one ill-fated foray — has ever spent as much money and effort on a council election as the fire fighters spend on just about every election.
And this makes sense. The fire fighters (and other city employees) make 100% of their incomes based on the decisions of the city council. For developers and contractors and so on, decisions of the council can be important: but usually they are marginally important, not amounting to their entire livelihoods.
“I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.”
On what?
Mark“Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.”
Please tell me any specific “misinformation” I have put out.
“The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong.”
If you could point out those wrong facts, it would be helpful. Granted, I’m human, and I’ve made mistakes. But you haven’t pointed out one, so it’s impossible to respond to your calumny.
ANON:“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
I honestly meant to imply no one individual. It was simply third person singular neutral.
Looking:“The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.”
I don’t think any developer in Davis — save possibly Steve Gidaro in his one ill-fated foray — has ever spent as much money and effort on a council election as the fire fighters spend on just about every election.
And this makes sense. The fire fighters (and other city employees) make 100% of their incomes based on the decisions of the city council. For developers and contractors and so on, decisions of the council can be important: but usually they are marginally important, not amounting to their entire livelihoods.
“I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.”
On what?
Mark“Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.”
Please tell me any specific “misinformation” I have put out.
“The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong.”
If you could point out those wrong facts, it would be helpful. Granted, I’m human, and I’ve made mistakes. But you haven’t pointed out one, so it’s impossible to respond to your calumny.
ANON:“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
I honestly meant to imply no one individual. It was simply third person singular neutral.
Looking:“The firefighters and DPOA put money and slick mailers out for their candidates, but not more than developers with deep pockets.”
I don’t think any developer in Davis — save possibly Steve Gidaro in his one ill-fated foray — has ever spent as much money and effort on a council election as the fire fighters spend on just about every election.
And this makes sense. The fire fighters (and other city employees) make 100% of their incomes based on the decisions of the city council. For developers and contractors and so on, decisions of the council can be important: but usually they are marginally important, not amounting to their entire livelihoods.
“I think you stand corrected Mr. Rifkin.”
On what?
Mark“Take the time to read and learn and not fall for the mis-information that Rich Rifkin puts out.”
Please tell me any specific “misinformation” I have put out.
“The guy has a column in the only paper in town, but often gets his facts wrong.”
If you could point out those wrong facts, it would be helpful. Granted, I’m human, and I’ve made mistakes. But you haven’t pointed out one, so it’s impossible to respond to your calumny.
ANON:“Women?”..kind of out of left field, Rifkin….you’ll have to be more subtle laying the groundwork for the Enterprise’s attack on Cecilia Greenwald’s candidacy for Council.
I honestly meant to imply no one individual. It was simply third person singular neutral.
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
Even on issues such as Covell Village where DPOA endorsed yes on covell village. Honestly I really resented that from a group composed of people who by and large do not live in town. It’s one thing if it is an issue that directly impacts them.
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
Even on issues such as Covell Village where DPOA endorsed yes on covell village. Honestly I really resented that from a group composed of people who by and large do not live in town. It’s one thing if it is an issue that directly impacts them.
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
Even on issues such as Covell Village where DPOA endorsed yes on covell village. Honestly I really resented that from a group composed of people who by and large do not live in town. It’s one thing if it is an issue that directly impacts them.
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
Even on issues such as Covell Village where DPOA endorsed yes on covell village. Honestly I really resented that from a group composed of people who by and large do not live in town. It’s one thing if it is an issue that directly impacts them.
To Davis voter who pays attention –
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
That’s not what I’ve seen in the campaign disclosures over the years. I have added all the contributions up several time. I think that the DPD got more involved this last council election due to their concern with the police oversight issue, but generally an endorsement by the DPOA doesn’t translate into a large chunk of money and campaign workers the way an endorsement from the fire fighters does.
To Davis voter who pays attention –
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
That’s not what I’ve seen in the campaign disclosures over the years. I have added all the contributions up several time. I think that the DPD got more involved this last council election due to their concern with the police oversight issue, but generally an endorsement by the DPOA doesn’t translate into a large chunk of money and campaign workers the way an endorsement from the fire fighters does.
To Davis voter who pays attention –
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
That’s not what I’ve seen in the campaign disclosures over the years. I have added all the contributions up several time. I think that the DPD got more involved this last council election due to their concern with the police oversight issue, but generally an endorsement by the DPOA doesn’t translate into a large chunk of money and campaign workers the way an endorsement from the fire fighters does.
To Davis voter who pays attention –
“The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fie fighters do.”
That’s not what I’ve seen in the campaign disclosures over the years. I have added all the contributions up several time. I think that the DPD got more involved this last council election due to their concern with the police oversight issue, but generally an endorsement by the DPOA doesn’t translate into a large chunk of money and campaign workers the way an endorsement from the fire fighters does.
Davis voter who pays attention: “The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fire fighters do.”
You are clearly not paying enough attention.
I happen to have the numbers handy from the 2004 City Council election. In that race, these are all the City of Davis firefighters who gave a maximum cash contribution ($100) to a winning candidate in that election. Not one City of Davis police officer or police employee gave anything:
Timothy Annis – Davis – $200
Blas R. Ayala – Vacaville – $100
Greg Bellin – Davis – $300
Mark Bills – Lincoln – $300
Neal Boysen – Sacrament – $200
Brian Brooks – Davis – $200
William Cahill – Lafayette – $200
George Cano – Davis – $200
John Cates – Oakland – $300
Judi Cutaia – Elk Grove – $300
Martin Eckhardt – Sacrament – $300
Brian Farid – Woodland – $200
Matt Fix – Elk Grove – $300
Bruce Fry – El Dorado – $300
Matthew Galloway – Vacaville – $300
Brian Garlick – Davis – $300
Justin Harris – Davis – $200
Jesus Hernandez – Woodland – $300
Andrea Hodorowski – Cedar Ridg – $300
Richard Jett – Fairfield – $300
Kevin Kelly – Davis – $300
Shawn Kinney – Davis – $300
Schuyler Lacy – Woodland – $300
Emily Lo – Davis – $300
Brian Lynch – Nevada City – $300
Richard Moore – Sheridan – $300
William Muller – Winters – $200
Raechel-Marie Parker-Cahill – Lafayette – $100
Luis Parrilla – Davis – $300
Steve Phillips – Antioch – $300
Mike Porter – Elk Grove – $300
Richard Potch – Elk Grove – $200
Adam Price – Davis – $200
Roland Pussich – Penn Valle – $200
Patrick Sandholdt – Davis – $300
Joseph Simione – San Jose – $300
Brian Stiles – Davis – $200
Paul Swanson – Davis – $200
Kirt Tallon – Davis – $200
Joseph Tenney – Elk Grove – $300
Robert Weist – Vacaville – $300
Daniel Wong – Woodland – $300
Ron Zohbi, Jr. – Davis – $100
Beyond the large monetary contributions — which would only be worse if we allowed $250 per person — the firefighters, I am told, give a lot of time walking home to home, distributing fliers for their preferred candidates. That translates into thousands of more dollars that don’t have to be spent on postage.
