Desert Political Opinion

Committee to Support Measure J Campaign Financing Reports

Administrator — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:21:22 GMT

Palm Springs, California. Desert Fashion Plaza developer John Wessman's "Committee to Support Measure J" campaign raised and spent $259,817.45 in their massive effort to pass the November 8, 2011 Sales Tax Hike ballot issue in Palm Springs. According to their campaign financial reports, $200,436.35 in Cash Contributions and $59,381.10 in Nonmonetary Contributions were received during the period from September 1 through December 31, 2011.

As was to be expected John Wessman's $94,227.40 was the largest contribution to his campaign and its success will now make possible the City Council's plan to award $43 million for renovation of the plaza property. His $94,227.40 investment in exchange for $43 million in taxpayer funds definitely qualifies as a sweet deal.

Spencers Restaurant owner Harold Matzner was the second largest contributor with $75,156.75 in cash, free meals, and newspaper advertising costs, etc.

Almost 95% of the Cash and Nonmonitary contributions, totaling $246,708.50, came from eleven (11) contributors. The following is a listing of the eleven (11) large contribution sources.

        Wessman Holdings, LLC                                           $ 94,227.40
        Harold Matzner & Spencers Restaurant                            75,156.75
        The Penta Building Group                                              22,000.00
        Palm Springs Hospitality Association                            16,000.00
        GHA Enterprises                                                        7,500.00
        Lulu Restaurant                                                        6,276.43
        Buzz Factory                                                              6,166.66
        Issues Mobilization Political Action Committee             6,000.00
        G&M Construction                                                        5,000.00
        Legacy Palm Springs, LLC                                          5,000.00
        Palm Springs Art Museum                                            3,381.26

Total contributions received 9/1/2011 through 9/24/2011        $ 64,774.21
Total contributions received 9/25/2011 through 10/22/2011     $ 84,846.99
Total contributions received 10/23/2011 through 12/30/2011 $ 110,196.25

It should be noted the City of Palm Springs budgeted an additional $60,000 in campaign funds which were administered independent of the Wessman campaign by City Manager David Ready. Those funds appear to be exempt from the Fair Political Practices Commission reporting requirements. City Manager Ready insisted his campaign was "educational" though it lacked an unbiased, independent point of view and instead promoted the passage of Measure J.

Copies of the three Committee to Support Measure J Campaign Financing Reports may be viewed/downloaded using the links below.

Bond Shands
Palm Springs

Click here to view/download first filing period report through 09/24/2011.

Click here to view/download second filing period report through 10/22/2011.

Click here to view/download third filing period report through 12/30/2011.

The Desert Observer Website

Note: In order to control out-of-area SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here.

Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

A Palm Springs Day of Shame?

Desert Observer — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:54:51 GMT

Palm Springs, California. Will future Palm Springs residents recall Thursday, January 26, 2012, in their city as a Day of Shame and one associated with a time of political corruption?

On November 8th, 2011 Palm Springs Mayor Steve Pougnet, City Manager David Ready and developer John Wessman celebrated the victory of their Measure J campaign to hike the local sales tax rate and hand over millions of dollars to Mr. Wessman. That campaign, born of greed and self-interest, proved that vast amounts of money can buy an election. More than $250 thousand was spent on a propaganda smokescreen of unenforceable promises, half-truths, fake statistics and demonstrations that included massive amounts of television, radio, newspaper, billboards and other signs, along with email and direct mail advertising, all designed to bury the truth and convince voters that a meaningless term, "Downtown Revitalization", would somehow result from their support of the new tax. "Downtown Revitalization" is an undefined concept, without a time line, that fitted neatly into a propaganda campaign that saw more than $40 spent for each of the votes it received. In winning that election, Mssrs Pougnet, Wessman and Ready definitely had reason to celebrate, for they too proved "you can fool ... some of the people all of the time..."

The City Council has since authorized expenditure of $500 thousand from the General Fund to allow developer John Wessman to immediately begin demolition work on his Desert Fashion Plaza property. A well-funded propaganda campaign has been mounted seeking community support for the start of the demolition work on Thursday, January 26th. According to a City press release the following will be part of the spectacle.

