As you can see the items are up, but they still lack a PDF on item #22.
(Click on image to see larger)
Look closely at Section 15 of Item 21 and the proppsed changes;Â campaign
Notice they changed it so current office holders (incumbents running for re-election included) cannot be investigated, but if you are Joe Blow running for office, people can file all kinds of complaints about you and how you are running your campaign.
The other day on the Argue Endorser’s ‘100’ Eyes show, managing editor, Patrick Lalley contended it just takes HARD WORK and A GOOD STRATEGY to win a council seat. Hogwash. While these are important factors, it also takes money and connections. It is an uphill battle for any average Joe to run for council in this city, and ordinances like this don’t help, they only make it harder for NON-incumbents to run.
I’ll put a challenge out there to Joe Kirby, (who thinks I need a vacation-thanks for noticing) if he thinks that regular people should run for city council, I suggest he starts a PAC that helps them with the financial end of it. He could call it ‘The Average JOE PAC’ and if candidates present him with a good strategy he could help fund their campaigns. The Jim Entenman’s of the world don’t need more donations from the Joe Kirby’s of the world.
Ellis also points out on his blog that open meetings laws may have been broken by walking in and voting on these items, if so, tsk-tsk, but what bothers me even more is that the items (PDF Documents) are still not listed on the city website. WTF? I know they are available, because city clerk Roust pulled them up during the meeting, so why are they not listed.
Sketchy. To say the least.
If I read this correctly, the City Attorney will go after the challengers while the Board of Ethics protects the incumbents in one of its secret sessions? Sweet deal … though highly unethical and inappropriate.
As for the walk-in stuff – motioned and seconded by the Urban Ag tag team of Rolfing and Karsky – it now takes two people to do the job of one Debra Owen?! And the Erp says this one-for-two deal will save money? I don’t know what she uses to power her calculator, but mine adds up to $156,707.20!
F’ck the math. We are breaking open meetings laws to make this happen.
I think this poem is appropriate;
http://www.poetry-online.org/poe_the_tell_tale_heart.htm
I agree with you 110%. My point is they’re adding more $ to the payroll and only compounding their original mistake in firing Owen in the first place (which was another Open Meetings violation).
There is, of course, one exception: “Formal action on such matters shall be deferred until a subsequent city council meeting, unless consideration is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety of the municipal government.”
I want a reporter to ask them how, in either case, the public peace or safety of the government was in jeopardy.
Oh, my email box has been on fire over this the past day or so. So yes, I agree also. I have a fire exstigushier on my keyboard at all times (or an ice cold vodka tonic 🙂
To respond to your comment, they are hoping no on is paying attention.
I remember democracy. It was pre-1994 before Munson & Huether. Citizens watch while their city models after North Korea. When Huether passes, we’ll have his midget daughter for our new dictator.
Heil Huether. Sig Heil.
I see KELO chimed in, good thing they have mine and Ellis’ blog to read for story leads;
http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail6162.cfm/Council_Votes_To_Split_City_Clerk_Job_In_Two/?Id=126508
“we’ll have his midget daughter for our new dictator” I think Kylie is very happy at her cushy hospital job. Like I have said in the past, it is who you know, not what you know in SF. I can’t count the number of times I have lost design projects to college students taking a desktop publishing course because there dad was a friend of a friend. Then after the project goes to shit (because they don’t know anything about production) They come crawling to me to fix shit. Annoying.