Measure A goes down and Drekmeier whines
Original post made by No on A on Nov 10, 2006
maybe it had more to do with Drekmeier no compromise style--it's either his way or the highway. I know many people that voted against the measure just because Drekmeier was behind it.
He may have many people fooled with his "I am a champion of the environment" shtick, but many of us have seen through his self-serving hypocrisy and know that the emporer has no clothes.
If I were him, i would spend the time taking down all those "Yes on A" signs plastered all over town instead of whining.
on Nov 10, 2006 at 4:35 pm
Perhaps enough people discovered that the "Green Belt Alliance" is a group of developers and their attorneys who want to build super high rise, high density in the cities of Silicon Valley and would like to control all development in the cities. This measure had nothing to do with the enviroment and everything to do with justifying super-high-density development(s).
on Nov 13, 2006 at 11:15 am
There seems to be a lot of confusion in the above two postings. The first post reads more like a malicious, personal attack than any kind of solid, well-reasoned political argument. The second poster is clearly misguided. Measure A has nothing to do with "controlling all development in the cities" -- or any, as far as I can tell. (Is the second poster even talking about Measure A?!? I wouldn't think so if it weren't for his/her signature.) Measure A focuses on regulating development in rural, hillside areas and open spaces, in an attempt to preserve open space and reduce sprawl -- which is getting to be a huge problem in SC county if you look around.
on Nov 13, 2006 at 12:07 pm
Joanna--I see no confusion in my original postings. Obviously my posting is not a "malicious, personal attack" otherwise the ditors of this forum would have deleted portions--regardless it is my opinion of Drekmeier, based on his comments to the papers post-election and his previous history of "environmental" action.
Measure A was an attempt by "environmentalists" to control/grab private property. the measure itself was overlong and tedious--causing many people to wonder why it took 13+ pages to makes it's case. Also, as I stated Drekmeier has a no-compromise style, which turned many people off.
Fortunately good sense won out and the measure went down to defeat.
BTW, I still see, today, Yes on A signs remaining on public property.