"A champagne toast and free block party celebration sponsored by Wessman Development, featuring finger foods from LULU California Bistro, Kaiser Grille, Matchbox, Las Casuelas Terraza and dessert donated by local realtor Brady Sandahl is slated for about 2 p.m. in the parking lot behind the old Bank of America."

It may be many years before the financial outcome of the decision to renovate John Wessman's Desert Fashion Plaza will be known. Even then it may not be possible to determine whether and to what extent, if any, the downtown community benefited from taxpayer funding of the Wessman property's renovation. What is known is the City will never recover those taxpayer funds for they will be handed over without expectation of repayment or sharing of profits. That meaningless "Downtown Revitalization" phrase will continue to defy precise definition; and no time line will ever be attached to whatever process it pretends to represent. The waste of taxpayer funds will take its place in the history of local politics but no one will ever be penalized or held accountable for the failure of the renovation project to meet the promised expectations of the taxpaying community. Even so, over 42% of the voters realized Measure J was bad legislation and they voted against it. Their consolation may come with the passage of time when their no votes will surely be proved right.

When city officials join with affluent interests who pool their funds to buy an election intended for their benefit, does that qualify as political corruption? When city officials offer champagne toasts to celebrate their successful fleecing of the taxpaying community, does that not represent a Day of Shame? And is the undefined "Downtown Revitalization" phrase little different than the search for the proverbial "Fountain of Youth"? It is probably too early for these and similar questions to find definitive answers. It may require the passage of considerable time before full realization becomes apparent and voters learn the extent of how they were fooled into voting gifts of public funds for the sole benefit of private interests.

Thursday's demolition party spectacle should remind us that money buys elections and Measure J proved that to be true. The sight of the elections' beneficiaries orchestrating community champagne toasts memorializing their success should be remembered as a Day of Shame. And each time those beneficiaries of taxpayer funds take additional victory laps, such events should also be remembered as Days of Shame.

Bond Shands
Palm Springs

The Desert Observer Website

Note: In order to control out-of-area SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here.

Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

An Open Letter to Mayor Steve Pougnet

Desert Observer — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:38:03 GMT

Dear Steve,

As you probably know I don't attend City Council meetings. I also don't watch the televised proceedings. So was unaware of your comments during the last council session until I received calls from concerned citizens. One provided me with a copy of the video and I've now had an opportunity to view your statements. That portion of your remarks chastising those opposed to Measure J (including some PSNIC members and myself) were unworthy of comment by a city official in a public forum that provides no opportunity for rebuttal. In my opinion the comments you made during that meeting did yourself and our community a disservice.

With regard to the new Measure J Oversight Commission, I posted information on my Desert Observer website advising citizens about the application process. A similar posting was made to the Palms Springs Taxpayers Facebook page. And an email was sent to all on the Committee for No on Measure J distribution list. The information sent included copies or references to the City's publicity release about the Oversight Commission application process. No opinion was expressed in my postings for the intent was simply to publicize the application availability period. Surely you will agree I have been supportive of the new Measure J Oversight Commission application process.

With respect to appointments of actual members to the Measure J Oversight Commission, neither you nor any member of the city council are on record as favoring a community healing process. None have suggested that all segments of the community should be represented on the new commission. And none publicly called for participation in the commission application process by those who were opposed to Measure J. When Yes on Measure J campaign chairman Dave Baron stated his view that the new commission should include representation from those who opposed the measure, you were asked to commit to that suggestion during a radio broadcast interview. You declined to favor or otherwise make that commitment! The foregoing reasons left me, and others, concluding none of those publicly identified in opposition to Measure J would receive consideration for appointment to the new Oversight Commission. Nothing I have seen, heard or you have said has served to change my understanding with regard to this subject.

