Archive | July, 2026

Prop 39, the Voter ID initiative: is AG Bonta writing things in a way that that align with his own political interests?

31 Jul

Remember California Prop 6 –  “the Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative”? That measure, on the 2018 ballot, would have repealed fuel tax increases and vehicle fees that were enacted in 2017, including the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (RRAA) and required voter approval (via ballot propositions) for the California State Legislature to impose, increase, or extend fuel taxes or vehicle fees in the future. (Ballotpedia).

We know that California has the highest gas prices in the country because California has the highest state taxes on gas. The RRAA was enacted by the legislature, not the voters. Prop 6 was an opportunity to give the taxpayers more say in raising the tax. It failed with 43% of the vote. Was the election fair? Even before the election, critics had already started talking about, in Cal Matters contributor Dan Walters’ words, “a hostile official ballot title from Attorney General Xavier Becerra’s office.“

California Assembly member Carl DeMaio cried foul at the time. Many folks I spoke to were also outraged, including the tow truck driver that brought us home when our truck broke down on US 395 one hot July afternoon. People get pissed off when gas gets expensive, it drives up everything in the economy. Our tow driver said he felt the measure had been titled and written in a way that confused people, and they might vote NO when they really wanted to vote yes. He predicted the measure would fail.

Walters confirmed the deception. “Instead of describing it as a repeal of gas taxes, the official title is ‘Eliminates certain road repair and transportation funding. Requires certain fuel taxes and vehicle fees to be approved by the electorate.’”

Walters actually disclosed that he was in favor of the gas tax as it was, but still gave this impartial assessment. “Although Democrats were less likely than Republicans to vote for Proposition 6, the gap wasn’t as wide as one might have expected. The rather slanted title, which didn’t say it was a repeal, probably had something to do with it.”

Now Carl DeMaio has come back with Prop 39, the Voter ID initiative.

According to the Los Angeles Times, “Prop 39 would require voters to present government-issued identification, such as a state driver’s license, every time they vote in person. Voters who use mail-in ballots — by far the most popular method of voting in California — would be required to write a four-digit number, essentially a PIN, on their ballot envelopes. The PIN would come from ID such as a driver’s license or could be generated from the county.”

The measure also requires that the secretary of state and county elections officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists, verify citizenship, and report annually the percentage of each county’s voter roll that have been citizenship-verified.“

I don’t see anything unreasonable here. We have to present a valid ID for so many things we do. My dog has to have a license, and we have to be ready to present it. I think the current voter registration laws in California are way too lax.

Under current law, Californians are required to provide identification when registering to vote and must swear under penalty of perjury, a felony, that they are eligible to vote and are U.S. citizens. The loop hole here is that you don’t have to present proof of citizenship when you get your California driver’s license, and then the county is just taking your word for it on your voter registration? Give me a break.

They are not required to show or provide identification when casting a ballot in person or by mail. So, anybody could be voting in your name, again, give me a break.

You’d expect the Democrats to push back on this measure. Several Democratic legislators have joined together to sue the proponents over “false statements” in their Argument In Favor. But a bigger issue, “A group led by California Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) allege in a 10-page lawsuit filed in Sacramento Superior Court that Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta violated election laws that require the “impartial” labeling of a measure’s purpose.“

DeMaio called it “a false title claiming it prohibits citizens from voting.”

The original language said the measure “establishes additional voters identification and citizenship verification requirements.”

“This measure would amend the California Constitution to further require that voters present government-issued identification at the polls or the last four digits of a government-issued identification number when voting by mail; the State provide voter identification cards on request; and elections officials annually report percentage of each county’s voters whose citizenship they have verified.”

According to the LA Times, “The summary language now states that the measure: ‘Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.‘”

“Invalidates mail ballots that do not have last four digits of designated government-issued identification number written on envelope. Prohibits in-person voting without presenting government-issued identification.”

Read the full article, including details of the suit against the proponents, here

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-07-28/voter-id-backers-sue-california-attorney-general-over-ballot-description

Like UCLA law professor Rick Hasen says,  “it’s common practice for the AG to write things in ways that that align with the political interests of the Attorney General.”

Frankly, I think the Democrats are afraid if they can’t cheat they can’t win. Silly Rabbits.

Tags: ,

Yes, the city manager form of government is a win-win for everybody but the taxpayers!

