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%!

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Another Guest Comment

We have another guest editorial today, but first some background.

Dr. Paul Mattiuzzi has another blog on the Arden Arcade incorporation, and all of the issue surrounding it. If you haven't read it, you should. Paul and I are working for the same cause from slightly different perspectives. Where I want to make you angry, knowing that will lead to you wanting to learn more about the issues, Paul wants to make you educated, knowing that knowledge of what is going on will make you angry. Or something akin to that. Either way, he is an excellent writer and presents some great facts you should be aware of. The link to the site os over there on the right.

Ray the Accountant is a reader of both blogs. Paul and I have both addressed the issue of the money trail, and the large donation from organized labor that provided the lion's share of the opposition funding, and Ray had some degree of disagreement with Paul's assessments. He wrote the following and asked it to be posted on Paul's blog, then asked it to go here as well. Since I agree the issues raised are key to this election and the decision we will all be making, I'm posting Ray's piece here with no further editorial comment from me.


I was recently made aware of your blog site on the Arden arcade cityhood measure that will be on the ballot November 2nd. I read with interest your postings, and those of your readers. I am an accountant and tax preparer who has lived in Arden Arcade, near Eastern and Whitney for about 7 years. I have been following this proposal for about two years, and, like you, the more I learned about the financials of both the county and the proposed city, I have come to the conclusion that the best chance that this community has to move forward against its crime and other problems is to become a new city. There were times that your early blog posts looked at the measure with a somewhat cynical view. However, I always found them to be fair and informative.

I do, however, respectively take issue with one thing that you said about the union contribution of the $50,000 to the Stay Sacramento campaign by the Plumbers and Pipefitters, Local 447. It appeared from that blog, that you didn't feel that it mattered that the union had made the contribution, because the Yes on Measure D campaign had received large contributions from other businesses also. So I went to the Sacramento Elections office, and personally campaign contributions for the report of 9/30/2010.

It is true the ‘Yes’ campaign received contributions from some companies outside the area. And in general, the support for both sides has come mainly from individuals. But the “large” contributions to the Yes on Measure D campaign have in no way approached the amount given by the union. And in my canvassing of the area to answer questions about Measure D, I did not find any plumbers or pipefitters that lived in the area, let alone supported the Stay Sacramento group although there are probably some. In fact, those contractors that I did talk to supported cityhood, because they've had to deal with the county and it’s delay is when pulling permits for the jobs that they need to do in the area.

But my disagreement with your statement is not with the amount of the contributions, but rather the intent of the contribution. On the Yes for Measure D. website, your blog site, and Ed Dickey's blog site ( there is a free flow of questions and responses, which further the discussion on the cityhood measure and help people in the community make an informed choice.

However, on the Stay Sacramento website, this free flow of information does not exist. The statements and arguments presented on that website are those of the authors, who apparently feel that they do not have to answer for the views that they provide there.

Their three recent mailers claim that “there are dozens of reasons to oppose cityhood”. However, the most recent one jumps to reason number 19, and, except for #7 & #13, which again have limited information, I haven't figured out what reasons 1 through 18 are quite yet. (The Stay Sacramento doesn’t seem to enumerate them either.) And all three mailers allude to terrible things that will happen in this area becomes a city, then gives no backup or additional sources for those points of view.

Personally, I find it very condescending when people try to tell me how to think. Therefore the information that they provide begins to lack credibility, and all their arguments become specious.

For those who do not realize this, all voters should choose members for the city Council, whether they are voting yes or no. Because if the cityhood measure passes, those council members will be representing us throughout this community.

It is a very important to know what the vision of those running for city Council, so I wanted you and your readers to be very aware of some upcoming candidate forums. Here's the information that has been listed on the websites of Jay Boatwright and Mary Ose.

CANDIDATE FORUMS – Live appearances by the people running for the City Council
Tuesday, October 19th, 6:30 pm - El Camino High School
Wednesday, October 20th, 6:30 pm - Rio Americano High School
Other forums are tentatively scheduled for October 21st and 25th.

There was also a televised forum that was sponsored by the League of Women Voters and will be replayed on the following days.

6 pm Wed October 20 (fourth re-airing)
5 pm Sun October 24 (fifth re-airing)
9 pm Wed October 27 (final re-airing)

On Comcast it is on channel 14.

On ATT U-verse it is a little harder to find but here are the directions. Go to channel 99 (you should have it if you have their 100 package or above). Find the section that says "Sacramento Metropolitan TV". Say OK to that and then go to Channel 14. While the station information says that you can find the meetings at, as of today the meeting was not shown, but I was able to confirm the dates and times above through the League of Women Voters. Long search but should be valid results.

I would hope the Surewest and the other satellite services would have a local government channel to see these, but I do not have specific channel information for them.

Dr. Mattiuzzi, I hope you will be able to post this e-mail in its entirety or in part to your blog site so that more people will be able to make an informed and well thought through decision on election day. It is a very important vote for the future of this entire community.

Ray, the Accountant.

No comments:

Post a Comment