Bond Shands

Palm Springs

p.s. Thanks for the public invitation to attend Thursday's Desert Fashion Plaza demolition event that is being paid from Palm Springs city funds. I remain completely opposed to these gifts of funds to developer John Wessman and view Thursday's associated evidence of inappropriate city funds use as a Day of Shame. I do not plan to attend that event.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

Measure J Oversight Commission Applications

Desert Observer — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:33:11 GMT

Click Here to view or download copy of City Clerk Transmittal Letter.

Click Here to view or download copy of Commission Objectives document.

Click Here to view or download copy of Commission Application Form.

Click Here to view or download copy of Revitalization Plan Description.

Click Here to view or download copy of Revitalization Plan FAQ.

The Desert Observer Website

Note: In order to control out-of-area SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here.

Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

Election Day - Final Decision Day - Campaigning Ends Day

Desert Observer — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 17:49:26 GMT

Committee for No on Measure J
VoteNOonMeasureJ.org
Tuesday, November 8, 2011

News Release
For information:
Contact: Bond Shands
Email: pstaxpayer@gmail.com

Election Day - Final Decision Day - Campaigning Ends Day

The Committee for No on Measure J and the Palm Springs Taxpayers group have always viewed Measure J as a bad idea. It resulted from private negotiations involving city officials without input from voters or any of the City Boards or Commissions. The Measure's intent is to benefit developer John Wessman and his Desert Fashion Plaza property. The principal flaw in the Measure is the $43 million bailout using taxpayer funds with no provision for repayment or sharing of revenues or profits from the proposed city-subsidized plaza renovation.

We view the $43 million bailout as a misuse of public funds and for that reason remain adamantly opposed to Measure J. There are other avenues available for plaza development that do not involve gifts of public funds and we encourage City officials and developer John Wessman to explore those options. Taxpayer funds should never be used to line the pockets of individuals or private business enterprises.

Elections do have consequences. Today's vote on Measure J will send a message how Palm Springs voters view using taxpayer money to fund a privately owned development. Whether in favor, or opposed, today is the last day to participate in that decision. Tomorrow, of course, is for moving on.

Finally, thank you to all who have supported the No on Measure J movement with your endorsements, financial support, expressions of encouragement and, of course, your votes.

The "Committee for No on Measure J" Leadership Team

Andy Hirsch - Voter Outreach
Bob Richmond - Campaign Strategy and Voter Outreach
Bond Shands - Media Spokesman
Elise Richmond - Finance & Fundraising
Jack Webster - Campaign Strategy and Voter Outreach
Kelly Eustis - Campaign Consultant
Renee DeVolt - Treasurer (Finance & Fundraising)
Sue Ferguson - Recording Secretary

______________________________________________________
Committee for No on Measure J
Renee DeVolt, Treasurer | Committee ID #1341720
1111 Tahquitz Canyon Way - Suite 111
Palm Springs, Ca. 92262
pstaxpayer@gmail.com | www.VoteNoOnMeasureJ.org

Visit us on our "Palm Springs Taxpayers" Facebook page.
www.facebook.com/PalmSpringsTaxpayers

Click here to view or download a PDF copy the No on J FAQ.

The Desert Observer Website

www.DesertObserver.com

The blog in this format is distributed via email to all who request to be included on the mailing list. Address an email to politics@DesertObserver.com to be added to the distribution list

Note: In order to control SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here. Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

The "Official" No on Measure J FAQ

Desert Observer — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 13:24:25 GMT

The “Official” No on Measure J FAQ

Measure J on the Palm Springs ballot will hike the local sales tax rate from 7.75% to 8.75% for a period of 25 years. Sales tax revenues, estimated at $8 million annually, will be deposited into the City’s General Fund. City officials have indicated the tax will be pledged for repayment of approximately $83 million in new 20-year revenue bonds. That will allow immediate use of funds but it also means interest and other financing costs may double the amount needed for repayment of the revenue bonds.

The following are some Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) about Measure J.

Q: How will the $43 million Sales Tax funds bailout for JohnWessman be used?

A: The City will deposit $32 million into an escrow to be used for “Phase One” demolition, construction and related costs to renovate a designated portion of the Desert Fashion Plaza. The remaining $11 million will be used for construction of three new streets and to rehabilitate the existing decrepit parking structure on the Plaza property.

