Town Square

Post a New Topic

Editorial

Original post made on May 8, 2009

Has there ever been an election, special or otherwise, with such a uniformly unpalatable set of choices? All six special propositions on the May 19 ballot are the result of a deeply flawed Sacramento budget and policy-making process. We've touched on what we believe are the underlying causes before: term-limits, the two-thirds super-majority requirement, our distorted initiative process, insulated legislative districts and an ineffective governor.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, May 8, 2009, 12:00 AM

Comments (11)

Posted by Carl, a resident of Country Fair
on May 8, 2009 at 12:55 am

With 'pages of reasons to vote "no" and that it doesn't represent good public policy', the best rationale you can come up with is - 'We don't like this package. We don't believe CA legislators can come up with a better one. Let's hold our noses, and vote Yes.'?? How lame.

Send these propositions to a rousing defeat. There is no reason to have a $42 billion and growing defecit. Send this package back to the drawing board and force a better solution.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on May 8, 2009 at 7:07 am

Stacey is a registered user.

It reminds me of one of something a pro-Measure G person wrote on this site once...

"Like it or not, vote yes!"

Well, fear can indeed sway many a decision. This shouldn't be one of them. If we're voting on propositions out of fear for what would happen if we don't pass them, then those propositions have no business being on the ballot in the first place. It means that those that put them on the ballot didn't do their job.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 8, 2009 at 8:59 am

Being scared and doubting the ability of the legislature and governor to come up with better solutions is NOT a good reason to vote yes on the measures... they are all wrong. The people who thought of these measures don't seem all that competent.

Why don't they, instead, reform all those deals Davis made with the unions? The city of Vallejo had financial issues because of the pensions paid to police, fire chiefs for instance. They get 3 percent (of their salary) for every year worked as pension once they retire, some retire with more than 200K in salary, and that has to change. That is what is making California have budget deficits. You have the unions and Davis to thank for that.

Also cut more expenses: do we really need a county of education? If you call them, there is nothing they can do for you, they say it is all local control. So why do we need a county office of education, on top of a state department of education? The solution is first to cut down all the unnecessary expenses. Walk into any government agency and see the many cubicles with people not doing anything but collecting a paycheck (just walk into any county of education office for example).

For NO on everything except 1F: obviously we don't have good leaders, and they do not deserve a raise.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 8, 2009 at 9:02 am

"For NO on everything except 1F: obviously we don't have good leaders, and they do not deserve a raise."

Meant to say VOTE NO (instead of "For NO")

YES on 1F, NO on everything else.


Posted by John, a resident of Del Prado
on May 8, 2009 at 9:03 am

You should visit this string being already discussed.

Retirement Benefit Excesses of California Public Employees


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 8, 2009 at 12:49 pm

Thank you John.

This post is a must read:
Web Link

While not all comments are good (as with any post), it gives you an idea of how California needs to change the 3 point system implemented by Davis. Until that is done, we will have budget deficits. There are public employees like police and fire fighters making more money (in excess of 200K) than some in the private sector -and this is at retirement! Their pension is huge! No wonder California is broke! Davis should be held accountable for what he did before being recalled as governor, and the unions must end.

Say NO to all propositions except 1F.


Posted by Steven, a resident of Deer Oaks/Twelve Oaks
on May 8, 2009 at 2:21 pm

I'm assuming all the Pleasanton residents who attended the Tea Party are voting no on Measure G. I wouldn't join you for tea, but I'll vote no with you on Measure G.


Posted by John, a resident of Del Prado
on May 8, 2009 at 2:52 pm

Steven, I think a lot more people than were at the tea parties would be voting no and by the way I did not attend the tea parties but have the utmost respect for the rights of the ones who did. Great for them!!!


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 10, 2009 at 6:40 am

I will vote YES on Measure G.

I will vote NO on all other measures (May 19) except 1F.

I was at the TEA party taking pictures and finding out who was there. Not everyone there was republican or right-wing. I spoke with some who were democrats, supported Obama and were disappointed with what the administration is doing so far. Some were independent, some were young with kids and some were older. At least that is what I found in the brief time I was there taking pictures and talking to people.


Posted by unclehomerr.., a resident of Downtown
on May 10, 2009 at 2:59 pm


Editor asks: "Has there ever been an election, special or otherwise, with such a uniformly unpalatable set of choices?"

I'll see your 1-A/F and raise you Obama/McCain. Unpalatable to the point of chronic indigestion.

unclehomerr..


Posted by unclehomerr.., a resident of Downtown
on May 10, 2009 at 3:00 pm


Case in point... even spellcheck can't digest Obama.

unclehomerr..


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Circumstances without Pomp
By Roz Rogoff | 3 comments | 1,065 views

‘Much Ado’ or is it Adios for ObamaCare?
By Tom Cushing | 28 comments | 768 views

Political posturing about water
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 654 views