14 Jul

Leave it to Scott Rushing to put it in adult language! Thanks Scott!

A City Manager form of administration is popular among Chico City Council members because it provides them with plausible deniability. When things go wrong, they can fire the manager at will. When things go well, the council can take credit for overseeing the City Manager, even though that oversight is illusory.

Yes, the city manager form of administration is just a win-win for everybody but the taxpayers. Council members are indemnified, and so are city employees. Yes, things go wrong, but very seldom does anybody get fired or go to jail. For example, Mark Orme, wow, that guy really screwed our pooch. I’ll say, he lied about population figures and he used COVID as an excuse to cut the public out of many important conversations. I can’t remember exactly what he did to piss off his adoring council, but even Sean Morgan, who used to call Orme “Skipper” so affectionately, turned on him like a viper. Here’s what he said about Orme’s “management style” when he voted to hire Sorensen.

“I think that some of the decision-making methods [in city administration] were handled loosely and people were given reigns that shouldn’t have been given reigns.” That made me laugh – he acted as though he and the rest of council were out to lunch while all this was going on.

So they pressured Orme out, because they knew it would be a lot more expensive to fire the little asshole, and hard to prove anything without turning the monkey gun right into their own faces.

Where’s that little asshole today? He’s in some nasty town, just about 2 hours west of Slab City, making over $250,000/year, base salary.

Yes, their “control” over our town is “illusory”. We’re sitting here like Mulder and Scully, in that episode about the underground fungus. “They treat us like mushrooms, they keep us in the dark and feed us bullshit…” If we allow them to hire this woman from Vallejo, we’re going back into the cavern.

Chico councilmembers want to be popular and pontificate at public meetings; after all, they are politicians.

That reminds me of a remark Bryce Goldstein made on her Facebook, rationalizing her decision to hire the woman. Talk about a pontificator – because the Vallejo woman “worked for The Tribe...” She also thought “settling” a lawsuit is the end of it. I’d have to ask her, what does she know about the lawsuits brought against this woman and the city of Vallejo? Does Ms. Goldstein think that paying somebody to shut up about a crime is “settling”? How much did those lawsuits cost the taxpayers? Including in terms of deferred maintenance? When I looked further into Vallejo’s finances, I see they recently went about cutting 20% of their staff, saying their pension deficit was their chief financial concern.

Thanks for keeping the conversation going Scott, hope to hear from you soon.

Tags: ,

Are the voters intelligent enough to elect anybody?

10 Jul

I won’t lie – I been trying my best to ignore what’s been going on in Chico. I been doing what some people have been suggesting for years – I been minding my own fucking business. And that has been working out for me somewhat – my husband and I have got our rentals buttoned up and easier to manage, we’ve cut utility bills, we’ve even made enough room in our budget for a little tomato patch. No more $8 tomatoes, we can eat BLT’s every night if we want. I got three jars of salsa sitting in the fridge right now, I feel like the queen of England. I blew out my tomato press, and have a new one on the way.

Here’s the thing – you turn your back on a rotten apple and it just gets rottener and rottener. Oh-my-god, they hired the new city manager out of Vallejo! When I heard that news, I thought of my old cousin, bless his soul – he was on the Vallejo City Council in the 1960’s. He told me, that was when Vallejo and cities all over California made a vital mistake – they gave their city managers “executive powers”.

“A city manager serves as the chief administrative and executive officer of a municipality, operating under a council-manager form of government. Their executive powers focus entirely on managing daily operations and implementing policy, explicitly separating administrative duties from the political and legislative role of the mayor and city council.”

Yes, this reduced our city council to the position of fist puppets, essentially cheer leaders. So why bother having a city council? Because that makes “the people” feel like they are still somewhat in charge. Meanwhile, the city manager does essentially what he wants, with a rubber stamp from weak ignorant council members who think they could not possible run a city without the help of this vested, completely indemnified asshole.

What kind of crack was I smoking when I recently said I would support Kasey Reynolds? Just because I don’t like her challenger, who has made it clear she is coming to the chair with an agenda of her own? I’m starting to think we should just eliminate council and go straight to electing our city staffers.

Are the voters intelligent enough to do that? If you have an opinion on that question, chime in. I’m not interested in hearing your opinion of me or posting advertisements for your business.