Q: How much will Mr. Wessman invest in the Desert Fashion Plaza “Phase One” renovation?

A: The Wessman share of demolition and construction costs associated with renovation has been estimated at between zero and $28 million. He is not required to spend his own money until the $32 million in taxpayer funds has been spent.

Q: Can John Wessman sell the Desert Fashion Plaza after he receives the $43 million bailout?

A: Yes. The only requirement is for the plaza owner to finish renovation before 2015. Mr. Wessman or a different owner can sell it before or afterwards.

Q: What happens when plaza renovation is complete and new buildings remain empty?

A: Who knows? There are no requirements in the agreement between the City and Mr. Wessman that address this concern.

Q: A portion of the $43 million bailout will be used for construction of a new Cinema Theater as part of plaza renovation. Will the new theater take patrons from existing theater facilities?

A: Yes. In fact it is possible one and perhaps two theaters in the area may not survive the new city-subsidized competition.

Q: Is John Wessman required to repay his $43 million taxpayer-funded bailout?

A: No. Neither repayment nor sharing of revenues and/or profits from a future sale is required.

Q: How will the remaining $40 million Sales Tax funds be used?

A: We do not know. No specific uses have been determined. The money will be available for any legitimate City purpose. Funds may be used for infrastructure improvements, maintenance and repairs, restoration of budget cuts, hiring additional personnel, or other identified needs.

Q: Who will decide how the $40 million will be used?

A: The City Council will make all decisions with respect to use of the funds.

Q: Can any of the $40 million be used for city staff salaries, benefits and automobile allowances?

A: Yes. There are no restrictions on how the funds can be used.

Q: Will Measure J result in 2,500 new jobs?

A: Nobody knows. Measure J will only produce revenues. Whether revenues will result in new jobs or any form of employment has not been determined. Measure J does not guaranty any jobs.

Q: Will Measure J result in free parking?

A: The Desert Fashion Plaza has parking for 1,061 vehicles. The parking facilities are decrepit, in need of extensive rehabilitation, and extremely expensive to maintain. Mr. Wessman will transfer his parking facilities to the City to forever be maintained at taxpayer expense as “free parking”. The City will also spend $11 million on facilities rehabilitation.

Q: Will Measure J result in “increased tourism and property values”?

A: No. Studies have not been released indicating what affect the Measure J Sales Tax hike will have on tourism or property values. Tax hikes could be a drag on the local economy.

Q: Will Measure J result in “new shopping, restaurants, entertainment and events”?

A: No. Specific plans or details have not been provided by the Desert Fashion Plaza developer regarding whether there are any committed or prospective tenants for the Plaza.

Q: Is it true non-residents pay 67% of local sales taxes?

A: Not true. All sales taxes are collected by merchants and reported to the State Board of Equalization. None are identified as having been collected from “non-residents”. The 67% is a questionable estimate for no substantiating documentation supporting the figure has been released.

Q: How will the Measure J sales tax affect automobile and other DMV registered purchases?

A: Palm Springs residents will be required to pay the higher 8.75% sales tax rate for vehicle purchases they make anywhere in the state. Sales taxes on vehicle purchases are based on where the purchaser resides and not on where the transaction occurs.

Q: Will the Measure J sales tax hike apply to East Valley visitor purchases in Palm Springs?

A: Yes. However, residents of other valley cities may choose to save money by making their purchases in cities with lower tax rates.

Developer John Wessman’s Yes on Measure J campaign has implied, speculated and promised a vast number of positive results will occur if the Sales Tax hike measure is approved by voters. All are little more than campaign slogans. Unfortunately, campaigns fold after Election Day and their slogans go with them. There is no accountability, no responsibility and little of lasting value once campaigns have left the scene. It is for that reason ballot measure campaigns are able to exaggerate and make wildly speculative statements for despite the false hopes they may raise, their period of existence is very short and they won’t be around to answer when promises and slogans prove to have been hyperbole. Voters should not make decisions based on campaign slogans.