There is simply no other equivalent for any other union in Davis.
Nevertheless, the principle is the same: campaign contributions from people who do business with the government always have the appearance of corruption, whether they are from union members, contractors, developers, etc.
Davis voter who pays attention: “The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fire fighters do.”
You are clearly not paying enough attention.
I happen to have the numbers handy from the 2004 City Council election. In that race, these are all the City of Davis firefighters who gave a maximum cash contribution ($100) to a winning candidate in that election. Not one City of Davis police officer or police employee gave anything:
Timothy Annis – Davis – $200
Blas R. Ayala – Vacaville – $100
Greg Bellin – Davis – $300
Mark Bills – Lincoln – $300
Neal Boysen – Sacrament – $200
Brian Brooks – Davis – $200
William Cahill – Lafayette – $200
George Cano – Davis – $200
John Cates – Oakland – $300
Judi Cutaia – Elk Grove – $300
Martin Eckhardt – Sacrament – $300
Brian Farid – Woodland – $200
Matt Fix – Elk Grove – $300
Bruce Fry – El Dorado – $300
Matthew Galloway – Vacaville – $300
Brian Garlick – Davis – $300
Justin Harris – Davis – $200
Jesus Hernandez – Woodland – $300
Andrea Hodorowski – Cedar Ridg – $300
Richard Jett – Fairfield – $300
Kevin Kelly – Davis – $300
Shawn Kinney – Davis – $300
Schuyler Lacy – Woodland – $300
Emily Lo – Davis – $300
Brian Lynch – Nevada City – $300
Richard Moore – Sheridan – $300
William Muller – Winters – $200
Raechel-Marie Parker-Cahill – Lafayette – $100
Luis Parrilla – Davis – $300
Steve Phillips – Antioch – $300
Mike Porter – Elk Grove – $300
Richard Potch – Elk Grove – $200
Adam Price – Davis – $200
Roland Pussich – Penn Valle – $200
Patrick Sandholdt – Davis – $300
Joseph Simione – San Jose – $300
Brian Stiles – Davis – $200
Paul Swanson – Davis – $200
Kirt Tallon – Davis – $200
Joseph Tenney – Elk Grove – $300
Robert Weist – Vacaville – $300
Daniel Wong – Woodland – $300
Ron Zohbi, Jr. – Davis – $100
Beyond the large monetary contributions — which would only be worse if we allowed $250 per person — the firefighters, I am told, give a lot of time walking home to home, distributing fliers for their preferred candidates. That translates into thousands of more dollars that don’t have to be spent on postage.
There is simply no other equivalent for any other union in Davis.
Nevertheless, the principle is the same: campaign contributions from people who do business with the government always have the appearance of corruption, whether they are from union members, contractors, developers, etc.
Davis voter who pays attention: “The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fire fighters do.”
You are clearly not paying enough attention.
I happen to have the numbers handy from the 2004 City Council election. In that race, these are all the City of Davis firefighters who gave a maximum cash contribution ($100) to a winning candidate in that election. Not one City of Davis police officer or police employee gave anything:
Timothy Annis – Davis – $200
Blas R. Ayala – Vacaville – $100
Greg Bellin – Davis – $300
Mark Bills – Lincoln – $300
Neal Boysen – Sacrament – $200
Brian Brooks – Davis – $200
William Cahill – Lafayette – $200
George Cano – Davis – $200
John Cates – Oakland – $300
Judi Cutaia – Elk Grove – $300
Martin Eckhardt – Sacrament – $300
Brian Farid – Woodland – $200
Matt Fix – Elk Grove – $300
Bruce Fry – El Dorado – $300
Matthew Galloway – Vacaville – $300
Brian Garlick – Davis – $300
Justin Harris – Davis – $200
Jesus Hernandez – Woodland – $300
Andrea Hodorowski – Cedar Ridg – $300
Richard Jett – Fairfield – $300
Kevin Kelly – Davis – $300
Shawn Kinney – Davis – $300
Schuyler Lacy – Woodland – $300
Emily Lo – Davis – $300
Brian Lynch – Nevada City – $300
Richard Moore – Sheridan – $300
William Muller – Winters – $200
Raechel-Marie Parker-Cahill – Lafayette – $100
Luis Parrilla – Davis – $300
Steve Phillips – Antioch – $300
Mike Porter – Elk Grove – $300
Richard Potch – Elk Grove – $200
Adam Price – Davis – $200
Roland Pussich – Penn Valle – $200
Patrick Sandholdt – Davis – $300
Joseph Simione – San Jose – $300
Brian Stiles – Davis – $200
Paul Swanson – Davis – $200
Kirt Tallon – Davis – $200
Joseph Tenney – Elk Grove – $300
Robert Weist – Vacaville – $300
Daniel Wong – Woodland – $300
Ron Zohbi, Jr. – Davis – $100
Beyond the large monetary contributions — which would only be worse if we allowed $250 per person — the firefighters, I am told, give a lot of time walking home to home, distributing fliers for their preferred candidates. That translates into thousands of more dollars that don’t have to be spent on postage.
