DeMaio to Hold “Signature Storms” in Support of Pension Reform Ballot Measure

Carl DeMaio Undesignated 13 Comments

Share

Mayoral candidate Carl DeMaio will spend every weekend at local San Diego stores collecting signatures for the Comprehensive Pension Reform Ballot Measure until the required 95,000 signatures from San Diego voters are collected, his campaign announced today.

The announcement comes on the heels of increasing efforts by local government labor unions to “block” signature collection efforts through a well-funded and aggressive campaign of intimidation and misinformation.

“I am not waiting to be Mayor to get things done – and reforming unsustainable and indefensible pension payouts for city employees is my top priority,” noted DeMaio in explaining the significant investment of his personal time in collecting signatures.

Last week DeMaio spent a combined 14 hours at stores in Rancho Penasquitos and Scripps Ranch – collecting more than 800 signatures for the measure.

This weekend, DeMaio will be at stores serving the communities of Tierrasanta, Allied Gardens, Navajo, San Carlos, and Grantville. (See information below)

“We cannot allow the government labor unions to block pension reform – and I’m prepared to do everything I possibly can to ensure that San Diegans have the right to vote on reforming the pension system in this upcoming city election,” DeMaio concluded.

DeMaio co-authored the Pension Reform Ballot Measure and is part of a broad-based coalition of taxpayer, business, and neighborhood groups working collaboratively to qualify and pass the measure.

MEET UP WITH DEMAIO:
Saturday 1pm-5pm: Tierrasanta Albertsons, 10633 Tierrasanta Blvd. 92124

Sunday 9am-6pm: Navajo Keils Foods Shopping Center, 7403 Jackson Drive SD 92119

Share

Comments 13

  1. Petition Workers for San Diego’s DeMaio Seek La Mesans’ Signatures
    “Not many people know La Mesa is [within] San Diego city,” said Kenneth Owen, manning one of two booths in front of the Albertson’s on Fletcher Parkway.
    By Ken Stone for La Mesa Patch, August 1st.

    Oops.
    ____

    Could you please provide the link when citing other online sources? Thanks. – Admin …
    http://lamesa.patch.com/articles/petition-worker-for-san-diegos-demaio-seeks-la-mesans-signatures

  2. Actually, this practice of collecting sigs for petitions in neighboring jurisdictions is not uncommon and, PROPERLY DONE, is not a problem.

    I was at the Poway Walmart last week, and they were doing the same thing. The “come on” is the state “Amazon sales tax,” but they bring up the SD city petition as well WHEN A PERSON IS AN SD CITY RESIDENT. Quite a few of the Walmart customers there were SD city residents.

    I talked with the Poway petitioner, who knew his stuff on the props. He was doing it right (I looked at the addresses on the SD city petition). Sounds like the same sometimes/often is not the case in La Mesa.

    If petitioners in La Mesa are mindlessly collecting sigs for the SD city petition, it is only a minor problem. After the error rate debacle on previous recent petition efforts, the petition management carefully checks both the validity AND THE DUPLICATION of signatures. It wastes some time for the excessive verifications, and the petitioner is penalized for excessive bad sigs — paid less per sig. A high validity rate has the opposite incentive bonus, as I understand it.

    It’s a bit complicated for petitioners as there are currently at least 5 petitions circulating in the area, and a couple more to come. And, as we all know too well, democracy is messy. But to have no citizen recourse to our California politicos passing all the laws is an invitation to (a bigger) disaster.

  3. Unfortunately, identity theft has become more prevalent as the petition process has grown. Just another avenue to steal someone’s information.

    One has to be very careful and read what you sign and ask questions and figure out which petitions are bogus and misleading. Hard to do while rushing in or out of an establishment.

  4. Identity thieves look for (1) Dates of Birth (2) Social Security
    numbers, and (3) Bank account and Credit card numbers.
    That’s where the Money is.

    NONE of these items are revealed on a voter petition !

    The names & addresses which petitions do include
    are already publicly available in places like phone
    books, city directories, and that whole Internet thing.

    It is pretty sad that much of today’s “Democratic”
    party is afraid of direct Democracy. Credit to Gov.
    Jerry Brown for proving some Democrats do not
    fear initiatives and referendums.

  5. JIm,
    I think that voters are just becoming aware of how the right to petition is becoming misused. Voters who love their democracy don’t “fear initiatives and referendums”. They fear being mislead by those who try to sign them up when they haven’t had the opportunity to read over the whole petition. I’ve heard my neighbors complain that what they thought they signed was just the opposite of what they would have signed. Maybe you could call it “bait and switch.”

    The whole petition set up doesn’t allow for complete reading of what the individual is being coaxed to sign….just given some encouraging and misleading explanations. Now my neighbors refuse to sign any petitions.

    Our right to petition our government has become perverted by a few less than scrupulous campaigns.

  6. If the unions were truly concerned with “name and address” identity theft, for years they would be clamoring for the banning of phone books and other readily available sources for such information.

    Of course, they care not a bit about identity theft. And it’s funny they never bought this up last year when they were paying for putting THEIR props on the ballot.

    But the union goons’ demonstration of desperate dishonesty is helpful for at least three reasons:

    1. It gives Gwendolyn a chance to trot out a liberal’s muddled thinking — or to, errrr, mislead (take your pick) — “identity theft has become more prevalent as the petition process has grown.” Correlation? Well, yeah — about as much as claiming that exploding government debt correlates with increasing identity theft. Causation? Nope. None. There are far superior sources for identity theft which include one or more of the critical pieces of info mentioned by Jim Sills.