Bond Shands
Palm Springs
November 5, 2011

- End -

Copies of this blog are available to all on the www.DesertObserver.com website
or to those on the Desert Politics & Elections email distribution list available by request from
politics@DesertObserver.com

Send requests for more information to the following:

Committee for No on Measure J
Renee DeVolt, Treasurer | Campaign ID #1341720
1111 Tahquitz Canyon Way - Suite 111
Palm Springs, Ca. 92262
pstaxpayer@gmail.com | www.VoteNoOnMeasureJ.org

Visit us on our "Palm Springs Taxpayers" Facebook page.
www.facebook.com/PalmSpringsTaxpayers

Click here to view or download a PDF copy based on this blog.

The Desert Observer Website

www.DesertObserver.com

The blog in this format is distributed via email to all who request to be included on the mailing list. Address an email to politics@DesertObserver.com to be added to the distribution list

Note: In order to control SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here. Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

Measure J Fans, Foes Demonstrate - Revisited

Desert Observer — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:10:03 GMT

Committee for No on Measure J
VoteNOonMeasureJ.org
Wednesday, November 2, 2011

News Release
For information:
Contact:   Bond Shands
Email:      pstaxpayer@gmail.com

"Measure J fans, foes demonstrate" headline's the story in today's edition of The Desert Sun regarding yesterday's planned demonstration activities by the Committee for No on Measure J. Developer John Wessman's Yes on J campaign and the Chamber of Commerce urged their supporters to arrive an hour in advance of the announced No on Measure J movement's planned protest. Wessman's Yes on J Campaign also imported construction workers and equipment from neighboring cities to bolster their activities. Using bullhorns and other noisy sounds, the obvious goal was to outshout and otherwise silence a legitimate protest demonstration by No on Measure J supporters.

The Yes on J campaign claims the sidewalk in front of the vacant old B of A building on Palm Canyon and Tahquitz qualifies as their headquarters. They use the sidewalk because the interior of the building is unsafe and it has no telephone, lighting or other utilities. Their "headquarters" claim is questionable and is only made in order to hang a huge campaign banner on the front of the building. The Palm Springs sign code ordinance permits large signs on campaign headquarters, but it does not state that empty buildings qualify for that exemption.

The Committee for No on Measure J views exploitation of the sign code ordinance by the Yes on J committee as inappropriate and worthy of legitimate protest. Setting up a table outside a vacant building should not qualify it as a "headquarters" for sign code ordinance purposes. City Manager David Ready supports Measure J. He is looking the other way and refusing to act by requiring that only an occupied building qualify as a campaign headquarters. It is for that reason a demonstration was held to draw attention to the apparent sign code violation. It is one part of the greater movement in opposition to the proposed sales tax hike that passage of Measure J would impose on Palm Springs residents.

The Measure J Sales Tax Hike is a misguided proposal to tax residents and raise funds for a taxpayer bailout of developer John Wessman's Desert Fashion Plaza partial renovation. The bailout represents a gift of public funds for it does not require repayment. The measure is misguided for the following reasons.

(a) The tax would be used to raise $83 million in new 20 year revenue bonds so that money would be available for immediate spending.

(b) Anticipated bond repayments, including interest and other financing costs, are expected to total $160 million over 20 years. Financing costs will leave little more than half of the tax monies available for public use.

(c)   Developer John Wessman will receive a $43 million bailout from the new taxpayer funds that he will not be required to repay. Financing expenses related to the $43 million will bring taxpayer total costs for the Wessman bailout to more than $75 million.

(d) The City of Palm Springs will assume huge annual maintenance costs for new streets it will build on developer John Wessman's property; for the Desert Fashion Plaza's decrepit above and below ground parking facilities it will take over, renovate, and maintain for the benefit of the developer and his future patrons; and for the new restroom facilities it will maintain on his plaza property.

Measure J is a poorly structured city ordinance that should be turned down by voters at the polls. Renovation of the Desert Fashion Plaza, if done using taxpayer funds, must include provisions for repayment or other financial return of equivalent value.