There is simply no other equivalent for any other union in Davis.
Nevertheless, the principle is the same: campaign contributions from people who do business with the government always have the appearance of corruption, whether they are from union members, contractors, developers, etc.
Davis voter who pays attention: “The majority of the police force does not live in town but they will endorse and contribute in the same way the fire fighters do.”
You are clearly not paying enough attention.
I happen to have the numbers handy from the 2004 City Council election. In that race, these are all the City of Davis firefighters who gave a maximum cash contribution ($100) to a winning candidate in that election. Not one City of Davis police officer or police employee gave anything:
Timothy Annis – Davis – $200
Blas R. Ayala – Vacaville – $100
Greg Bellin – Davis – $300
Mark Bills – Lincoln – $300
Neal Boysen – Sacrament – $200
Brian Brooks – Davis – $200
William Cahill – Lafayette – $200
George Cano – Davis – $200
John Cates – Oakland – $300
Judi Cutaia – Elk Grove – $300
Martin Eckhardt – Sacrament – $300
Brian Farid – Woodland – $200
Matt Fix – Elk Grove – $300
Bruce Fry – El Dorado – $300
Matthew Galloway – Vacaville – $300
Brian Garlick – Davis – $300
Justin Harris – Davis – $200
Jesus Hernandez – Woodland – $300
Andrea Hodorowski – Cedar Ridg – $300
Richard Jett – Fairfield – $300
Kevin Kelly – Davis – $300
Shawn Kinney – Davis – $300
Schuyler Lacy – Woodland – $300
Emily Lo – Davis – $300
Brian Lynch – Nevada City – $300
Richard Moore – Sheridan – $300
William Muller – Winters – $200
Raechel-Marie Parker-Cahill – Lafayette – $100
Luis Parrilla – Davis – $300
Steve Phillips – Antioch – $300
Mike Porter – Elk Grove – $300
Richard Potch – Elk Grove – $200
Adam Price – Davis – $200
Roland Pussich – Penn Valle – $200
Patrick Sandholdt – Davis – $300
Joseph Simione – San Jose – $300
Brian Stiles – Davis – $200
Paul Swanson – Davis – $200
Kirt Tallon – Davis – $200
Joseph Tenney – Elk Grove – $300
Robert Weist – Vacaville – $300
Daniel Wong – Woodland – $300
Ron Zohbi, Jr. – Davis – $100
Beyond the large monetary contributions — which would only be worse if we allowed $250 per person — the firefighters, I am told, give a lot of time walking home to home, distributing fliers for their preferred candidates. That translates into thousands of more dollars that don’t have to be spent on postage.
There is simply no other equivalent for any other union in Davis.
Nevertheless, the principle is the same: campaign contributions from people who do business with the government always have the appearance of corruption, whether they are from union members, contractors, developers, etc.
I was unaware that changes in the campaign contribution limits were under consideration until I received my packet this weekend. (I go over the agenda items, but don’t see the staff reports in advance).
I had expressed reservations to the City Manager about this item, since Ruth was to be out of town. He assured me that the item was not substantive, but involved moving the ordinance to a more logical chapter in the City code.
When I saw the $250 surprise item, I called the City Manager to ask him why the changes in the campaign contribution limits materialized at this time and in this manner, he said that it was a surprise to him.
I asked him to find out how this occurred, and at whose behest.
I do know that Berkeley has a $250 per person contribution limit for their city council races, and that their candidates spend even more than we do, even though they have to reach fewer households per candidate.
It is difficult enough to run a campaign in Davis without support from special interests under our current limits.
I was unaware that changes in the campaign contribution limits were under consideration until I received my packet this weekend. (I go over the agenda items, but don’t see the staff reports in advance).
I had expressed reservations to the City Manager about this item, since Ruth was to be out of town. He assured me that the item was not substantive, but involved moving the ordinance to a more logical chapter in the City code.
When I saw the $250 surprise item, I called the City Manager to ask him why the changes in the campaign contribution limits materialized at this time and in this manner, he said that it was a surprise to him.
I asked him to find out how this occurred, and at whose behest.
I do know that Berkeley has a $250 per person contribution limit for their city council races, and that their candidates spend even more than we do, even though they have to reach fewer households per candidate.
It is difficult enough to run a campaign in Davis without support from special interests under our current limits.
I was unaware that changes in the campaign contribution limits were under consideration until I received my packet this weekend. (I go over the agenda items, but don’t see the staff reports in advance).
I had expressed reservations to the City Manager about this item, since Ruth was to be out of town. He assured me that the item was not substantive, but involved moving the ordinance to a more logical chapter in the City code.
When I saw the $250 surprise item, I called the City Manager to ask him why the changes in the campaign contribution limits materialized at this time and in this manner, he said that it was a surprise to him.
I asked him to find out how this occurred, and at whose behest.
I do know that Berkeley has a $250 per person contribution limit for their city council races, and that their candidates spend even more than we do, even though they have to reach fewer households per candidate.
It is difficult enough to run a campaign in Davis without support from special interests under our current limits.
I was unaware that changes in the campaign contribution limits were under consideration until I received my packet this weekend. (I go over the agenda items, but don’t see the staff reports in advance).
I had expressed reservations to the City Manager about this item, since Ruth was to be out of town. He assured me that the item was not substantive, but involved moving the ordinance to a more logical chapter in the City code.
When I saw the $250 surprise item, I called the City Manager to ask him why the changes in the campaign contribution limits materialized at this time and in this manner, he said that it was a surprise to him.
I asked him to find out how this occurred, and at whose behest.
I do know that Berkeley has a $250 per person contribution limit for their city council races, and that their candidates spend even more than we do, even though they have to reach fewer households per candidate.
