If you like political underdogs, you should love the Salem Can Do Better campaign I'm leading against the second-try $62 million police facility bond, Measure 24-420 on the May ballot.
I just checked. The YES campaign being run by Friends of Salem Police has raised $114,750. The Salem Can Do Better NO campaign has raised $2,200.
That's a 52 to 1 difference.
Which doesn't bother me at all. Last year's first-try $82 million police facility bond measure was turned down by voters in the November election even though Salem Can Do Better also was outspent by a lot, about 30 to 1 if I recall correctly.
I'm doing what can be done with the limited resources that we have.
In addition to the Salem Can Do Better web site, Facebook page, and Voter's Pamphlet arguments, yesterday I finished a web page that shows how Salem can get a 2 for 1 deal by saying NO to Measure 24-420.
If the cost of the overly expensive Salem police facility is reduced to the price per square foot that a new Beaverton police facility is costing, the 26% reduction saves $14.6 million -- which is almost exactly the $15.3 million cost of making the Library earthquake-safe and making other needed repairs/renovations to the Library.
Citizens urged City officials to include that $15.3 million for the Library in a May police facility bond measure, but this option was rejected by the City Council on a 4-4 tie vote.
So now voters have a chance to do what should have been done before: a NO vote on Measure 24-420 will make it possible to reduce the excessive cost of the police facility, which means Salem can have both a new police facility AND an earthquake-safe Library for just a bit more than the $61.8 million taxpayers are being asked to fork out for just a police facility now.
Here's the new web page. Take a look at how a better YES can result from a NO.
Yesterday I also had a half-hour interview with Ken Adams that will be shown on his City Beat show on CCTV. Ken just gave me the airtimes on Channel 21. In the interview I described the reasons to vote NO on Measure 24-420, and we talked about other subjects relating to the police facility bond.
4/28/2017 at 5:30 PM
4/29/2017 at 12:30 PM
5/1/2017 at 9:00 AM
5/3/2017 at 5:30 PM
5/5/2017 at 9:00 PM
5/8/2017 at 10:00 AM
5/9/2017 at 8:00 AM
5/10/2017 at 5:00 PM
5/11/2017 at 1:00 PM
5/13/2017 at 7:00 PM
The interview should be available on You Tube fairly soon. When it is, I'll share it on social media for the benefit of those who don't get CCTV, or want to view the interview at a time of their choosing.
I got my May election ballot today.
People will be voting by mail or drop-off between now and election day, Tuesday, May 16. Naturally I have no idea how the vote on Measure 24-420 will go, or how any other vote will go. Hopefully citizens will do their best to educate themselves about the candidates and issues, then cast an informed vote.
My goal is to help with this informing: to present arguments for voting NO on the $61.8 million police facility bond measure, just as proponents of the measure are presenting YES arguments.
Democracy in action.
When I speak to a group about Measure 24-420, I like to say that every election -- whether for a candidate or for an issue -- benefits from having two sides presented to voters. Sure, sometimes a candidate for some office is unopposed, and sometimes an issue doesn't have an active opposing (or supporting) campaign.
Usually though, democracy benefits from a vigorous debate/discussion about the pros and cons of voting this way or that way. There always are decent reasons to vote YES or NO, FOR or AGAINST.
I'm presenting the arguments to vote NO on Measure 24-420. The other side is presenting arguments to vote YES. Whatever happens on May 16, it will be a more informed vote this way.
I feel really good about that, regardless of how the vote turns out.
Comments