The "Committee for No on Measure J" Leadership Team

Andy Hirsch - Voter Outreach
Bob Richmond - Campaign Strategy and Voter Outreach
Bond Shands - Media Spokesman
Elise Richmond - Finance & Fundraising
Jack Webster - Campaign Strategy and Voter Outreach
Kelly Eustis - Campaign Consultant
Renee DeVolt - Treasurer (Finance & Fundraising)
Sue Ferguson - Recording Secretary

______________________________________________________

Committee for No on Measure J

Renee DeVolt, Treasurer | Committee ID #1341720

1111 Tahquitz Canyon Way - Suite 111

Palm Springs, Ca. 92262

pstaxpayer@gmail.com | www.VoteNoOnMeasureJ.org

Visit us on our "Palm Springs Taxpayers" Facebook page.
www.facebook.com/PalmSpringsTaxpayers

The Desert Observer Website

www.DesertObserver.com

The blog in this format is distributed via email to all who request to be included on the mailing list. Address an email to politics@DesertObserver.com to be added to the distribution list

Note: In order to control SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here. Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

No Palm Springs Taxpayer-Funded Bailout for Millionaires

Desert Observer — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:07:20 GMT

No Palm Springs Taxpayer-Funded Bailout for Millionaires

“No $43 Million taxpayer-funded bailout for a millionaire developer!” That statement is probably appropriate any place in America except Palm Springs. Congress paved the way for government bailouts of the wealthy using taxpayer funds. Banks, insurance companies, mutual funds, industry business giants and others with hands stretched out all benefited from billions in bailout funds. Palm Springs has been doing the same thing on a smaller scale. City leaders recently decided it is time to become big time players and use taxpayer funds to help the rich get richer.

Palm Springs city leaders, heavily influenced by the downtown business community, are demanding voters tax themselves in order to hand over $43 million to developer John Wessman for renovation of his Desert Fashion Plaza property. It is not an investment of taxpayer funds for he does not have to repay a single penny. The full $43 million will be raised by issuing expensive new revenue bonds. Taxpayers will be in hock for 20 years to repay those bonds. Interest and other financing costs will send the total price of the Wessman bailout skyrocketing upwards of $75 million dollars.

Why would a community consider taxing itself in order to provide funds for a wealthy millionaire? One answer is the smokescreen of half-truths and innuendos surrounding the $43 million gift of taxpayer funds. John Wessman’s Desert Fashion Plaza is currently valued at $20 million. The smokescreen involves transferring certain least desirable segments of the plaza property to the city. That arrangement is being marketed as a reasonable exchange for the $43 million taxpayer dollars. This trade for dollars does not represent an equal value transaction. The transaction will serve to relieve Wessman of huge annual maintenance costs which taxpayers will instead bear. These hidden facts are why it is called a smokescreen.

John Wessman reportedly will not renovate his Desert Fashion Plaza property without financial assistance. He is not turning to private investors for the funds he needs; not asking for a loan from the city; not offering a partnership arrangement with the city; and not asking for a city guarantee of borrowings from other sources. His request is quite simple. Give him $43 million for Desert Fashion Plaza renovation! Repayment is not to be required. Taxpayers will pay all interest and financing costs. John Wessman will be able to sell the project at any time of his choosing and the profits will be his alone. It is a simple arrangement that should serve well to make a rich man richer.

“Yes to a $43 Million taxpayer funded bailout for millionaire developer John Wessman” is the message Palm Springs voters are receiving from city officials, downtown business interests and most of all from developer John Wessman’s Yes on Measure J campaign committee. Will Palm Springs taxpayers listen to the message? Will voters agree to a $43 million bailout for a local millionaire?

Please send a message to the Palm Springs City Manager, the Chamber of Commerce, developer John Wessman and anyone with outstretched hands seeking taxpayer funds. No taxpayer funded bailouts – not for millionaires – not for anyone! Vote NO on Measure J.

Bond Shands
Palm Springs
October 27, 2011

- End -

Send requests for more information to the following:

Click here to view or download a PDF copy based on this blog.