It is difficult enough to run a campaign in Davis without support from special interests under our current limits.
first of all, renters ought to have the first amendment rights to put signs up, period.
second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit. what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.
i’m with rich on public financing, although i really don’t think it’s nearly as big a problem for citywide elections as compared with statewide, assembly or state senate races.
first of all, renters ought to have the first amendment rights to put signs up, period.
second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit. what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.
i’m with rich on public financing, although i really don’t think it’s nearly as big a problem for citywide elections as compared with statewide, assembly or state senate races.
first of all, renters ought to have the first amendment rights to put signs up, period.
second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit. what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.
i’m with rich on public financing, although i really don’t think it’s nearly as big a problem for citywide elections as compared with statewide, assembly or state senate races.
first of all, renters ought to have the first amendment rights to put signs up, period.
second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit. what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.
i’m with rich on public financing, although i really don’t think it’s nearly as big a problem for citywide elections as compared with statewide, assembly or state senate races.
Rich, Your list totals $11,300 from 43 individual fire department employees (62% of whom do not live in Davis, 51% live out of Yolo County) in the 2004 campaign to the three winning candidates. I believe there also was an independent expenditure of around $1,500 for a promotional material produced by the union endorsing the three candidates. This doesn’t count the hours of campaign work put in by union members, the majority of whom live out of town.
No other City of Davis union does this.
I support our fire fighters. But, if they choose to live out of town or out of the county, I expect that they should come here and do their jobs, not work to steer Davis politics in a direction of their own making.
Rich, Your list totals $11,300 from 43 individual fire department employees (62% of whom do not live in Davis, 51% live out of Yolo County) in the 2004 campaign to the three winning candidates. I believe there also was an independent expenditure of around $1,500 for a promotional material produced by the union endorsing the three candidates. This doesn’t count the hours of campaign work put in by union members, the majority of whom live out of town.
No other City of Davis union does this.
I support our fire fighters. But, if they choose to live out of town or out of the county, I expect that they should come here and do their jobs, not work to steer Davis politics in a direction of their own making.
Rich, Your list totals $11,300 from 43 individual fire department employees (62% of whom do not live in Davis, 51% live out of Yolo County) in the 2004 campaign to the three winning candidates. I believe there also was an independent expenditure of around $1,500 for a promotional material produced by the union endorsing the three candidates. This doesn’t count the hours of campaign work put in by union members, the majority of whom live out of town.
No other City of Davis union does this.
I support our fire fighters. But, if they choose to live out of town or out of the county, I expect that they should come here and do their jobs, not work to steer Davis politics in a direction of their own making.
Rich, Your list totals $11,300 from 43 individual fire department employees (62% of whom do not live in Davis, 51% live out of Yolo County) in the 2004 campaign to the three winning candidates. I believe there also was an independent expenditure of around $1,500 for a promotional material produced by the union endorsing the three candidates. This doesn’t count the hours of campaign work put in by union members, the majority of whom live out of town.
No other City of Davis union does this.
I support our fire fighters. But, if they choose to live out of town or out of the county, I expect that they should come here and do their jobs, not work to steer Davis politics in a direction of their own making.
“second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit.”
I don’t have a strong opinion on the specific amount contributions should be limited to. I would think, though, that the higher that number is, the more beholden candidates will be to their contributors. Nonetheless, if we are not going to have publicly financed campaigns, it makes sense to tie the contribution limit to a reasonable inflator.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.”
I strongly agree with Wu Ming on this. Because Davis is now such a large town, all competitive candidates must raise a bunch of money to mail out fliers and some run TV ads. With smaller districts, any candidate could walk door-to-door, meeting voters in person and handing out his/her literature. Paying larger money for advertising which reaches the entire city would make less sense. It would still help to have money to win in a district election. But the threshhold to be competitive would be much lower.
I personally support dividing Davis into 6 equally populated districts (divided by major streets), with the Mayor (as Wu Ming says) elected citywide, yet having only one vote on the council. The quadrennial district elections could be held in off-presidential even years; and the mayoral in the same years we vote for president.
Having 6 districts would put approximately 10,000 people in each. Parts of town which have not had much representation would have it. Students, who make up a significant portion of some districts, would have more power and hence more representation.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor)”
Yes, and limits or a ban on corporate contributions to local campaigns.
“second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit.”
I don’t have a strong opinion on the specific amount contributions should be limited to. I would think, though, that the higher that number is, the more beholden candidates will be to their contributors. Nonetheless, if we are not going to have publicly financed campaigns, it makes sense to tie the contribution limit to a reasonable inflator.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.”
I strongly agree with Wu Ming on this. Because Davis is now such a large town, all competitive candidates must raise a bunch of money to mail out fliers and some run TV ads. With smaller districts, any candidate could walk door-to-door, meeting voters in person and handing out his/her literature. Paying larger money for advertising which reaches the entire city would make less sense. It would still help to have money to win in a district election. But the threshhold to be competitive would be much lower.
I personally support dividing Davis into 6 equally populated districts (divided by major streets), with the Mayor (as Wu Ming says) elected citywide, yet having only one vote on the council. The quadrennial district elections could be held in off-presidential even years; and the mayoral in the same years we vote for president.
Having 6 districts would put approximately 10,000 people in each. Parts of town which have not had much representation would have it. Students, who make up a significant portion of some districts, would have more power and hence more representation.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor)”
Yes, and limits or a ban on corporate contributions to local campaigns.
“second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit.”
I don’t have a strong opinion on the specific amount contributions should be limited to. I would think, though, that the higher that number is, the more beholden candidates will be to their contributors. Nonetheless, if we are not going to have publicly financed campaigns, it makes sense to tie the contribution limit to a reasonable inflator.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.”
I strongly agree with Wu Ming on this. Because Davis is now such a large town, all competitive candidates must raise a bunch of money to mail out fliers and some run TV ads. With smaller districts, any candidate could walk door-to-door, meeting voters in person and handing out his/her literature. Paying larger money for advertising which reaches the entire city would make less sense. It would still help to have money to win in a district election. But the threshhold to be competitive would be much lower.
I personally support dividing Davis into 6 equally populated districts (divided by major streets), with the Mayor (as Wu Ming says) elected citywide, yet having only one vote on the council. The quadrennial district elections could be held in off-presidential even years; and the mayoral in the same years we vote for president.
