The proposition provides for a totally novel budget setting procedure
for the ethics commision. The commision in conference with the ciity
comptroller sets a bbudget based on comparisons with other cities. So
we will let the corruption levels in other cities decide our ethics
commisins budget. They get to decide appropriate comparisons. There is
no mention of what items can be in the budget, so absent a
prohibition, it seems to me they can startpaying salaries or benies or
who knows what kind of expenses at any time. Would someone with better
vision than I please check the rest of the budget commision law to see
if there is any prohobition on remuneration tothe commisioners or
emplayees budgeted by the commision. The Mayor an elected official, if
prohibited from his normal roles in budget setting and review. And so
Jawg is correct, the budget and therfore potentially the salry of the
commisioners is set by the commision itself, with no veto power by the
elected mayor or the comptroller. Only the Board of Sups can then
adjust the budget or approve it. Nevertheless the budget originates
from the ethics commision, not the elected executive. True, the
supervisors can raise or lower the budget presented by the commision,
however the commision is very much in the position to intimidate the
board. The set up gives the commision tremendous intimidation power
over the mayor and is missing a normal and customary check on it's
potential power. Therefore the arguement is correct in it's assertion
and does not make a factual error. The summary, the actual text and
Jawg's srguements are all in agreement. The board st's it's own
budget. Jawg never claims the budget is not subject to review by the
Supervisors.
And so the important question is will fighting this advance Liberty.
Which comes down to the question, will fighting this even appear on
the radar screen, if it does appear on the radar screen, will it
attract any support from San Franciscans or will it be a win for the
opponents, and will it cost us mor than we can win. What would
Machiavelli do.
So who can call some media types at the chronicle ,examiner, tv, talk
radio, etc. and feel them out.
And is it OK and do we have time for me to call Pacific legal
foundation to see if we can get some support.
Mike Denny, what about your connected lawyer friend. What about the
What about the Republicans, who can call some republican allies.
I think if we show some backbone here we begin to be taken seriously.
I so not think Jawg's facts are weong. The facts are there in the
summary for all to see. This ammendment certainly makes the ethics
commision the board of sups own personal playground. And now they want
to stop even the paid dissent after reserving the unpaid dissent for
one of thier own.
I think we can do some damage here to the corrupt status quo, and I
think the atmosphere is ripe for it. This is politics babby,lets did
in and enjoy it. They fired the first round. I awy we give them no
quarter. Help with the above questions is greatly appreciated,
especially as the SOBs don't publish the charter on the internet, but
hide it witha crony legal publisher.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/VpgUKB/pzNLAA/cUmLAA/69cplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpsf-activists/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-activists-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/