    2. The unions are on the defensive. They are afraid to put tax increases on the ballot (via the petition process), because they know they’d lose big-time. Moreover, their union-owned politicians would be harmed, campaigning for these doomed tax measures.

    3. The unions are apoplectic when it comes to “paycheck protection,” banning PLA mandates, managed competition and public employee pension reform — all props currently circulating. There is no clearer evidence than this panicky and sordid union “identity theft” con job to tell us that we need to pass these propositions.

  7. Jim,

    I agree that this whole “identify theft angle” is completely bogus, but Democrats aren’t the only ones who are “afraid of direct Democracy.” Our Founding Fathers were as well.

  8. Gwendolyn says, “Identity theft has become more prevalent as the petition process has grown.” That falsely implies the two have something to do with each other. They do not. Identity theft isn’t about names and addresses, it is about access to a person’s money. It would be just as safe to say that “world populations have increased as cases of identity theft have gone up.” So? Two things happening at the same time don’t necessarily have a connection, except in the mindlessness of those regurgitating whatever radio ad they happened to hear that day which fits their particular bias.

  9. Greg,
    Unfortunately, you have missed my point. Perhaps I’m not being clear.My last comment had to do with how petition signing is set up that leads to misinformation to the voter.
    As I said before:
    They (voters) fear being mislead by those who try to sign them up when they haven’t had the opportunity to read over the whole petition. I’ve heard my neighbors complain that what they thought they signed was just the opposite of what they would have signed. Maybe you could call it “bait and switch.”
    This comes from comments made by some friends and neighbors who’ve in the past signed petitions and then discovered they’d signed something quite opposite from what they were told.

  10. Gwendolyn, you wrote, “Unfortunately, identity theft has become more prevalent as the petition process has grown. Just another avenue to steal someone’s information.” We understand completely. You are clearly saying that the petition process is being used for identity theft. Flat out BS.

    Your other issue, immediately above, is different altogether.

  11. Sports-minded readers will remember the “Washington Generals”, the basketball team which always played the Harlem Globetrotters, and ALWAYS lost to them.

    “Gwendolyn” serves the same purpose at SD Rostra.

    She is the foil who allows Rostrafarians to dunk and make 3-point baskets.

  12. Liberals in CA dislike the CA initiative process. Indeed, they just tried to enact an effective ban on the process, but the bill was vetoed by Gov. Brown. Mislabeled “progressives” dislike citizen-signed propositions, as such measures bypass the institution the Big Government advocates control throughout most of the state — elected officials. I doubt we’d be hearing the proposition bleating from them if such were not the case.

    Moreover, the feigned concern about improprieties in signature gathering ignores the benefits of a full vetting of the prop once it is on the ballot — especially compared to our chaotic state legislatures’ procedures.

    I recommend an informative out-of-print book by the late State Senator H.L. Richardson — “What Makes You Think We Read the Bills?”
    http://www.amazon.com/What-Makes-Think-Read-Bills/dp/0916054780

    Most of us know that in the closing days of each legislative session, our intrepid CA elected leaders vote on literally hundreds of ever-changing bills — some even changed surreptitiously. NO ONE knows what is in all — or likely even most — of the bills.

    Hearings are bypassed, and seldom do the legislators hear a full debate by both sides. As the session deadline approaches, logrolling too often becomes the primary criteria for passing each other’s bills. It’s not your high school civics class version of government. No-sir-re-bob!

    Compare that unfixable legislative morass with the proposition process. Once a prop is ballot qualified, it cannot be amended. Each side gets to present their ballot argument — and that argument is sent to all the registered voters in the state.

    Perhaps more important, we voters quickly can see (often just by the signers of the arguments) which groups are on which side — a wonderful shorthand way of making an informed decision as to how to vote. And we have months to make our decisions.

    Yes, the proposition system is awful. Capricious voters making sometimes ill-informed decisions.

    But, as Henny Youngman responded when asked — “How’s your wife?” — COMPARED TO WHAT?

    Bad as the initiative process is, the legislative process is worse. The real world of capitol shenanigans trumps the idealized stereotype of wise officials judiciously deciding our fate.

    BTW, one control we still need — a super-majority to pass ANY law. And probably higher than 2/3 majority. I doubt we’d miss most of the failed legislation — or propositions. But that’s just my super-minority opinion — no need to seriously consider my idea.

  13. Dear Greg and Jim,
    Nice try boys. I’m surprised you haven’t seen the reason yet and continue to claim it’s bogus identity theft claim.
    Something to consider the next time you sign a petition:
    Having a signature along with a person’s name and address is valuable to someone trying to steal information. Yes, you can find people’s information just about anywhere today, but to find the signature along with the name can be gold in unscrupulous hands.

    and,

    Dear Richard,
    You say “Liberals in CA dislike the CA initiative process.” So, why do you think Gov. Brown vetoed the bill?
    “Maybe they (the reformists) shouldn’t be surprised — the governor may have given a hint at his position last week when he mused, in response to a question, that the bill could make initiatives such as the one he is planning on taxes, more expensive.”

    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=94447#ixzz1U28y73S4

    The knife cuts both ways.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *