Debate Tuesday on Palo Alto's November ballot measures | October 7, 2011 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |

Palo Alto Weekly

News - October 7, 2011

Debate Tuesday on Palo Alto's November ballot measures

Measure D and E supporters, opponents will speak at City Hall

The two city ballot measures that Palo Alto voters will decide upon in the Nov. 8 election will be the subject of a forum Tuesday (Oct. 11) sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Palo Alto.

This story contains 211 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe

— Palo Alto Weekly staff


Like this comment
Posted by Barbara
a resident of University South
on Oct 7, 2011 at 9:01 am

Thanks to the LWV for sponsoring this discussion.

Will it be broadcast or cablecast through the Media Center?

Like this comment
Posted by Becky Sanders
a resident of Ventura
on Oct 7, 2011 at 11:00 am

The debate will be broadcast LIVE from 7-9:30 on Comcast Channel 27. And it will also be streaming from our website at the same time. We plan to record it and play it back throughout the election season. Oh and it you can view on AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 which is a portal to all the access stations in the Bay Area and then you find Palo Alto Channel 27! Okay! And then call the Media Center if you need more information - 494-8686.

Like this comment
Posted by Diogenes
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Oct 7, 2011 at 2:20 pm

PUBLIC CHALLENGE TO THE YES ON E SPEAKERS: (1) Name the location of one plant in the entire world that uses Dry Anaerobic Digestion to process wet sewage sludge (biomass in the Feasibility Report). Name one, just one. (2) If you cannot name one such plant, how do you justify using Case1a data from the Feasibility Report, which requires Dry AD to process biomass, in your arguments? (3) Explain how the Feasibility Report arrived at its Case 1a data when there is no existing plant anywhere in the world on which to base its figures. Does that not mean that Case 1a and you own arguments for Measure E are based solely guesswork? (4) How do we know that Dry AD can even succeed in processing wet biomass, regardless of the cost? (5) How does the Feasibility Report's Case 1a data differ from a study that I intend to do about turning lead into gold? I know it has never been done, but neither has using Dry AD to process wet biomass. I plan make my best good faith estimates and then add a 60% contingency factor, which is twice the 30% contingency the Consultant used in arriving at his Case 1a data, and i intend to put in a footnote warning that my data is based on "incomplete information". How is my intended study different from Case 1a?

Like this comment
Posted by John Edwards
a resident of Midtown
on Oct 7, 2011 at 2:25 pm

The debate on oposing Measure E has too speakers, Emily Renzel and Shani Kleinhaus, both of whom have done their homework to expose the negative impact of undedicating the parkland and the cost to taxpayer if measure E is passed.
Gain the information to vote no on Measure E!!
Attend or listen to video when available.

Beware of politians that want to waste your money.

Like this comment
Posted by Diognes
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Oct 8, 2011 at 7:28 am

It has been over sixteen hours since I posted my PUBLIC CHALLENGE TO THE YES ON E SPEAKERS re their reliance on guesstimate data in the Feasibility Report for their campaign. They have said not one word in response, and if they finally say something now, judge for yourself if it is not Smoke and Mirrors. I renew my questions. Where are the Yes on E answers? Real answers to my questions? You want the City to build a plant in the Baylands Park costing over $100M based on guesstimates from an overly friendly Department of Public Works and a Consultant, whose business depends on such plants and who presents his guesses as reliable data? Speak.

Like this comment
Posted by Diogenes
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Oct 8, 2011 at 9:24 pm

29 hours since I posted my PUBLIC CHALLENGE TO THE YES ON E SPEAKERS above on this blog and not a peep from them. They cannot answer the five questions/challenges that I put to them, because they do not have an answer. That should tell the public all it needs to know. Everyone should go to Tuesday night's debate in the City Council Chambers to see what the Measure E proponents say there about my questions. They will try to pretend the questions were never asked. Do not let them get away with it. ALL OF THE MEASURE E DATA IS PHONY, AS PHONY AS MY PREDICTING THAT I CAN TURN LEAD INTO GOLD!!!

Like this comment
Posted by Mark Weiss
a resident of Barron Park
on Oct 11, 2011 at 11:33 am

I am No on E -- "E" equals "expensive", and not, in my opinion an example of deep ecology -- but I want to caution people from labeling it as a government spending concept. It is a citizens' initiative. Even the official "No on E" one-sheet references "the government" when it should reference "community members." I was surprised to see what I think of as right wing rhetoric in the No on E platform.

Government is a "we" not a "they" or a "them". We self-govern, etc.