Having 6 districts would put approximately 10,000 people in each. Parts of town which have not had much representation would have it. Students, who make up a significant portion of some districts, would have more power and hence more representation.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor)”
Yes, and limits or a ban on corporate contributions to local campaigns.
“second, i don’t think we need a higher donation limit.”
I don’t have a strong opinion on the specific amount contributions should be limited to. I would think, though, that the higher that number is, the more beholden candidates will be to their contributors. Nonetheless, if we are not going to have publicly financed campaigns, it makes sense to tie the contribution limit to a reasonable inflator.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor) so that it is easier for candidates to walk a given district without raising much money.”
I strongly agree with Wu Ming on this. Because Davis is now such a large town, all competitive candidates must raise a bunch of money to mail out fliers and some run TV ads. With smaller districts, any candidate could walk door-to-door, meeting voters in person and handing out his/her literature. Paying larger money for advertising which reaches the entire city would make less sense. It would still help to have money to win in a district election. But the threshhold to be competitive would be much lower.
I personally support dividing Davis into 6 equally populated districts (divided by major streets), with the Mayor (as Wu Ming says) elected citywide, yet having only one vote on the council. The quadrennial district elections could be held in off-presidential even years; and the mayoral in the same years we vote for president.
Having 6 districts would put approximately 10,000 people in each. Parts of town which have not had much representation would have it. Students, who make up a significant portion of some districts, would have more power and hence more representation.
“what we need are district elections for city council (and a directly elected at large mayor)”
Yes, and limits or a ban on corporate contributions to local campaigns.
So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle? Would one of the current council members like to introduce a proposal to implement them?
So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle? Would one of the current council members like to introduce a proposal to implement them?
So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle? Would one of the current council members like to introduce a proposal to implement them?
So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle? Would one of the current council members like to introduce a proposal to implement them?
When Sue Greenwald(a strong advocate of district elections in the past) is reelected as Mayor Pro Tem along with sending the current status-quo Establishment Council Majority out to pasture, we could very well see District elections become a reality for Davis.
When Sue Greenwald(a strong advocate of district elections in the past) is reelected as Mayor Pro Tem along with sending the current status-quo Establishment Council Majority out to pasture, we could very well see District elections become a reality for Davis.
When Sue Greenwald(a strong advocate of district elections in the past) is reelected as Mayor Pro Tem along with sending the current status-quo Establishment Council Majority out to pasture, we could very well see District elections become a reality for Davis.
When Sue Greenwald(a strong advocate of district elections in the past) is reelected as Mayor Pro Tem along with sending the current status-quo Establishment Council Majority out to pasture, we could very well see District elections become a reality for Davis.
“So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle?”
Don,
I don’t know. I would think we would have to have a referendum on this. The issue was brought before a special commission on government reform — the same one which recommended choice voting — and if I recall correctly, that commission did not favor district elections.
To the best of my knowledge, as a general law city, there is no statutory obstacle to having districts elections.
“So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle?”
Don,
I don’t know. I would think we would have to have a referendum on this. The issue was brought before a special commission on government reform — the same one which recommended choice voting — and if I recall correctly, that commission did not favor district elections.
To the best of my knowledge, as a general law city, there is no statutory obstacle to having districts elections.
“So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle?”
Don,
I don’t know. I would think we would have to have a referendum on this. The issue was brought before a special commission on government reform — the same one which recommended choice voting — and if I recall correctly, that commission did not favor district elections.
To the best of my knowledge, as a general law city, there is no statutory obstacle to having districts elections.
“So, just out of curiosity since district elections are often mentioned, what is the obstacle?”
Don,
I don’t know. I would think we would have to have a referendum on this. The issue was brought before a special commission on government reform — the same one which recommended choice voting — and if I recall correctly, that commission did not favor district elections.
To the best of my knowledge, as a general law city, there is no statutory obstacle to having districts elections.
Don Shor,
I agree that we should limit corporate contributions, so that West Yost Associates and Ramos can’t bankroll their boys to another council term. It’s the worst kind of conflict of interest.
Don Shor,
I agree that we should limit corporate contributions, so that West Yost Associates and Ramos can’t bankroll their boys to another council term. It’s the worst kind of conflict of interest.
Don Shor,
I agree that we should limit corporate contributions, so that West Yost Associates and Ramos can’t bankroll their boys to another council term. It’s the worst kind of conflict of interest.
Don Shor,
I agree that we should limit corporate contributions, so that West Yost Associates and Ramos can’t bankroll their boys to another council term. It’s the worst kind of conflict of interest.
Wait a minute. Council Members Heystek and Greenwald (the mayor) did not even know it was on the agenda? And, the city manager told you that he didn’t know anything about it Sue?
Who the heck is running the city? It sure isn’t the city manager who makes well over $100,000 per year plus benefits.
Who sets the agenda? Maybe it’s time to replace Emlen?
Wait a minute. Council Members Heystek and Greenwald (the mayor) did not even know it was on the agenda? And, the city manager told you that he didn’t know anything about it Sue?
Who the heck is running the city? It sure isn’t the city manager who makes well over $100,000 per year plus benefits.
Who sets the agenda? Maybe it’s time to replace Emlen?
Wait a minute. Council Members Heystek and Greenwald (the mayor) did not even know it was on the agenda? And, the city manager told you that he didn’t know anything about it Sue?
Who the heck is running the city? It sure isn’t the city manager who makes well over $100,000 per year plus benefits.
Who sets the agenda? Maybe it’s time to replace Emlen?
Wait a minute. Council Members Heystek and Greenwald (the mayor) did not even know it was on the agenda? And, the city manager told you that he didn’t know anything about it Sue?
Who the heck is running the city? It sure isn’t the city manager who makes well over $100,000 per year plus benefits.
Who sets the agenda? Maybe it’s time to replace Emlen?
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the City manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the City manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the City manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the City manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
And this is not meant as a criticism of our current City Manager. It is an inherent problem with the system.
