Eye On Modesto

Thoughts and observations about Modesto and Stanislaus County

Archive for the tag “Modesto California”

07 May 2013

Is the Proposed WOODGLEN Project Right for Modesto?

May 6, 2013

ghost subdivision

ghost subdivision (Photo credit: reallyboring)May 6, 2013

City of Modesto Planning Commission
(Sandra Lucas, Ted Brandvoid, Patricia Gillum, Chris Tyler, Steve Carter, Dennis Smith,
Marshall Riddle)
1010 10th Street, Modesto, CA
RE: STUDY SESSION for “Woodglen” development by Fitzpatrick Homes;
Requiring annexation of 72 acres of County Agricultural land to build
353 single family homes, 180 units of multi-family housing.
Dear City of Modesto Planning Commission Members,
As a public resident who lives in the unincorporated area of Modesto, nearby the
proposed site of the project (Bangs/Carver/Pelandale/Tully Road), this project would
involve the conversion (destruction of) agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes is
quite large, and would definitely cause several negative impacts for the surrounding area
and the city overall.
Before you approve any such development to proceed further, or give the developer
approval to present such an annexation to LAFCO for consideration, I would ask that
answers to the following concerns should be provided to the public:
1. The residential building of 533 homes in one project, to be built in 2013/2014 while the
recession is still, and is expected to continue in force for the next 5 years (for our area),
which Modesto is effected by still a high 20% unemployment rate, with no promise of
employer/s migration to our area, this excessive residential project is an example of
“urban sprawl” that is not sustainable in the next year or two years, and will further cause
economic damage to existing property owner’s equity and property values.
2. The 683 page “EIR Draft Document” does NOT provide support or mitigation actions
to justify to go forward with this project.
The entire report must be read in its entirety by anyone making decisions on this project.
Some concerns in regards to the content of this document include:
Several “Potentially Significant” negative impacts if this large residential
development were approved. Some, but not all, citations include:
Destruction of AG Land
“the proposed project site has historically been used for agricultural purposes and
is currently cultivated alfalfa and almonds.” (Almond crops are one of Stanislaus
County’s top crop categories and directly responsible to maintaining our
economy.)
TO: Stanislaus County Planning Commission, May 6, 2013 public letter, RE: STUDY
SESSION for “Woodglen” development by Fitzpatrick Homes, Page 2 of 5.
Rebuttal: The AG Element of the General Plan’s main goals are to protect
agricultural land – our #1 industry.
Air Quality and Transportation
“Implementation of the proposed project would result in pollutant emissions being
released into the atmosphere.”
“Implementation of the proposed Woodglen Specific Plan project will exacerbate
existing conditions at one intersection operating below the City’s minimum LOS
D with the addition of projected traffic and result in levels of service dropping
from LOS C to LOS E at one additional intersection.”
“Significant and unavoidable” transportation negative impacts will result from:
“Implementation of the proposed Woodglen Specific Plan project would result in
an incremental increase in delay that exceeds the daily thresholds at intersections
where LOS D is already exceeded.”
“Implementation of the proposed Woodglen Specific Plan project would result in
level of service dropping to an unacceptable level on one roadway segment and an
increase in volume-to-capacity ratio above the incremental threshold on two
roadway segments under near-term conditions.”
Rebuttal: This residential project is TOO BIG for the proposed area, and will
cause air pollution from 533 OR MORE resident automobiles owned by residents
trying to navigate out of the neighborhood. Modesto’s air quality is already at a
serious and extreme levels (caused by automobile emissions).
The project will also cause significant negative traffic slowdowns, hurting
existing residents who normally travel on the major streets of Standiford, Bangs,
Tully, Synder, Carver, and Prescott – to get home, to work, or for other needs.
This project does not meet greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction mandates under SB
375. Road widening or additional road lanes encouraging more cars does not
reduce GHG.
Who would actually pay for any road widening or additional lanes? I hope
taxpayer money would not be spent, nor would transportation improvement grant
funds be spent.
Any transportation costs should be paid by the developer!
TO: Stanislaus County Planning Commission, May 6, 2013 public letter, RE: STUDY SESSION for “Woodglen” development by Fitzpatrick Homes, Page 3 of 5.
The further destruction of farmland would most likely be involved just to accommodate the multiple road improvements required. What other farmland owners will be personally harmed by any eminent domain land takeovers?
Excessive Noise and Dust
The construction period which would last for several months to a year, two years, ??? would cause harm to nearby residents and such dust would travel and pollute the air to a larger surrounding diameter where more residents live, causing unknown and possible serious (lung) health effects.
Water Quality
Of serious concern is, “Implementation of the proposed Woodglen Specific Plan would increase the amount of impervious surface on the project site and the amount of urban runoff. In addition, construction activity could contribute to short-term discharges of waste and accelerated soil erosion and siltation. These things could degrade surface water quality.”
