Paul.Gullixson: November 2008 Archives

Should the Santa Rosa City Council declare a fiscal crisis for the purposes of tapping into Measure O funds to keep from cutting positions in the Police Department?

It's a difficult question.

When Measure O, calling for a quarter-cent sales tax, was approved in 2004, voters were promised that the funds would be used only to augment police, fire and anti-gang programs.

But there was a caveat that allowed the city to divert the funds to pay for existing police, fire and anti-gang programs if six of the seven council members declared a "fiscal crisis."

It's hard to argue that the city's current mess isn't a fiscal crisis.

Still many are concerned about the message it will be sending to voters, especially if the city decides it needs to go back to voters next year with another tax measure.

Will this jeopardize their chances of success?

My guess is the city would be justified in using the Measure O money especially if the alternative would be eliminating eight police officers, one sergeant, one lieutenant and several other department employees. It would be hard to imagine that most voters would prefer to leave that silo of money untouched while police service is cut so dramatically in other areas.

But the City Council first needs to make it clear it's serious about making major cuts to the city budget. We discuss this more in Tuesday's editorial in prepartion for tomorrow night's City Council meeting.

- Paul Gullixson

It's 11 p.m. and it looks, believe it or not, as if Measure Q could be headed for victory.

With 97 percent of the precincts reporting in Marin County, Measure Q was winning with 62.4 percent of the vote. In Sonoma County, with half the precincts reporting, Measure Q was winning with 72.7 percent. Combined, the train measure was winning with about 68 percent. If these numbers hold, the train would get about 2 percent more in Sonoma County and a surprising 5 percent increase in Marin County from the results of a similar measure (Measure R) two years ago.

That is really remarkable given the downturn in the economy and the opposition this year by some well-known Sonoma County people such as Joan Vilms and former Supervisor Ernie Carpenter.

Carpenter was recently interviewed on KRCB by Dick Spotswood and said that he still believed the train was going to create a surge in growth in Sonoma County, altough he had a hard time explaining why.

When Spotswood asked him, "Well, what's your alternative?" Carpenter stumbled a bit. "I don't know," he said. "Do you really need an alternative?"

He then went onto talk about how cars will become more fuel efficient. I like Ernie, but this wasn't his most persuasive moment. I'm still not clear why he stepped out to oppose Measure Q.

- Paul Gullixson

OK,

Our list of the most deceptives mailers in this election continues . . .

No. 2 - Zane the Puppet - This is the nasty four-page mailer that shows 3rd District Supervisorial Candidate Shirlee Zane on puppet strings under the title "Who really controls Shirlee Zane." (To see it, click here azneoutside0081104202002.pdf and zaneinside0081104202014.pdf ). Zane has been supported heavily by the unions in this race. But this mailer goes over the top in suggesting that she will be their puppet which "can only mean fewer parks, more potholes and less money for badly needed social services." It's hard to believe Zane, the head of the Council on Aging, would agree to cut social services to bost benefits to union employees. I also don't remember her pledging to creat more potholes. Distortion score (on scale of one to 10) - 7

And now for the No.1 most deceptive mailer - "One thing is clear" This is part of a series of attack mailers put out by "West County Labor, Environmentalists and Democrats for Change" against 5th District supervisorial candidate Efren Carrillo. 

(Click here. efrenfront20081104202225.pdf  and here efreninside0081104202123.pdf  ) This one features an aerial photo of a clear cut hillside. It states, "In the race for Supervisor, one thing is clear - the developers backing Efren Carrillo want to clear cut Sonoma County Forests." This refers to the proposed 19,650-acre Preservation Ranch project which includes planting 1,800 acres of vineyards across 30 square miles near Annapolis. If the project is approved, trees will be cut down. But no clear-cutting is proposed. On the contrary, sponsors of the project are seeking approval under the very timber-conversion rules that county Planning Commissioner Rue Furch, Carrillo's election opponent, recommended be approved.

The ad notes that one of Carrillo's closest advisers is a paid consultant on Preservation Ranch. This is true. It's referring to former supervisor Eric Koenigshofer who has supported and is helping Carrillo and has donated to his campaign.

The ad states that ``Carrillo has refused to take a position on the project, saying he is waiting for a report to be issued ...'' This is also true. But Furch has taken the same position, because that "report" happens to be the environmental impact report which will trigger the county's review process.

The contention here is that if Carrillo is elected, forests will be devastated, which is the worst kind of pandering to environmental fears. Distortion score (On scale of one to 10) - 9

  Honorable Mentions for the "worst" list:

• A mailer from unions and environmental groups supporting Shirlee Zane that contends Sharon Wright, while on the board of Memorial Hospital, ``presided over the closing of vital services'' such as the psychiatric center;
• A mailer from Efren Carillo titled "Furchfacts.com," which attacks Furch for her delinquency in paying her property taxes. It also distorts her position on the Rohnert Park casino vote.
• The big check. (See Sweeney's blog to come.)

Overall, it's the ads that demonize people that are the worst in my opinion. Carrillo, Furch, Zane, Wright, Brown, Pier, they are all decent people who are running for office because they care about their county not because they are to destroy it - as the worst of the mailers in this campaign contend.

What do you think? Any other nominations?

- Paul Gullixson

Let's admit it. This election has been one of the worst for negative campaigning in Sonoma County. The gloves came off, and it got pretty nasty out there.

