To Fix Murrieta.
It would be good to hear some commentary or bios from candidates who will be running in May’s recall election. This includes those who are defending their places on the council, McAllister, Seyarto, and VanHaaster. Look at this blog in the coming months for candidate’s plans to fix Murrieta.
posted by J. L. Kunkle at
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
8 Comments:
The CEQA could possibly be a good starting point in the impending major "course correction" in Murrieta and it is the first inkling of a solid plan that I have heard being formed by any replacement candidate to date. Do not misconstrue this comment as a backing of Ms. Knight, but May is coming up fast and if these candidates don't start coming up with solutions that they can implement when they get into office, then we might as well maintain status quo.
By
J. L. Kunkle, at Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:45:00 AM
Key phrase being "solutions that can be implemented". So far recall proponents and candidates have yet to publish solutions. Removal is not a solution, if it is explain in deail how.
By
Anonymous, at Saturday, January 29, 2005 8:44:00 PM
I, too, have yet to see any solutions offered. It seems that the recall is simply a "vote for me, I'm not 'them'" action.
As I recall, John Kerry didn't have much luck with a similar campaign and he didn't cost the citizens of Murrieta $80,000 which the City can ill-afford.
Murrieta resident since 1993
By
Anonymous, at Sunday, February 06, 2005 4:55:00 PM
Stay Tuned. The best is yet to come.
By
Anonymous, at Sunday, February 06, 2005 10:53:00 PM
It's a pity that this city council has made a recall the only way in which Murrieta citizens (some of them moved here before 1993) to communicate their dissatisfaction with the direction Murrieta is being sent. If you need to find someone at fault for the $80,000 price tag, try looking at 20% of the population of this town.
By
J. L. Kunkle, at Monday, February 07, 2005 12:47:00 PM
I do not understand your comment about 20% of the population being at fault for the $80,000 cost of the recall. Can you explain?
Murrieta resident since 1993
By
Anonymous, at Friday, February 11, 2005 4:40:00 PM
Excuse me if I was vague. The 20% represents 20% of the population that was angered at the city council enough to sign petitions for the recall of councilmembers Seyarto, Vanhaaster, and Mcallister. It means this $80,000 of taxpayer funds was alloted to conduct this recall at the bequest of over 6,000 taxpaying Murrieta residents. It is meant to indicate that this city council has done a very poor job to Murrieta and that The citizens who were most hurt by city council policies were left with no other alternative than recall. It takes commitment to gather that many signatures. Why would they do this if they could just go to a council meeting and state their views?
By
J. L. Kunkle, at Wednesday, February 16, 2005 6:22:00 PM
I can excuse you being vague but that's the least of your problems. Once again, let's do the math. 6,000 people signed the petition and you're saying that represents 20% of the population? You would be correct, sir, if this was 1990 and the population was 30,000. Unfortunately for you, today the population is @84,000 so your 6,000 represents about 7%. That's still not an insignificant number but it's about twice as many as even managed to get off their ass and vote last time around.
Maybe if you can get Ed, Barbara and Hope out there lying thru their teeth in front of Ralph's again for weeks, you might have a chance, especially if you can get the law changed to allow voting at Stater Bro's. However, if you're counting on those fabrications to stand up another 45 days and then actually motivate those same people to come out and vote you may as well save yourself the aggravation and pack it in now.
By
Anonymous, at Monday, March 14, 2005 3:11:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home