Rebuttal: The protection of surface water quality is an important human and agricultural need. Contaminated water will reach crops in which humans consume. Contaminated water is known to cause serious health issues, which include cancer (means eventual death).
“Implementation of the proposed project would expose people and structures to future ground shaking. The presence of sandy soils and groundwater creates the potential for unstable soil conditions and liquefaction. Furthermore, construction on the project site could contribute to soil erosion.”
Rebuttal: No development, or one that may serve a city’s future plans, should ever jeopardize the personal or property safety, or economic protection of surrounding property of existing owners and residents. Ground shaking and liquefaction of the ground is a serious situation and can cause economic and personal harm to residents in an undetermined radius surrounding the site. This area’s sandy soil presents very sensitive construction issues. Unknown earth damage could extend well beyond the site and is not warranted to support this project’s size. (The entire community of nearby Del Rio could be affected as it is also built on sandy soil due to its location to the Stanislaus River). There are no “mitigation” measures that are justifiable or can prevent harm to residents.
“Implementation of the proposed project would increase demand for police services in association with new residential development.”
TO: Stanislaus County Planning Commission, May 6, 2013 public letter, RE: STUDY SESSION for “Woodglen” development by Fitzpatrick Homes, Page 4 of 5.
Rebuttal: The City of Modesto and Stanislaus County are severely underserved with providing Modesto’s 206,000+ residents with proper police protection at large. Only twelve (12) patrol officers to date are out on patrol at any given time in the entire city. (Quote from Police Chief Ballantine on March 4, 2013). Only six (6) county patrol officers to date are out providing police services in the unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County. (Quote from Mayor Marsh in a Modesto Bee article dated May 5, 2013).
Until there are significant increases in city and county police patrols offering police protection and services at large, this development cannot go forward, adding another 533 units (with 1000+ more persons) to protect. Previous, existing, and new general plan policies state that NO new developments will go forward until proper public services are available.
What is meant by “the project includes development of an “infrastructure financing plan” ? What is being developed, when, and by whom? How much money? How realistic is achieving this? Who pays what, who gets what?
3. How is this 533 residential home development consistent with the General Plan and Land Use and Zoning?
Is this large project accepted by StanCOG to meet it’s “future growth and development” of a “sustainable city” under SB 375?
4. Are any of these homes or multi-unit buildings going to satisfy RHNA affordable housing numbers under the 2009-2014 Revised Housing Element Update?
If so, how many units will be set aside?
5. Are any of these homes or units going to be purchased by HCD or other government agencies with NSP or Housing Block funds, offering either subsidized rental housing or property sales to low income persons? If so, how many homes and units?
6. With Modesto experiencing insufficient water resources to date for its residents and farmers, (a variety of problematic issues) – where will the water needs for this project’s residents come from? Which agency would provide water and from what sources?
Will this additional water need cause any rate increases or supply loss to existing residents of Modesto or Stanislaus County unincorporated residents?
Existing legislation does NOT allow any future growth until adequate public services (such as water) are available.
7. How will the City of Modesto Police Department or the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department provide sufficient police protection at large to an increased population of 533
TO: Stanislaus County Planning Commission, May 6, 2013 public letter, RE: STUDY SESSION for “Woodglen” development by Fitzpatrick Homes, Page 5 of 5.
homes (which reasonably amounts to at least 1000 total persons (2 per household or the project as a whole), when existing police protection is at very severe levels (12 officers on patrol for a population of 206,000 approximately, (city services) and 6 officers for the unincorporated town areas (population unknown)?
The City or County currently is NOT paying for reasonable levels of protection at large for Modesto or Stanislaus County!
Existing legislation does NOT allow any future growth until adequate public services (such as police protection) are available.
I urge you to NOT vote in approval of this huge residential project at this time, which has has NO realistic “sustainability” or “demand” in our area at this time, or in the near future. This excessive project will cause multiple issues of serious harm to existing land owners and existing residents. Mitigated proposals hurt residents and would cause cumulative negative impacts to the city’s residents. Proper public service levels do not exist to warrant the project to stain existing services to the public.
Sincerely,
D. Minighini
Modesto unincorporated resident
Encls:
City of Modesto “2012 crime statistics” presented to City Council Safety & Communities Committee/Council Workshop Meeting on March 4, 2013
http://www.modestogov.com/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=535&doctype=AGENDA
“Re-Alignment” Update web article, May 3, 2013, re: more releases into communities
http://news.yahoo.com/california-prison-crowding-plan-still-falls-short-213707352.html
The Woodglen EIR Report: http://www.modestogov.com/ced/pdf/planning/projects/woodglen/Woodglen%20SP%20DEIR_FINAL.pdf