And this is not meant as a criticism of our current City Manager. It is an inherent problem with the system.
And this is not meant as a criticism of our current City Manager. It is an inherent problem with the system.
And this is not meant as a criticism of our current City Manager. It is an inherent problem with the system.
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
The council-city manager form of government has its challenges. It can allow a council majority to assert its will, through the manager, without any accountability.
The following is a description of the council-manager form of government, lifted from Wikipedia:
“The council-manager government is one of two main variations of representative municipal government in the United States. This system of government is used in the majority of American cities with populations over 12,000. (for contrast, see Mayor-Council government). The system is also used in the Republic of Ireland both for city councils and county councils
In the council-manager form of government, an elected city council (typically between 5 and 11 people) is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances, voting appropriations, and having overall supervisory authority in the city government. In such a government, the mayor (or equivalent executive) will perform strictly ceremonial duties or will act as a member and presiding officer of the council, similar to a chairman.
The council will hire a city manager or administrator who will be responsible for supervising government operations and implementing the policies adopted by the council. The manager serves the council, usually with a contract that specifies duties and responsibilities. Ideally, the manager is apolitical, but this is often difficult.”
Whoop! Sorry. I don’t know how I managed to send off two copies!
Whoop! Sorry. I don’t know how I managed to send off two copies!
Whoop! Sorry. I don’t know how I managed to send off two copies!
Whoop! Sorry. I don’t know how I managed to send off two copies!
My experience in large organizations is that the staff that have to put together changes to ordinances, bylaws, etc., don’t do so because they are under worked or bored. They do it because someone asked them to do it. And, probably, someone in the city attorney’s office would routinely review proposed changes to ordinances. I doubt the city attorney would initiate a substantive change like a campaign limit dollar amount to an existing ordinance. That pretty much leaves a member of the city council to see that such a change was written up like it was.
What sort of answer must the city manager be trying to come up with other than getting the person who proposed this to step forward and take ownership? The best scenario is that one of our council members asked the city manager to see that this was done and the manager lied to protect the guilty. A worse scenario is that a council member went directly to some lower level person in the city offices to draft the proposal without bothering the very busy City Manager. The issue should have properly been raised and proposed in a public venue. Only then should the city manager be involved. Never should a city employee be asked to draft something of this nature directly by a council member.
This is dysfunction defined. To see just how dysfunctional this kind of behavior is, one should consult the Policy Governance Model website and learn about the basics of how a board or council should operate. Yes, there is a better way to take care of the people’s business.
My experience in large organizations is that the staff that have to put together changes to ordinances, bylaws, etc., don’t do so because they are under worked or bored. They do it because someone asked them to do it. And, probably, someone in the city attorney’s office would routinely review proposed changes to ordinances. I doubt the city attorney would initiate a substantive change like a campaign limit dollar amount to an existing ordinance. That pretty much leaves a member of the city council to see that such a change was written up like it was.
What sort of answer must the city manager be trying to come up with other than getting the person who proposed this to step forward and take ownership? The best scenario is that one of our council members asked the city manager to see that this was done and the manager lied to protect the guilty. A worse scenario is that a council member went directly to some lower level person in the city offices to draft the proposal without bothering the very busy City Manager. The issue should have properly been raised and proposed in a public venue. Only then should the city manager be involved. Never should a city employee be asked to draft something of this nature directly by a council member.
This is dysfunction defined. To see just how dysfunctional this kind of behavior is, one should consult the Policy Governance Model website and learn about the basics of how a board or council should operate. Yes, there is a better way to take care of the people’s business.
My experience in large organizations is that the staff that have to put together changes to ordinances, bylaws, etc., don’t do so because they are under worked or bored. They do it because someone asked them to do it. And, probably, someone in the city attorney’s office would routinely review proposed changes to ordinances. I doubt the city attorney would initiate a substantive change like a campaign limit dollar amount to an existing ordinance. That pretty much leaves a member of the city council to see that such a change was written up like it was.
What sort of answer must the city manager be trying to come up with other than getting the person who proposed this to step forward and take ownership? The best scenario is that one of our council members asked the city manager to see that this was done and the manager lied to protect the guilty. A worse scenario is that a council member went directly to some lower level person in the city offices to draft the proposal without bothering the very busy City Manager. The issue should have properly been raised and proposed in a public venue. Only then should the city manager be involved. Never should a city employee be asked to draft something of this nature directly by a council member.
This is dysfunction defined. To see just how dysfunctional this kind of behavior is, one should consult the Policy Governance Model website and learn about the basics of how a board or council should operate. Yes, there is a better way to take care of the people’s business.
My experience in large organizations is that the staff that have to put together changes to ordinances, bylaws, etc., don’t do so because they are under worked or bored. They do it because someone asked them to do it. And, probably, someone in the city attorney’s office would routinely review proposed changes to ordinances. I doubt the city attorney would initiate a substantive change like a campaign limit dollar amount to an existing ordinance. That pretty much leaves a member of the city council to see that such a change was written up like it was.
What sort of answer must the city manager be trying to come up with other than getting the person who proposed this to step forward and take ownership? The best scenario is that one of our council members asked the city manager to see that this was done and the manager lied to protect the guilty. A worse scenario is that a council member went directly to some lower level person in the city offices to draft the proposal without bothering the very busy City Manager. The issue should have properly been raised and proposed in a public venue. Only then should the city manager be involved. Never should a city employee be asked to draft something of this nature directly by a council member.
This is dysfunction defined. To see just how dysfunctional this kind of behavior is, one should consult the Policy Governance Model website and learn about the basics of how a board or council should operate. Yes, there is a better way to take care of the people’s business.
This reminds me of another story of fiction that had no basis in fact and played upon rumor. David why don’t you try and use the phone to confirm your allegations before allowing them to take on a life of there own? The animosity that it generates is not what I think you want or that our town deserves.
This reminds me of another story of fiction that had no basis in fact and played upon rumor. David why don’t you try and use the phone to confirm your allegations before allowing them to take on a life of there own? The animosity that it generates is not what I think you want or that our town deserves.