The Desert Observer Website

www.DesertObserver.com

The blog in this format is distributed via email to all who request to be included on the mailing list. Address an email to politics@DesertObserver.com to be added to the distribution list

Note: In order to control SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here. Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

“Sounding Off on Measure J” – Revisited

Desert Observer — Sat, 22 Oct 2011 08:00:00 GMT

Palm Springs, California. In the hour preceding last Wednesday’s Palm Springs city council meeting, the Committee for No on Measure J mounted a peaceful protest demonstration outside the council’s City Hall meeting chambers. Their purpose was to persuade the council to extend its new Oversight Commission’s purview to encompass the entire city budget.

Developer John Wessman’s Yes on J campaign announced last minute plans to mount a counter-demonstration. Email messages from the Yes on J campaign, the Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce and the Palm Springs Democratic Club falsely accused the No on J supporters of demonstrating simply to “make a media splash”. They urged their members to meet at City Hall in opposition and “stand strong against ‘fringe’ obstructionists”.

The Yes on J campaign obviously hoped to produce a huge contingent of members in support of their counter-demonstration efforts. They failed in that quest for their numbers barely matched the number of No on J taxpayers who were seeking to exercise their citizenship protest rights.

The actual demonstration event boiled down to citizenship protest rights versus those opposed to citizenship protest rights. According to the next day’s report in The Desert Sun the Yes on J campaign had a bullhorn. Others reported the bullhorn was used to lead Yes on J demonstrators in noisy efforts aimed at silencing the peaceful remarks of the No on J citizen protest. The bullhorn-led effort was unsuccessful and a contingent of police officers kept the Yes on J coterie separate from their No on J targets. The No on J folks were not intimidated! They remained firm in their resolve and continued their peaceful protest.

The Yes on J campaign appears to be entering a desperation mode cycle. They have outspent the No on J opposition by many, many thousands of dollars. The City of Palm Springs has spent more than $70 thousand of taxpayer money to defeat the No on J efforts. The Wessman campaign and allies have resorted to using epithets, including “fringe obstructionists”, in referring to the No on J protestors. And now they seek to “kill the messenger” by silencing citizens who simply wish to exercise their right to engage in peaceful public protests. No on J versus Yes on J is clearly a case, respectively, of David versus Goliath - and allies. Once again Goliath and his allies need to be defeated.

The underlying but rather clear purpose behind the crusade to pass Measure J is the millions of dollars involved and those who will benefit. It is all about a simple word – one that starts with the letter “g”, ends with a “d” and it has a single “r” and two “e” letters in it. Money is not only the Mother’s Milk of Politics; it is the only fuel driving the interests of the downtown business community – and Developer John Wessman’s Yes on J campaign.

When it comes to money, it is claimed to excuse many things. It doesn’t excuse name calling, misuse of taxpayer funds for campaign purposes, and efforts to prevent citizens from exercising their right to peacefully protest. The Yes on J Committee and allies stand guilty of all these offenses. Voters can best show their disgust for such un-American tactics by voting No on Measure J.

Bond Shands
Palm Springs - October 22, 2011

- End -

Send requests for more information to the following:

Committee for No on Measure J

Renee DeVolt, Treasurer | Campaign ID #1341720
1111 Tahquitz Canyon Way - Suite 111
Palm Springs, Ca. 92262

pstaxpayer@gmail.com | www.VoteNoOnMeasureJ.org

Visit us on our "Palm Springs Taxpayers" Facebook page.
www.facebook.com/PalmSpringsTaxpayers

Click here to view or download a PDF copy based on this blog.

The Desert Observer Website

www.DesertObserver.com

The blog in this format is distributed via email to all who request to be included on the mailing list. Address an email to politics@DesertObserver.com to be added to the distribution list

Note: In order to control SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here. Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.