 

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment
01 May 2013

What’s On America’s Mind Wednesday at 6:30 PM

Topics include are developers taking over the City Council, RUL and what it means to you, the Salida MAC meeting

Radio RED 104.9 FM

Radio RED 104.9 FM (Photo credit: Mahdi Ayat.)

Supervisor Monteith’s obstructionism Ad Mitigation, the General Plan Amendment process, these and more so tune in at 6:30 PM Wednesday and find out the things you really  need to know.

104.9 FM Modesto our Flag Ship station

 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/centralvalleyhornet/2013/05/02/whats-on-americas-mind-with-emerson-drake

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment
01 May 2013

Council Comments from the Residential Urban Limit Meeting

By Emerson Drake

At Tuesday’s 4/23/13 Modesto City Council meeting regarding Denny Jackman’s Residential Urban Limits or RUL, we

English: Author: Carl Skaggs This image was ta...

English: Author: Carl Skaggs This image was taken by me on January 14, 2010 in Modesto, California I hereby relinquish all rights to this photo. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

listened to new talking points being aired by the Chamber of Commerce and Building Industry Association through their close friends/mouthpieces on the council.

Denny’s RUL  recommends boundaries beyond which no residential development under 10 dwelling units per acre could occur without a majority public vote.  A very much similar version of RUL had been presented to the Economic Development Committee last year but was temporarily shelved due to upcoming elections. I believe what Denny expected was a reasoned conversation regarding farmland preservation. Unfortunately Lobbyist Cecil Russell’s response was a personal attack on Mr. Jackman instead of a conversation about RUL.

Council comments were even more interesting.  Several members of the public at the meeting pointed to the five Measure “M” votes  (the five were about sewer extensions after annexation) as the people having spoken about NOT wanting uncontrolled growth or  “Sprawl.”  The public rejected these votes by 60.05, 61.66, 63.66, 64.7, and 69.78 percent.  Councilman Dave Lopez decided to try and undermine five Measure “M” votes with spin.  He made the claim “voter fatigue set in.”   His comment was attempting to invalidate 65,974 votes.  The “spin” he was basing his comments on was the fact the voters turned down what he termed “easy money” for the general fund when they could have at least voted for the Hetch/Hetchy Measure “C” which included the car dealerships on North McHenry Avenue.  He specifically sited their use of Modesto’s water and sewer.

While he suggests this  invalidates the five measures the public voted on,  I believe he’s reaching.  Doesn’t this match up almost exactly with the Council’s decision to allow Beard Industrial Tract a  “deal” to avoid paying Modesto utility user fees for the very same services (water, sewer, electricity) they wanted to charge the car dealerships?  It’s all about the utility tax any business building in the Tract would have been required to pay.  This “special arrangement” he wasn’t willing to give the dealerships will cost Modesto Taxpayers MILLIONS of Dollars every… single… year after the businesses move in.

So if  the five decisions by the voters area are a case of voter fatigue,  was the Beard decision voter fatigue or a payout to special interests by the council ?  Charging the car dealerships is good while charging Beard is bad?  Councilman Lopez, no matter how hard you try you can’t have it both ways because we’ll call you on it.

Councilwoman Burnside has been on a roll herself.  At the March 26th  meeting she gave the council the credit for Modesto being one of the “most dense cities in California.”  She cited a figure of 8.8 people per acre. While our math suggests the figure is closer to 7.9 per acre, in this case it just doesn’t matter.  Her 8.8 puts Modesto somewhere around 108th in density of  California cities.  We would be 8th in a list of cities starting with the letter “M.”  Maybe that’s what she meant.