This reminds me of another story of fiction that had no basis in fact and played upon rumor. David why don’t you try and use the phone to confirm your allegations before allowing them to take on a life of there own? The animosity that it generates is not what I think you want or that our town deserves.
This reminds me of another story of fiction that had no basis in fact and played upon rumor. David why don’t you try and use the phone to confirm your allegations before allowing them to take on a life of there own? The animosity that it generates is not what I think you want or that our town deserves.
That’s very interesting Anonymous. I can’t wait until you see how this story ends.
That’s very interesting Anonymous. I can’t wait until you see how this story ends.
That’s very interesting Anonymous. I can’t wait until you see how this story ends.
That’s very interesting Anonymous. I can’t wait until you see how this story ends.
This clearly has the “smell” of the arrogance and contempt for the will of the electorate that we have seen with the Council Majority of Asmundson,Saylor and Souza. My bet is on Souza with Saylor running a close second.
This clearly has the “smell” of the arrogance and contempt for the will of the electorate that we have seen with the Council Majority of Asmundson,Saylor and Souza. My bet is on Souza with Saylor running a close second.
This clearly has the “smell” of the arrogance and contempt for the will of the electorate that we have seen with the Council Majority of Asmundson,Saylor and Souza. My bet is on Souza with Saylor running a close second.
This clearly has the “smell” of the arrogance and contempt for the will of the electorate that we have seen with the Council Majority of Asmundson,Saylor and Souza. My bet is on Souza with Saylor running a close second.
Someone on the city staff’s job is potentially on the line here and an attempt at a cover-up will seal their fate. With reasonable diligence, the facts should become public.
Someone on the city staff’s job is potentially on the line here and an attempt at a cover-up will seal their fate. With reasonable diligence, the facts should become public.
Someone on the city staff’s job is potentially on the line here and an attempt at a cover-up will seal their fate. With reasonable diligence, the facts should become public.
Someone on the city staff’s job is potentially on the line here and an attempt at a cover-up will seal their fate. With reasonable diligence, the facts should become public.
The Vanguard has delivered once again. As expected the Emptyprise reported NOTHING on the two important items on the council agenda for tonight’s council meeting.
The mayor did not know about this and neither did Councilman Heystek. Let’s see what excuse is given by the city manager.
The Vanguard has delivered once again. As expected the Emptyprise reported NOTHING on the two important items on the council agenda for tonight’s council meeting.
The mayor did not know about this and neither did Councilman Heystek. Let’s see what excuse is given by the city manager.
The Vanguard has delivered once again. As expected the Emptyprise reported NOTHING on the two important items on the council agenda for tonight’s council meeting.
The mayor did not know about this and neither did Councilman Heystek. Let’s see what excuse is given by the city manager.
The Vanguard has delivered once again. As expected the Emptyprise reported NOTHING on the two important items on the council agenda for tonight’s council meeting.
The mayor did not know about this and neither did Councilman Heystek. Let’s see what excuse is given by the city manager.
My bet is on the City Clerk doing her job without paying any attention to politics and the paranoid of this blog.
My bet is on the City Clerk doing her job without paying any attention to politics and the paranoid of this blog.
My bet is on the City Clerk doing her job without paying any attention to politics and the paranoid of this blog.
My bet is on the City Clerk doing her job without paying any attention to politics and the paranoid of this blog.
Really that’s your bet. You have the Mayor posting on here that she did not know about this and neither did the City Manager. And you have a city councilmember posting the same thing. There is no paranoia here, this was mishandled.
Really that’s your bet. You have the Mayor posting on here that she did not know about this and neither did the City Manager. And you have a city councilmember posting the same thing. There is no paranoia here, this was mishandled.
Really that’s your bet. You have the Mayor posting on here that she did not know about this and neither did the City Manager. And you have a city councilmember posting the same thing. There is no paranoia here, this was mishandled.
Really that’s your bet. You have the Mayor posting on here that she did not know about this and neither did the City Manager. And you have a city councilmember posting the same thing. There is no paranoia here, this was mishandled.
Watch for the “explanation” that the campaign contribution change was MISTAKENLY included with the ordinance change item instead of a separate item for informational discussion. This could get staff off the hook but we still need to find out who put them up to inserting this item.
Watch for the “explanation” that the campaign contribution change was MISTAKENLY included with the ordinance change item instead of a separate item for informational discussion. This could get staff off the hook but we still need to find out who put them up to inserting this item.
Watch for the “explanation” that the campaign contribution change was MISTAKENLY included with the ordinance change item instead of a separate item for informational discussion. This could get staff off the hook but we still need to find out who put them up to inserting this item.
Watch for the “explanation” that the campaign contribution change was MISTAKENLY included with the ordinance change item instead of a separate item for informational discussion. This could get staff off the hook but we still need to find out who put them up to inserting this item.
Emlen’s tenure as city manager is beginning to resemble someone running around frantically trying to keep all the kittens(his staff) from scrambling out of their box.
Emlen’s tenure as city manager is beginning to resemble someone running around frantically trying to keep all the kittens(his staff) from scrambling out of their box.
Emlen’s tenure as city manager is beginning to resemble someone running around frantically trying to keep all the kittens(his staff) from scrambling out of their box.
Emlen’s tenure as city manager is beginning to resemble someone running around frantically trying to keep all the kittens(his staff) from scrambling out of their box.
If someone comes up with a graphic to describe the above, I may bust a gut…
If someone comes up with a graphic to describe the above, I may bust a gut…
If someone comes up with a graphic to describe the above, I may bust a gut…
If someone comes up with a graphic to describe the above, I may bust a gut…
Another gem from Davis’ left-wing Bill O’Reilly.
Another gem from Davis’ left-wing Bill O’Reilly.
Another gem from Davis’ left-wing Bill O’Reilly.
Another gem from Davis’ left-wing Bill O’Reilly.
Since when does the city clerk decide what is going on the agenda? Do we have a city that is being run by staff and not those whom we elected?
