This is OUR Community - It's time to step up and claim it!

Thanks to a Federal Grant of $21 million dollars, and Major Funding by Organized Labor, I've been to avoid projected layoffs and raise the snarkiness factor by an additional 22%!

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Hmmm... Interestinger and Interestinger...

I wrote a great piece last night. One of my best. I was inspired by something a friend sent, and wanted to share it here, but somehow it vanished into the ether somewhere betwixt key and mouse. Oh well, I'll give it another shot. It will be a nice warm up for the 1000 word essay I still need to crank out tonight.

Mike Duveneck does a lot of debates. In fact, I was at one last night. And he has a subtle way of putting forth a condescending attitude toward his opponents, while always making sure to get his Doctor title out there enough so that no one misses it. The implication is that since he is a Ph.D, he has more credibility than us, so we ought to listen to him.

So what happens when someone with more credibility, like say, a Nobel Laureate, says his reasoning is a great big pile of dog droppings? Such was the inherent message from Elinor Ostrum, 2009 prize winner in Economics. Here are a couple key quotes worth hearing:

"Small and medium cities are more effective monitors of performance and cost."

"Incorporated areas can contract with larger producers [for services]. Neighborhoods cannot do that."

and regarding a study she did of police effectiveness:

"Not a single instance was found where a large centralized police department outperformed smaller departments serving similar neighborhoods."

I want to have a cup of tea with this lady. I want my children to study economics under her! Heck, I want to throw rose petals before her feet when she walks down the sidewalk!

So to sum up - A Nobel Laureate in Economics tells us that smaller cities are better, incorporated areas are better, and we should expect (the speech actually hints that we should accept nothing less) first-rate police services. I can't sum it up in a single quote, but there is a safe conclusion that can be drawn from several other statements she makes, which is simply that moving toward this ideal model of a small, incorporated city is a risk that must be undertaken.

Funny, but isn't that what we've been saying all along?

Oops... almost forgot that our side is the one that backs up the claims... here's the speech. If you are used to doctors doing Nobel speeches, this one is a breeze. For the rest of us, it's a bit wordy (at 28 minutes)... and dragging... but still worth the effort.

***

Another incorporation debate last night. This one for the Arden Park Homeowner's Association. Our side had council candidate Anthony Hernandez at bat, while Dr. Duveneck was joined at the hip with Tim Cahill, real estate inheritor and developer, who seems to own the land under about a zillion business properties along Fulton Avenue.

Anthony was pleasant and knew his facts, but needs to connect more emotionally with the crowd. But in his defense, it was a tough room to pull that off, since it's home turf for most of the other side. Duveneck was Duveneck. Cahill seemed like his main purpose for being their was to serve as Judas toward his fellow Fulton Avenue associates. Seems no one mentioned to him that Kuni was opening five new auto dealerships in the area, or that we have a net increase in new car dealers over the past few years, with the spots on Auburn Blvd, Arden, and the Maserati folks. All he cared about was how business was going to hell in a handbasket, and how anyone who does business in this community needs to have a psych eval... wonder if that includes the ones who rent his land?

Probably the most telling moment of the evening was when an audience member (someone I've never seen before - not one of the many supporters we see at every one of these) read a quote from the good doc, delivered back in '04 when he was running for county supervisor. Don't have the exact words, but the context was that cities were good. Local control was good. Responsive government was good. Anyone who would stand in the way of these things (say, Susan Peters?) was evil! When asked to defend those comments, Duveneck stated that those things were true six years ago, but since then the county has learned its lesson, and services have improved across the board. Of course, by services, he means the "artwork" down the median of Watt and the pillars 'n palms along the median and intersections of Fulton. Not that those aren't nice things, but really? Then again, it's somewhat refreshing to hear him speak from both sides of his mouth, while putting our side down as a bunch of wannabee politicians. Is he afraid we'll end up as good at it as him?

***

We're #1!

It's true! Arden Arcade leads the entire region! Well, by one measure, at least. Homicides. Three last month alone. So I close this time with an open question to Dr Duveneck: How many more of our citizens have to die while you tell us everything is ok? And to the residents of Arden Arcade: How much longer before you realize that no matter how many calls you make to 911, the red lights just aren't coming? Wake up folks, it's time for a change.

7 comments:

  1. Must find that person and that exact quote! Does anyone really know what Duveneck's true agenda is? I don't know his history at all.

    And why wouldn't anyone like cast iron wildlife caught up and dying in a median fence? Or, is it just breaking through to get to the Walmart on the other side?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Deana, the info is just a Google search away. Psychologist turned career politician, who is afraid he will lose his nestegg of political capital if the county isn't calling the shots. There's more, but it's best discussed over a latte sometime. You're buying.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ed:

    I think I would disagree about the room being tough for the Yes side. There is opposition in Arden Park, but there is also strong distrust of the County and fear of Sac City. Those feelings go to a Yes vote. That's why there was so much heat about the City annexation concern.

    I've posted my views on what happened: http://ardencitypost.com

    I didn't score "the debate," but I do explain why I believe "the argument for a Yes vote came out stronger."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Paul, thanks as always for giving this race a bit of intellectual cred. As we discussed at the debate, there's room in this fight for both the smart and the snarky. Lucky for us we have both.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Your response got me thinking how nice it would be for cityhood supporters to casually meet for coffee once a week or every other week to chat, ask questions, share ideas, etc. (maybe this already happens - I don't know). I often have random questions or ideas- for example a friend asked me about Sac City's plan for annexation and I wasn't really confident about my answer (I let her know of course that I wasn't sure). Just a thought!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Deana,

    Sounds good. What time should we get there?
    Kidding! But the big question is what time will work for most people? I'm fairly flexible if I can work around classes. Jane works all day, so she's out unless it's an evening or Saturday. I think Michael is fairly open. And I can invite a candidate or two to join in as their schedules allow.

    Let's say I tossed out something like Saturday, 10 am, at Country Waffles on El Camino. The owner there is a strong supporter, although eh just moved out of the area. He still wants to see the city become reality for the business side of things.

    Would that work for everyone here?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good point about finding a time that works! We have soccer every Saturday morning. I wonder if it would work if people just posted something on the Save AA Facebook page and here like "Anyone want to meet up Friday at X place at X time."

    ReplyDelete