She also said “it cracks me up when people say” smart growth, your smart and my smart may be completely different” she went on to say, so that’s very subjective. There needs to be responsible growth in the manner in where we are building. As dense as we are I think we can do it through the General Plan, not through Ag Mitigation.”

Ranking at 108 and not being among the most dense, I believe shows many things are subjective and if this is an example of their reasoning we had better utilize Ag Mitigation through the ballot box rather than trust our council to do the right thing.

The good Councilwoman’s other remarks, “I don’t believe in leadership by ballot box.  I believe that’s why we were elected.”  She also said “I despise the individuals that stand up here and say I represent the people like farmers aren’t people “, and “I’d like to know where all of those lobbyist are, I haven’t seen any.”

Lets look at her first two comments. Her district encompasses about 34,000 people and has about forty farmers. The farmers she’s really discussing are about the 6 who would like to sell their farms to home builders because that’s the only people RUL would affect.  What she’s actually saying is she wants to provide taxpayer assistance so a few farmers and her developer friends in the Chamber of Commerce can make lots of money while leaving us taxpayers to pay the bills.  Taxpayer assistance?  Yes, conservatively speaking for every acre of homes that are built the taxpayer is on the hook for between $3,000 to $5,000 yearly for services. That’s right year after year, after year, $3-5,000 dollars just so her friends can be wealthy.  Taxpayer’s  paying  developers welfare money.

Councilman Cogdill’s comments covered a wide rages of topics.  He suggested in the last twenty years councils had planned effectively.  He said “Village I was planned responsibly.” I’m not a big proponent of urban limits or ballot box planning.” And “You don’t have to scratch a farmer very deep to find a developer.”

As Mayor Marsh later commented, Village I as originally designed was a marvel but by the time the council back then was on their eight change amendment it was no longer recognizable. It’s also understandable for these politicians to be resentful of ballot box measures.  It’s obvious the people of Modesto no longer trust their elected politicians to follow the will of their constituents  and because of past and current history who can blame them.

I encourage everyone to go online and listen to the council debates and see for themselves what is going on in the Modesto City Council. Here is the link to the city agenda and meeting archive. Click on the video of the week you want to see and while it’s loading you can choose the agenda item you want to watch discussed by clicking on it. The video will advance to approximate  location. http://ci.modesto.ca.us/ccl/agendas/

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment
30 Apr 2013

Modesto Bee Heavily Biased in Water Discussion Says Vance Kennedy

By Vance Kennedy

The Chamber of Commerce and developers want to make the San Joaquin Valley another Santa Clara Valley.  It will be

California's San Joaquin Valley and Central Va...

California’s San Joaquin Valley and Central Valley. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

a food disaster for the nation.

MID Talk – The Modesto Bee is heavily biased in discussing the so-called subsidy of farmers by electric rate payers.  There has been extensive coverage of the subject.  There has been essentially no effort made to ask how the farmers are subsidizing the rate payers in return.  I have already mentioned the groundwater recharge that flood irrigating farmers do for the city’s benefit.  That has been largely ignored.  There are many other benefits that need to be emphasized, but have not been.  These include the cleansing of dust particles from the air by vegetation, which is known to occur, but has not been extensively studied in the community.  Another is the fact that agriculture is the main source of outside money for our economy.  The Bee would do well to look for the many pluses that farmers and the irrigation system bring to the Valley and give them equal coverage.

Subsidizing is not necessarily a dirty word.  The federal and state governments do it all the time, when they feel that it is best for the overall community.  The Modesto Bee is apparently pushing to greatly increase farmer’s water rates.  What will that do to the overall community?  I’m told that the dairy farmers are struggling to survive and that many of them across the state are going into bankruptcy.  In Stanislaus County, in the last two years, 61 dairies have gone bankrupt.  In 2 months, 10 dairies,  3 more now ready to go bankrupt.  20 more expected this year.  207 dairies have now gone bankrupt in Stanislaus County.

Water in large quantities is absolutely required to operate a dairy.  Has the Been inquired about the economic impact on the county of water rates were tripled, for example?  Could the job losses far exceed the subsidy that the Bee is so fond of emphasizing?  If it were a responsible organization, it would look into the effect of what they are pushing so hard.