I’ll bet the Vanguard that a city staffer takes the hit on this one trying to cover up for incompetence of the city manager and his staff “slipping one in” for Souza or Saylor.
Since when does the city clerk decide what is going on the agenda? Do we have a city that is being run by staff and not those whom we elected?
I’ll bet the Vanguard that a city staffer takes the hit on this one trying to cover up for incompetence of the city manager and his staff “slipping one in” for Souza or Saylor.
Since when does the city clerk decide what is going on the agenda? Do we have a city that is being run by staff and not those whom we elected?
I’ll bet the Vanguard that a city staffer takes the hit on this one trying to cover up for incompetence of the city manager and his staff “slipping one in” for Souza or Saylor.
Since when does the city clerk decide what is going on the agenda? Do we have a city that is being run by staff and not those whom we elected?
I’ll bet the Vanguard that a city staffer takes the hit on this one trying to cover up for incompetence of the city manager and his staff “slipping one in” for Souza or Saylor.
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.” Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.” Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.” Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.” Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?
“Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?”
Hi Freddie,
I use the other ear to catch typos.
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.”
Just by chance, Freddie, I happened to be looking over an old copy of The Enterprise, tonight, which regarded you. It was from February, 1998, when you were on the BOS, but decided ultimately to not run for a full term.
The story mentioned that you were appointed by Governor Wilson to fill out the rest of Helen Thomson’s term. I remember that you were appointed, but never knew how it was he picked you. Is there a story there? Or did he simply ask Helen for a good choice?
There were some nice quotes from you in The Enterprise story:
“I haven’t enjoyed campaigning. I just don’t think I have the right personality to be a candidate.”
“I enjoy my family and I have not liked being away from them virtually every evening.”
“It’s been very intense.
“From my point of view, there’s not a big enough personal or private interest” in continuing as a supervisor.
“Everything is about, will it get me money and votes”.
“I may lack the ability to appreciate that public office is important in an immediate way in the lives of needy people by delivery of services to people.”
Oakley has enjoyed being a supervisor and said, “I’m good at it.”
“I will get a children’s waiting room in the courthouse or die trying.”
“If I never get a message from people about what Lois is doing unless it’s to say she’s having a party and I’m invited, that’ll be fine.”
“Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?”
Hi Freddie,
I use the other ear to catch typos.
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.”
Just by chance, Freddie, I happened to be looking over an old copy of The Enterprise, tonight, which regarded you. It was from February, 1998, when you were on the BOS, but decided ultimately to not run for a full term.
The story mentioned that you were appointed by Governor Wilson to fill out the rest of Helen Thomson’s term. I remember that you were appointed, but never knew how it was he picked you. Is there a story there? Or did he simply ask Helen for a good choice?
There were some nice quotes from you in The Enterprise story:
“I haven’t enjoyed campaigning. I just don’t think I have the right personality to be a candidate.”
“I enjoy my family and I have not liked being away from them virtually every evening.”
“It’s been very intense.
“From my point of view, there’s not a big enough personal or private interest” in continuing as a supervisor.
“Everything is about, will it get me money and votes”.
“I may lack the ability to appreciate that public office is important in an immediate way in the lives of needy people by delivery of services to people.”
Oakley has enjoyed being a supervisor and said, “I’m good at it.”
“I will get a children’s waiting room in the courthouse or die trying.”
“If I never get a message from people about what Lois is doing unless it’s to say she’s having a party and I’m invited, that’ll be fine.”
“Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?”
Hi Freddie,
I use the other ear to catch typos.
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.”
Just by chance, Freddie, I happened to be looking over an old copy of The Enterprise, tonight, which regarded you. It was from February, 1998, when you were on the BOS, but decided ultimately to not run for a full term.
The story mentioned that you were appointed by Governor Wilson to fill out the rest of Helen Thomson’s term. I remember that you were appointed, but never knew how it was he picked you. Is there a story there? Or did he simply ask Helen for a good choice?
There were some nice quotes from you in The Enterprise story:
“I haven’t enjoyed campaigning. I just don’t think I have the right personality to be a candidate.”
“I enjoy my family and I have not liked being away from them virtually every evening.”
“It’s been very intense.
“From my point of view, there’s not a big enough personal or private interest” in continuing as a supervisor.
“Everything is about, will it get me money and votes”.
“I may lack the ability to appreciate that public office is important in an immediate way in the lives of needy people by delivery of services to people.”
Oakley has enjoyed being a supervisor and said, “I’m good at it.”
“I will get a children’s waiting room in the courthouse or die trying.”
“If I never get a message from people about what Lois is doing unless it’s to say she’s having a party and I’m invited, that’ll be fine.”
“Rich – what do you use the other ear for? Or should I say, for what do you use the other ear?”
Hi Freddie,
I use the other ear to catch typos.
I had to stop reading when I sae Rich Rifkin’s comment about his “literary ear.”
Just by chance, Freddie, I happened to be looking over an old copy of The Enterprise, tonight, which regarded you. It was from February, 1998, when you were on the BOS, but decided ultimately to not run for a full term.
The story mentioned that you were appointed by Governor Wilson to fill out the rest of Helen Thomson’s term. I remember that you were appointed, but never knew how it was he picked you. Is there a story there? Or did he simply ask Helen for a good choice?
There were some nice quotes from you in The Enterprise story:
“I haven’t enjoyed campaigning. I just don’t think I have the right personality to be a candidate.”
“I enjoy my family and I have not liked being away from them virtually every evening.”
“It’s been very intense.
“From my point of view, there’s not a big enough personal or private interest” in continuing as a supervisor.
“Everything is about, will it get me money and votes”.
“I may lack the ability to appreciate that public office is important in an immediate way in the lives of needy people by delivery of services to people.”
Oakley has enjoyed being a supervisor and said, “I’m good at it.”
“I will get a children’s waiting room in the courthouse or die trying.”
“If I never get a message from people about what Lois is doing unless it’s to say she’s having a party and I’m invited, that’ll be fine.”