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.
If Measure D were to pass, the city would no longer be required to send its disputes with public-safety unions to a panel of arbitrators.
If Measure E were to pass, 10 acres of Byxbee Park in the Palo Alto Baylands would be undedicated for the purpose of potentially building a composting facility.
Speakers for and against each ballot measure will make a case for their position.
Those advocating for Measure D will be City Council members Karen Holman and Greg Scharff. City Councilwoman Gail Price and another representative, to be announced, will speak on the opposing side.
Speakers in favor of Measure E will be former Mayor Peter Drekmeier and Walt Hays. Opposing the measure are former Councilwoman Emily Renzel and Shani Kleinhaus.
The forum will be held in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Ave., from 7 to 9:30 p.m.
The forum is co-sponsored by the Palo Alto Weekly, Palo Alto Online and Midpeninsula Community Media Center. Other co-sponsors include Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, Palo Alto branch of AAUW and Avenidas Senior Center.
By Palo Alto Weekly staff
By Palo Alto Weekly staff
By Palo Alto Weekly staff
Thanks to the LWV for sponsoring this discussion.
Will it be broadcast or cablecast through the Media Center?
The debate will be broadcast LIVE from 7-9:30 on Comcast Channel 27. And it will also be streaming from our website http://www.midpenmedia.org/stream 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.
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?
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.
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.
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!!!
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.