Now, I don’t question that there is a real need to issue more long-term MID bonds while bond interest rates are at an all time low.  When the government prints lots of money, inflation is a usual result, delayed for a varying length of time.  With inflation, prices go up along with interest rates.  Such bonds have a guaranteed source of payoff and that means additional income will be needed.  City residents should realize that only a very small fraction of their water charges is due to the wholesale price of water that the city and the farmers pay.  By far, most of the water charge to city residents is due to treatment and distribution charges.  Even so, I think that the cost to city residents is on the order of 2/10ths of a penny per gallon.  That is guaranteed pure and available in large quantities at the touch of a faucet.  What a deal!  Half of that water is there now because farmers pushed for the Don Pedro dam many years ago.  It raises a familiar old question – “What have you done for me lately?”

Before we price many farmers out of business with water charges, lets have an independent group look at all of the factors that contribute to the community’s welfare.  Some farmers can easily pay considerably more for water.  Others will be wiped out.  What does the community want and what is reasonable for the long-term good of the city residents and businesses, who constitute the over-whelming users of electricity?  It is a very complicated question which must not be ignored.

In Stanislaus County in the last two years 61 dairies have gone bankrupt.     In the last two months 10 dairies went bankrupt, 3  more are on the brink, 20 more are expected this year.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              We have only 207 dairies left in the county.

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment
30 Apr 2013

MID Ratepayer Wants Safe and Tasty Local Produce and is Willing to Pay for It

By Joan Rutachow

I would to thank Vance Kennedy for his comments this morning.  I would like to comment on an article by Glen Wild that

Agriculture

Agriculture (Photo credit: thegreenpages)

appeared in the Modesto Bee on Sunday, April 21st –

Item #5 – “Those urban residents, the vast majority of our district customers, have their power bills inflated so that the MID irrigators do not have to pay for the cost of service.  It is estimated to amount to at least 3% of their power bill”.

Speaking for myself, a private citizen, I am happy to pay 3% of my MID bill for the irrigators!  Our irrigators raise livestock, grow hay and food crops.  They wake up in the middle of the night to irrigate.  They supply my food and the food for hundreds of thousands of people.  A 3% fee is a good investment!  3% of a $50 MID bill is $1.50; 3% of a $100 MID bill is $3.00, 3% of a $150 MID bill is $4.50.  3% is a small price to pay for all of the services our farmers provide.

Let us not forget that the farmers  subsidize the ratepayers.  Their water recharges the aquifer and agricultural products bring millions of dollars to our district.  Again, 3% of my MID bill is money well spent!

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment
29 Apr 2013

Monday Night 6 PM “On Watch” with Special Guest Supervisor Jim DeMartini

I’m guest hosting Athens Abell’s cable TV show “On Watch”  and Supervisor Jim DeMartini will be my guest.  The show is

Cable tv

Cable tv (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

on KBSV-DT  Comcast channel  15 and can be found on any cable company in the Central Valley.

You can watch it on the internet at: http://www.betnahrain.org/KBSV/kbsv.htm it’s also on 89.5 FM

You’re welcome to send any questions you have to me here as comments to this article until 5 PM tonight.

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment
29 Apr 2013
1 Comment

Mayor Marsh to Host Town Hall Meeting at Gregori High

Saturday May 4 at 1:00 PM – Mayor’s Town Hall Meeting 

Money

Money (Photo credit: 401(K) 2013)


Gregori High School, 3701 Pirrone Road

 

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , ,
25 Apr 2013
1 Comment

Last Night’s Local Agency Formation Commission Meeting (LAFCO)

By Emerson Drake

Last night’s LAFCO was sparsely attended, short and bitter sweet.  All of the  Commission Members were in attendance.

English: This map shows the incorporated and u...

English: This map shows the incorporated and unincorporated areas in Stanislaus County, California, highlighting Modesto in red. It was created with a custom script with US Census Bureau data and modified with Inkscape. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

They started out by discussing the letter from the Modesto Chamber of Commerce where the Chamber “mistakenly” used the official Modesto logo.  The letter had blasted LAFCO for conducting interviews out of the public’s eye. The letter’s last paragraph complained about the direction LAFCO has been going in favor (Ag Mitigation) hence my  concern about the possible confusion of using Modesto’s official logo.  It’s the way LAFCO has been doing business for a long time and it’s similar to the way the City and County interview potential Committee members.  The Board as a whole Chairman O’Brien and Supervisor Jim DeMartini took exception to the Chambers expressed opinions.