Palm Springs City Manager Campaigns for Measure J

Desert Observer — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 18:27:18 GMT

Palm Springs City Manager Campaigns for Measure J

In a recent Valley Voice offering in The Desert Sun titled “Don’t reject Measure J just because you don’t like John Wessman” the author noted one name, developer John Wessman, is absent from campaign advertising on behalf of Measure J. Actually there are at least two names missing from the roster of Measure J principal players. The other is that of Palm Springs City Manager David Ready. He is the visible presence in city government responsible for taxpayer funding of Measure J supportive campaign propaganda that is being marketed in the City’s name.

City Manager David Ready appears to view passage of Measure J as a personal quest and is leading a crusade in its support. Why a city official would become involved in a local ballot measure remains an open question. Is he the official who authored the Measure J sales tax hike concept and views it as “his baby”? If so, that may explain some of the following.

The City Manager has used taxpayer funds to create and publicize an official city website primarily devoted to campaign propaganda supportive of Measure J.
The City Manager has used taxpayer funds to produce and publish a four-page supplement in the local paper containing campaign propaganda supportive of Measure J.
The City Manager has used taxpayer funds for an expensive glossy-paper mailing to Palm Springs residents with campaign propaganda content supportive of Measure J.

City Manager David Ready alleges his propaganda activities supportive of Measure J passage are “educational” and do not represent campaigning. The common theme in his campaign is the City needs revenues from Measure J or its project wish list will not have adequate funding. There is no theme discussing the many disadvantages to Measure J’s passage.

The City’s campaign website has a back page section that includes reference data from the voter’s Sample Ballot and Information Pamphlet. That is the only instance where information in opposition to Measure J appears. That reference does not qualify the website as an independent or unbiased presentation of Measure J and its full impact. The website is but one more example of taxpayer funds used to fund Measure J campaign propaganda.

Among the many genuine concerns missing from City Manager David Ready’s extensive “educational” campaigning are the following.

A sales tax is regressive and its burden falls most heavily on the low, moderate, and fixed income earner. It is one of the least desirable forms of taxation.
Sales tax revenues will be pledged to repay approximately $83 million in new twenty (20) year revenue bonds. Those bonds will adversely affect the City’s future borrowing capabilities when funds may be required to meet unforeseen emergencies.
A twenty-five (25) year sales tax partially used for recurring maintenance costs represents borrowing from the future to fund current needs. It leaves open the question where funds will come from to pay the next round of recurring infrastructure costs.
Only twenty-four percent (24%) of the sales tax funds will be available for infrastructure needs. Twenty-six percent (26%) will go to developer John Wessman and fifty percent (50%) will be consumed by interest and other borrowing costs.
The City will need to wait twenty (20) years before it will start receiving all sales tax revenues. Until then only twenty-four (24) cents from every sales tax dollar will have been available for its use.

City Manager David Ready is an employee whose salary and benefits are paid from taxpayer funds. His official position is one of government service to the community. It is not an office that should be involved in local politics. He may be the secret Svengali behind the entire effort; the puppeteer pulling the strings; or the fiddler whose tune causes others to dance. But he should not do so using his official government position and taxpayer funds in support of his campaign quest.

Taxpayers need to send a strong message to City Manager David Ready that use of his office and of public funds in support of Measure J is not acceptable. That message to him can best by delivered by voting NO on Measure J.

Bond Shands
Palm Springs
October 16, 2011

- End -

Send requests for more information to the following:

Committee for No on Measure J
Renee DeVolt, Treasurer
1111 Tahquitz Canyon Way - Suite 111

Palm Springs, Ca. 92262

pstaxpayer@gmail.com | www.VoteNoOnMeasureJ.org

Visit us on our "Palm Springs Taxpayers" Facebook page.
www.facebook.com/PalmSpringsTaxpayers

Click here to view or download a PDF flyer based on this blog.

The Desert Observer Website

www.DesertObserver.com

The blog in this format is distributed via email to all who request to be included on the mailing list. Address an email to politics@DesertObserver.com to be added to the distribution list

Note: In order to control SPAM the comment-awaiting-approval feature is in effect here. Comments left by actual viewers are not suppressed.

My opinion is neither copyrighted nor trademarked, and it's price competitive. If you like, I'll trade for one of yours.