46° DNS FOG, Supervisors call on voters to just say no
Board urges rejection of 5 propositions that might not get adequate funding
Last Modified: Saturday, October 11, 2008 at 7:43 a.m.
Sonoma County supervisors are urging voters to reject five propositions on the November ballot, including three that deal with criminal justice issues and two that involve renewable-energy proposals.
The five-member board has unanimously voted to oppose Propositions 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 after concluding that they will mandate funding that, ultimately, the county may be forced to provide if the state budget isn't able.
"They sound like motherhood and apple pie, however, they have fatal flaws," deputy county administrator Lori Norton told supervisors at a meeting earlier this week. "They do not indicate sustainable sources of funding and that means there will be a shifting of resources or raising of taxes."
Proposition 5 deals with sentencing of nonviolent offenders. Proposition 6 revises criminal penalties. And Proposition 9 pertains to victims rights.
Proposition 7 proposes renewable-energy programs while Proposition 10 is an alternative-fuel vehicles and renewable-energy bond.
Supervisor Tim Smith said the goals of the propositions were "laudable," but they were drafted by special interest groups that used the initiative process to avoid vetting through the Legislature.
Smith said he agreed criminal justice system changes are necessary, but he added, "I don't have any faith that we will be able to do that through state propositions."
West county Supervisor Mike Reilly said although the five propositions are just beginning to receive publicity, "we need to take a public position now because people are already starting to vote."
Supervisors said they will take up debate on Proposition 8, the measure that would ban same-sex marriages. Smith and Reilly said they would urge voters to reject the proposition, but the other three supervisors did not immediately express an opinion, leaving the topic open until next week.
You can reach Staff Writer Bleys W. Rose at 521-5431 or bleys.rose@pressdemocrat.com.
Next Article in
Events Calendar More Events Submit Event
- Free Dr Pepper for everyone in U.S.
- Petaluma store clerk survives assault by robbers
- Student commits suicide on webcam
- Early morning fire started by 2-year-old
- Hip-hop pot seller convicted
- 49ers' Singletary looking for a better result
- Sex offender suspected of violent attack on ex-girlfriend
- Cell phone traffic stop leads to $90,000 drug find, arrest
- SJRC student reports sex assault
- Rohnert Park woman dies in violent crash on Hwy. 116
- Tedford gets back in touch with his imaginative self 1 hr ago
- Bowl berth rides on Big Game outcome 1 hr ago
- Healdsburg rallies behind Balestrieri 1 hr ago
- Romo's even keel helps keep T.O. off hot seat 1 hr ago
- Ukiah airs it out but gets grounded in 34-33 loss 1 hr ago
- Maria Carrillo wins second straight NCS championship 1 hr ago
- Froman leads SRJC to bowl victory 1 hr ago
- 49ers at Cowboys preview 1 hr ago
- Raiders at Broncos preview 1 hr ago
- Clowe’s two goals lead Sharks to victory 1 hr ago
Comments
Only moderator-approved comments are shown on this page. To see all comments, please visit the forum.Post a comment | View all comments on this topic.
October 11, 2008 8:35:00 am
RE: Link
And these same people are for trains from SF to LA and Cloverdale to NOWHERE which will have to be subsidized forever . And as anything the cities and counties of Sonoma run, conductors will be paid 150,000 per year, station sweepers 100,000 and the taxpayers will pay and pay and pay even if they never ride the damn trains!
October 11, 2008 10:42:17 am
Although not perfect, Prop. 7 is good in that it will require all utilities (large and small) to meet the RPS (Renewable Portfolio Standard) to wean us from imported energy. I'm voting "YES" on 7. Prop. 10 is good in theory, but puts way too much emphasis on natural gas consumption. When will people realize that hydrocarbons (including natural gas) are a finite product to be used sparingly. Yes, we need to use natural gas, but not increase its consumption by mandate at the expense of neglecting other energy resources (e.g., biomass to energy). I'm voting "NO" on 10.
October 11, 2008 11:07:02 am
If the Supervisors vote "yes" on Prop 8 when they should be voting No on Prop 8, then their recommendations on all the other propositions are probably wrong as well.
Do not trust any politician or supervisor who does not support the civil rights of all citizens.
How the Supervisors treat women, children, and homosexuals tells you all you need to know about their sense of justice and allegiance to the truth of issues.
October 11, 2008 5:42:45 pm
Although I agree, the trick is to try to replace the bad (of which there is much) with some good policies finally. That is why I am very careful to vote for very few things that raise taxes or cost American taxpayers more money. Government, like almost all of us have had to do, needs to tighten its belt and work within a budget.
October 12, 2008 6:01:47 pm
sure sups ill say no to your health plans to you brown heres a littel news flash that the PD was unabel or unwilling to to print did you know they had 80 million in untold money for the county however they told us that they are broke and when they where called on it (by seiu) they moved it to the general fund kinda funny
Post a comment | View all comments