In our survey last week, half of the respondents agreed that the mailers in this election were "more negative and more misleading" than in previous years. And 75 percent agreed that candidates themselves need to take a stronger stand against such ads, whether they benefit from them or not.

Here are my picks for the five most deceptive and unfair mailers in this election. I'll make like Letterman and start with the last first.)

No. 5.  The Developers' Team - (To see this one, click here 20081104190051.pdf) This is a card attacking "The Team" - a slate of the more conservative candidates for the Santa Rosa City Council. This mailer was put out by "A Coalition for a Better Sonoma County" the group funded primarily by labor and environmental groups.

The slate attacks the "Team" as being supported by the developers, although it doesn't give one example of a pro-developer vote  - or any vote for that matter - by the incumbents (Jane Bender, John Sawyer and Carol Dean) that the coalition disagrees with. Nastiest remark: Under the remarks about Ernie Oliveras it states that he "hasn't done much about gang prevention" and is known for "Being a part of the Police Department's failed leadership on gangs." Ouch. Where did that come from? Before you try to smear someone's career, you might give an example.

No. 4 - On the Hook - This is the one we talked about in today's editorial. (To see it, click here  20081104190217.pdf) In this one, incumbent Valerie Brown attacks her opponent Will Pier for his suggestion that the county should look into taking back control of Sutter Medical Center, which used to be the county-operated Community Hospital. The ad contends Pier "wants taxpayers on the hook for millions to take over Sutter." All Pier has done is suggest that it be explored. He is not the first to make this suggestion and hardly deserved to be hung out to dry on this one.

No. 3 - Not Green, Not Smart - This is an anti-Measure Q mailer sent out by North Bay Citizens for Effective Transportation, No on Q, a Corte Madera-based group. (To see it, click here. measureq0081104201200.pdf )It's essentially a letter from former Sonoma County Supervisor Ernie Carpenter and Santa Rosa conservationist Joan Vilms. In it they say, "If Measure Q passes, powerful forces will propel massive growth and urbanization from Petaluma to Cloverdale under the rubric of 'transit villages.'" Powerful forces? Massive growth? Sounds like a job for Superman. All this from a train that, as they argue, no one will ride. Pretty dramatic - and misleading - talk.

This is getting to long, so I'll give my final two in my next blog entry

- Paul Gullixson

OK. Here's my guess for tonight's outcome. You heard it here first.

Obama - 353 electoral votes (including Florida, Virginia and Ohio)

McCain - 185 electoral votes (including Missouri)

In the Senate, Democrats pick up seven seats including Oregon and North Carolina.

In the House, Democrats pick up 25 seats, reaching 260.

What's your guess?

- Paul Gullixson

So when exactly did Sharon Wright leave the Memorial Hospital board and was she responsible for the closure of the psychiatric center?

A recent mailer sent out by unions and environmental groups supporting Shirlee Zane contends that Wright, while on the board "presided over closing of vital services"' such as the psychiatric center. Our story on Oct. 28 noted, "Wright says the decision to close that facility was made after she got off the board and besides 'those decisions are made at the corporate level, not at the local level.'''

But an opinion piece submitted by Santa Rosa City Councilwoman Veronica Jacobi and new SR School Board member Laura Gonzalez contends that Wright's own Web site notes that she didn't leave the board until March of this year, which the decision to close the psychiatric unit was announced in mid-February. (To read the Close to Home, click here.)

So which is it?

I called Sharon and this is the response she e-mailed me:

Is Sharon Wright in trouble in her race against Shirlee Zane for the 3rd Supervisorial District?An informal poll of select PD letter writers that we conducted late last week suggests that Zane could be heading for a victory.

Although history has shown these surveys to be fairly accurate, they are not at all scientific.  (For one reason, they're biased toward people who read newspapers and write letters, which is not a representation of the general voting public.)

The sampling of voters from the 3rd District (102 voters) was not huge either. Nonetheless, the poll shows Zane leading 50 percent to Wright's 31 percent, with 21 percent undecided.

The 5th District race is much closer with 45 percent of voters saying they support Efren Carrillo with 42 percent supporting Rue Furch. Twelve percent are undecided. (These results are slightly different from what we reported today because an additional 25 filled out the survey after deadline Friday.)

The results of the 1st District race between incumbent Valerie Brown and Will Pier had to be tossed out because of a mistake in how the survey was set up. But the results still sugget that this race could be close.

Another indication is the "attack" mailer that went out this week against Pier for, among other things, his position that the county should try to take back control of Community Hospital. Why would Brown and her supporters spend the money on something like that unless they were concerned that this race might be tight?

Is change in the air?

A number of Sonoma Valley residents are not happy with her vote on the Graywood Ranch proposal.

In the Santa Rosa City Council race, it appears to be a tight race between incumbents Lee Pierce and John Sawyer as well as Gary Wysocky, Marsha Vas Dupre and Michael Allen for the four open seats. All had support ranging from 41 percent to 50 percent of those surveyed. Ernest Oliveras trailed this group with 38 percent followed by incumbent Carol Dean and Don Taylor with 23 percent. Nine percent of voters said they were still undecided.

According to our poll, the race for the two-year seat had Judy Kennedy ahead with 32 percent followed by incumbent Councilwoman Jane Bender at 29 percent. David Rosas followed with 20 percent support of the 118 surveyed. But 24 percent of those surveyed said they were undecided on this race.

- Paul Gullixson