Chairman Bill O’Brien and Vice Chair Amy Bublak met and interviewed the four finalists before the meeting started (okay technically they interviewed Brad Hawn by phone) and they were Ron Freitas, John Mier, Annabel Gammon, and Brad Hawn.  Commissioner Mayor Charlie Goeken made the nominations for both Public member and Alternate public member.  Successful candidates were required to receive a vote from both a city and a county member.

After each nomination a vote was taken.  Brad Hawn, former Modesto City Councilman and a member of the Chamber’s Board of Directors was chosen for public member and Annabel Gammon was chose as the alternate. Ms. Gammon’s vote was unanimous and  Commissioner DeMartini voted against Brad Hawn.

It was somewhat interesting to see Steve Madison builder, former BIA Director, and Chamber of Commerce member not only attending but speaking in support of the Chamber.  Sitting directly  behind me was  land use attorney and who is also sometimes portrayed as political kingmaker and Chamber campaign fund facilitator  George Petrulakis.  While George  and Steve were sitting separately,  they  left huddled in conversation together very soon after Brad Hawn who is also on the Modesto Chamber of Commerce’s Board of Directors nomination.

Did the letter have the desired effect and help Hawn get the position?  I couldn’t say.  But I do know the past practice with LAFCO is to take the alternate public member who has been observing and participating as necessary and bringing them onto the Board as the Public member. Ron Freitas would have been my first choice for the position of Public member but the public doesn’t get to vote and since he had already served a term as Alternate he wasn’t eligible for the position. The public and the candidates were given the opportunity to speak in behalf of themselves or any of the candidates but since Commissioner Goeken wasn’t part of the interviewing process and was the one making the nominations I don’t believe any input at that point would make a difference.

So does Brad Hawn being chosen place Ag Mitigation in jeopardy? I spoke to several of the Commission members after the meeting and they assured me changing their Ag mitigation policy was a long and arduous process and that particular conversation wasn’t even on the distant horizon.

Now the flip side.

We all know the Modesto Chamber of Commerce has been actively planning and has started using Modesto’s General Plan Amendment process to campaign to completely destroy not only Ag land preservation but also Ag Mitigation utilizing the current election cycle as a tool and that Steve Madison and George Petrulakis were there for a reason last night.

.Lobbyists, real estate agents, and home builders fill their action committees and with no direct concerted opposition mounted by the citizens of Modesto I’m afraid there are dark times ahead.

I’m looking forward to next Monday’s “On Watch With Athens Abell”  on local cable television KBSV 6:00 PM Comcast 15 also on streaming video.  I’ll be the guest hosting  and  talking with  Stanislaus County Board member and LAFCO Commissioner Jim DeMartini.

Now that’s one conversation  you won’t want to miss.

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , ,
24 Apr 2013

What’s on America’s Mind Wednesday at 7:30 PM Special Starting Time

Salida residents please call the show tonight to tell us about the SalidaMAC meeting.

Radio RED 104.9 FM

Radio RED 104.9 FM (Photo credit: Mahdi Ayat.)

Topics include last night’s SalidaMAC meeting, how special interests are buying our city councilmen and women and how it effects YOU, how lower campaign donation limits protect our voice in the political process, Tonight’s LAFCO meeting and who was chosen to represent us, MID and the ongoing water issues,  Women at Dartmouth College who we protesting the “rape culture” are receiving rape and death threats so some classes are being canceled, these and more so tune in at 7:30 PM Wednesday and find out the things you really  need to know.

 

 

This link is good live or from our archives http://www.blogtalkradio.com/centralvalleyhornet/2013/04/25/whats-on-americas-mind-with-emerson-drake

The call in number is (347)215-9414

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment
22 Apr 2013
1 Comment

The Bottom LIne…

I was hoping someone else would notice but …Judy Sly never says what I said was wrong about Tom Van Groningen and his

News of the day.

News of the day. (Photo credit: RussellReno)

negative effect on MID.  What she said was she didn’t like the fact it was  me who  said it. That makes it a petty hit piece  by anyone’s definition.

I believe we are now witnessing the anticlimax of her journalistic career.

If I made the powers that be, and our local lobbyists and their organizations  this upset,  I must be doing something right.

See everyone at the MID meeting.

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , ,

Post Navigation

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →